Shortbus

There are a couple of features about this movie that will hit you. Yes there is some rather graphic sex, but to anyone after hitting adulthood it works purely to support the film, erotic would be too strong a word for it. It is to everybody's' credit that this was possible. The model of New York works great and is a real devise for the movie.

As we progress through the film we see the lives of a small group of New Yorkers grow as they develop their relationships or indeed the quest for a relationship. The medium for bringing these lives together is the "Shortbus" club. A rather carnal club which they all drawn to becomes a focus for their development. Each confronts their own particular daemons. As heavy as this sounds, it is quite a light hearted film. The closing scenes are fantastic. As you watch this film you will feel yourself being dragged in, until the end when u feel almost as if you are part of it.

A great movie, one which should become a cult classic (only because it might be a bit too "graphic" for mainstream cinemas, but certainly a classic. Any attempt to sanitize and edit it would surely destroy the film.

This movie will make you laugh, cry and sing; you will leave the movie theatre affected by this film.

What everyone will hear about "Shortbus" is that the sex is real and explicit. Yes, this is all true. But so is the emotional journey the characters go through.

Far from being crude or offensive, Shortbus is fresh, insightful, celebratory -- and, most importantly, focused on the fully realized people, not just the bodies, who bare their flesh and feelings on screen. Like Michael Winterbottom, who made the explicit "9 Songs," writer/director John Cameron Mitchell says he wants to show true human sexuality as part of his story. Unlike "9 Songs," which seemed to focus on 1/8 of the full human experience of relationships (concerts and sex), Mitchell's "Shortbus" approaches 9/10 of the authentic experience of being human, being miserable, looking to come to joy, and exploring funny, sensual, and affectionate avenues to get there.

Is "Shortbus" provocative? Yes. Is it explicit? Yes! And these are good things in these politically authoritarian times.

Shortbus is very high on the list of my most beloved movies. I can not avoid to call it a masterwork. And why is that so ?

It is a deeeply human movie. It has so many facettes, like comedic, sensual, pornographic, sad, senseful, atmospheric, toughtful, and many other things. It's a vibrant view on the lifes of some outsiders or people who don't fit in functionwise, and are searching for magic in their live, which is provided through the club shortbus as a catalysator. The movie is much too far off the main road to be swallowed in one session. It has to be watched sometimes, so one can find always new aspects and details.

While going very deep into some sad or explicit situations, Shortbus alwas stays lighthearted, not taking itself too serious. Acting is partially phenomenous, it's often more being than acting, so that I had the impression of sitting between those characters and watching them living, losing, hurting and hoping.

In the end, I am always a bit sad the movie is such a loner in the landscape. The concept is so easy, and not even its creator managed to make a follow-up. It's the actual proof that modern cinema can be glorious, intelligent, erotic, sensitive AND enjoyable. I do not want to believe that this proof will be the only one in decades.

We need at least a couple more movies like this, since we are all existing through sex and emotions, and we should enjoy the short time we have. At least, I need. And because I always feel good and lighthearted, in a way healed, after watching Shortbus.

Shortbus reviewed by Sam Osborn

I have a bad feeling that after the first ten minutes of Shortbus are through, much of the audience will have already left; because within this first segment, sophomore director John Cameron Mitchell has the mind to show his audience the nature of this very, ahem…frank work. Audiences will have witnessed filmed masturbation, wild fornication in a myriad of poses, and a scene of S&M sexual nature. These are all acts we've seen before from other Hollywood pictures; but then again, those pictures only played pretend. Shortbus requires all its actors to do such acts for real.

Is Porn too strong a word to describe such a film? It's debatable, I suppose. Films that boast actual penetration are usually not found in theatres anymore; instead hidden in the back of your video rental stores, or placed neatly on a shady internet site. But Pornography uses plot mechanisms only to drive the story into another sex scene. Shortbus has plot mechanisms to drive the arcs of its characters. That its characters all play roles indulgent in fornication is simply the nature of Shortbus' stories. But enough about the ethics of Shortubus; it's a good film. And if you're not too squeamish for the subject matter, and have a mind for tongue-in-cheek wit, then it shouldn't matter how close to porn the film means to aim.

