ravitchn

Having read both the book and seen the movie twice I have contradictory impressions. First, Andre Aciman has a deep understanding of the problem of men who are both gay and also feel unhappy about being gay, or rather understanding men who are both straight and gay at the same time. He is better than a shrink or therapist in demonstrating the joys and sorrows of men of this sort.

Still, living through the emotions of the two male characters is not only painful, it is also boring and predictable. It turns out that the only really sympathetic character in the story is the father of the young boy Elio. He alone seems to understand his son and his protege's basic problems and he alone has himself been to some extent in their predicament. In fact one could believe from his role that all men are to some extent in this dilemma of dual sexuality.

My only question is this: who want to know all this? Does this story, granted its brilliant analyses of the problems dealt with, really help anyone who might be in similar dilemmas? I think rather the story is so true to life that it can only cause pain. And if all men to a degree are represented here by the two principal male characters the pain is even more intense for those who do not recognize who they really are sexually, having perhaps blocked self understanding lest they learn too much.

A movie whose premise is entirely without any scientific or medical justification. It is scandalous and exploitative but not worthwhile in any way. It does paint the police as homophobic but who is surprised at that? Many homophobes are secret gays, more often than one might think.