Several times now I have stumbled across comments ( both in reviews and in television guides ) that the lead actor is straight. It is as if this is a comfort blanket for those in the audience who a ) do not want to confront a gay actor in the film, and b ) for those liberals who think how marvellous it is to see a straight actor being ' brave ' enough to take on the role. This is a recurring issue. James Ivory's ' Maurice ' was awash with it and so was ' Call Me By Your Name '. Given the discreet homophobia of both mainstream cinema and theatre it is not surprising Gay actors will not raise their heads above the parapet. The fact of having to explain an actor is straight is a sort of deadly homophobia in itself.
Now for the film that I liked a lot. The acting from all of the cast was good but above all the direction was exceptionally good. The opening shot of cars scurrying about from a great height, like some sort of insect was a scary acknowledgement of how tiny we are in the scheme of things. This I believe occurred several times during the duration of the film and for me it was a revelation. Like an anthill we struggle with our histories, both political and personal, and how that very history is trodden on by the large feet of time. That alone made the film above the ordinary. The minimalism of the film also appealed with its Antonioni obsession with the sense of place around us mere humans, and the way we alternate between silence and noise. Of course there is a story, and for those who are interested in what has happened in Vietnam important, and the dislocation of a man who returns to a country he knew only to find he is more or less a stranger in a strange land. As for the homosexuality it is there, but despite a few brief scenes discreet. It is quite simply another aspect of the history of a character immersed in living in this great anthill called human life.