It's a story of New Yorkers. A fringe group of New Yorkers who all meet at the underground lounge Shortbus. It's a place of casual frivolity, where people of any sexual preference are free to indulge in whatever they please. They mingle and dance and drink and have sex, all happily and without any semblance of filth or vice. These people are simply enjoying themselves and being quite hilarious while they do it. The members that we're asked to follow all come from the Magnolia school of connections, where links between characters are often coincidental and illogical, but acceptable as obligations of an ensemble drama. Sofia (Sook-Yin Lee) is a Sex Therapist who prefers to be called a Couples Councilor and who's unable to have an orgasm. She's invited to Shortbus by the club's poster child couple, Jamie and Jamie (Paul Dawson and PJ DeBoy), who assure Sofia that if there's an orgasm to be found, it's hidden within Shortbus. In a dark room there, Sofia meets Severina (Lindsay Beamish), a lonely dominatrix who gets mean when uncomfortable, and whose longest relationship was with the geeky trust fund sexual deviant.

All their stories are all human and kind of affecting, managing to dig their way out of the film's heaping shock factor to create something like empathy. It's nothing heartbreaking or particularly inspiring, but how much can we really expect from a film that has an entire scene dedicated to the National Anthem being sung into an anal orifice. But that's the charm of Shortbus, I suppose. Director/Writer John Cameron Mitchell has made a film more explicit than most pornography while keeping eroticism completely out of the equation. The film's sexuality is frank and the humor always constant, while avoiding jokes that patronize its cast of outsiders.

It's too easy to forget the poignancy of Shortbus, though. The dialogue that's sure to be shot wild by its release won't be about its humor or spirit; talk will be of the skin that was exposed in finding the better, realer bits. It's too bad, but, again, what can we expect from a film that sings the National Anthem into a man's anus? Rating: 3 out of 4

Samuel Osborn

A married sex therapist doles out relationship advice at work but privately spends her time in search of an orgasm, which she's never had. Two gay men find themselves drifting from one another and introduce a third man into their relationship in an attempt to bring some fulfillment back to their emotional connection. A professional dominatrix excels at abusing clients, but brings that abusive behavior to her personal relationships as well and as a result isolates herself from any true human contact. Meanwhile, all of these characters meet regularly at Shortbus, a sex club where everyone is free to be whatever they want to be, where no one's a freak because everyone's a freak, and where, most importantly, everyone feels a sense of community in a scary post-9/11 world.

Such is "Shortbus," John Cameron Mitchell's emotionally affecting follow up film to his dazzling debut, "Hedwig and the Angry Inch." By now, everyone knows that "Shortbus" contains many scenes of quite explicit sex. As happens with any more conventional film that contains material we are used to seeing only in bona fide pornography, the sex tends to dominate on a first viewing; it's so hard not to be distracted by the explicit scenes and ignore the other things going on. However, it is to Mitchell's great credit that I left the film not remembering the sex as much as I remembered some of the beautiful emotional moments, of which "Shortbus" is chock full.

I saw a screening of this at the Chicago International Film Festival, and two of the actors, Sook-Yin Lee and Lindsay Beamish, were on hand to answer questions. Lee explained what Mitchell was trying to do with this film, and I greatly admire his ambition. She said that he was trying to make an antidote to all of the other films out there that treat sex just as explicitly but in such more negative ways. Sex in our movie culture is usually full of dysfunction -- if it's not downright harmful, it's at best desultory and unsatisfying (think "9 Songs"). Our culture condones graphic violence in films, many times in combination with sex, but squirms away from sex as it really looks, even though it's one of the most natural of human functions. Mitchell wanted to illuminate this hypocrisy and show that sex can be fun, sex can bring people together, sex can make you laugh. It can't necessarily solve problems, as the characters in this film realize, but it doesn't always have to necessarily cause problems either.

My biggest complaint about "Shortbus" is that I felt somewhat left out. As a heterosexual male, I don't feel that I was represented by any of the film's characters. Mitchell, as a gay man, obviously has an understanding of gay relationships, and the storyline with the three gay lovers is handled beautifully. But I felt that Mitchell was stereotyping heterosexual relationships in the same way that heterosexuals stereotype gays. The married couple is bored, unfulfilled, caustic with one another. Lee's character can't achieve orgasm until she comes to a sex club and gets it on with another woman. Just once, can't a film show a heterosexual couple who are happy and having a completely satisfying emotional and sexual relationship? I know this wouldn't make for great drama, but it would at least make me feel better.

I really liked "Shortbus" without feeling that it was a complete bulls-eye for Mitchell. At the very least, he has an outstanding talent and has proved himself to be a young filmmaker to watch.

Grade: A-