Harry and Max

a friend of mine, after having been asked whether he liked Almodovar, replied that if it was in his power he would have all kinds of cinema, theater, critic, film, movie magazine associations, companies and circles constantly award him, week after week for years on end, so that would prevent him from making another film, ever.

I can't say I share completely my friend's devastating sarcasm concerning Almodovar, but that is an eye-opening method I would like to employ in some occasions - and here, being somewhat exasperated by this muddled little piece of film, I would like to employ it for TLA's constant it seems effort on producing and offering us a queer sense of valid film-making.

I would certainly award them again and again and again and again and yet again for what they bring to queer cinema.

Yet another overrated Sundance feature. Sure, it may've been controversial (the attempts to shock audiences seems to be the trend of many Sundance competitors), but it was still boring as hell. Two brothers, Harry and Max, spend most of this film trying to figure out what each means to the other and doing so without sparing us of much of the self-indulgence and pretension that many Sundance filmmakers are seem to like to create in abundance.

Harry is a former "boy band" performer, his success having all but entirely quelled. He serves as a sort of mentor to his younger brother Max, an up-and-coming "boy band" performer. Protective of his curious young brother, Harry spends most of the first half of the film advising Max about the realities of a not-so-fabulous future of fame, whether it be short-lived or not. Harry knows it's a joke, repeatedly testifying that he was only doing what he had to in order to make money, and knows that Max, who admits he can't even sing, may do the same. In the meantime, the parents are either entirely absent or simply at conflict with the boys (mom plays the typical "boy band mother" role as Max's manager).

Aside from all this brotherly advice, there is the more unusual (and some may say repulsive) incestuous relationship between the two brothers. Max is gay. And, Harry seems...unsure?...at first. And the two always seem to be on emotionally divergent paths, even though Harry think he knows what Max wants, and Max is sort of turned off by a sort of insincerity he may think that Harry exhibits. Whatever. Despite the whole thing being a little too freakish for my tastes, I will say that the amount of time spent on all this going back and forth and trying to "understand" one another not only makes an awkward plot, but at times quite a boring one.

If you've been disappointed with much of the recent Sundance fare before, you're advised to skip this one, especially if you're uneasy with the relationship between Max and Harry because that's the entirety of the plot.

I bought this film on DVD a while back through recommendation from a friend and I was as unwilling as anyone to watch a film that was known because two brothers "get it on"... I study psychology and one of the main (and more unpleasant) topics is incest and in 75% of sibling incest cases, mutual consent is given (meaning both siblings wanted it and one did not force it upon the other). On first hearing this I was curious as to why; most of the time when you think of incest you think of backward trailer trash states in America (or story lines from soap operas) but this film does kind of open your eyes a little bit to that kind of thing. The relationship between Harry and Max isn't shown as disgusting or immoral and you end up sort of understanding why they do get it on. My idea was that it was due to uncaring parents who live through their kids and being in a business that is notably full of fake people. Through this, the brothers seem to learn that the only people they can fully trust is each other. Obviously this is no reason to start boinking so other stuff must come into it but yeah I still obviously don't condone incest but this film kind of makes you understand mutual incest. I recommend giving it a try, you won't be too disgusted since the only thing you really see between the brothers is two kisses and a badly simulated oral sex scene but hey, at least you don't see anything to be too grossed out by. Some people pass this off as a gross film for people who get off on that kind of thing but I disagree. Just give it a try. I don't think you'll regret it.

I never had a brother, but I always wondered, if I had a brother and my brother was hot, or cute, or handsome, what would stop me from having sex with him? There's no chance of having a child. What is wrong? Where is the danger?

This movie takes that notion pretty far. Two brother, both in the music business. At first, the younger brother lusts after the older one, but the older one doesn't allow it to go too far. Then the older brother, after being revealed as an alcoholic, and after masturbating to his younger brother's picture in a magazine, changes his mind, and pursues the younger bro. But now the young one resists, rebels, says no.

The young one is remeniscent of Zak Hanson; the older is like one of those Backstreet Boys. Both are desirable, and the movie his hot. And it's in the hands of a really good, refined director, Christopher Munch, who knows how to photograph a movie in scenic locales, and can handle the mood music. The topic may be a bit shocking, but the movie works really well.

(PLEASE NOTE THIS REVIEW IS BASED ON MORE THAN ONE VIEWING OF THE FILM)

(1) While 'good attempt' is an acceptable way in which to describe this film, there are definitely three words which better describe it: HONEST......FOOLISH......BRAVE. All three adjectives apply to the producers/director, but most certainly they apply to the two male leads (their futures in film likely are not now as assured as they might otherwise have been prior to undertaking these particular roles.....despite relatively accomplished performances). Also, it's important to say of this work that, while instances of incest have occurred in earlier films of various genres, this reviewer is unaware of any film script which has been as open or blatant in picturing such an ancient taboo (however, see paragraph 3, below).

(2) Much of the reaction to this film will, undoubtedly, be one of abhorrence. Yet can there be any question that the type of sibling love and sexual behavior exhibited here has occurred countless times throughout human history (whether there are those who like thinking so, or not). And whether that's been brother to brother, or sister to sister, it is behavior which has occurred, sometimes as a one-time or an infrequent event, other times most certainly for life. (At least it's not a behavior which can be claimed to "muddy the gene pool", such as a brother/sister relationship might). But (and here's a vital point) in incest, as in most homosexual events, at the end we are left with the question of who will admit to it. Surely we must all see that, throughout time, those who've railed the loudest, and behaved the most indignantly regarding homosexual behavior, very often were and are those who earlier on in their lives either took part in such behavior or possessed such feelings. Strong societal "norms", of course, force these individuals to, later on, express repellent feelings when confronted with such sexual behavior. Possibly, but perhaps in a much lesser number of instances, this might be just as true of incest behavior.

(3) To be completely objective about this film, there is, indeed, a fourth word which needs be applied to the work: FUDGED. Viewers will note that on several occasions the scriptwriters/director have "pulled back" from showing more complete scenes of the physical love that could have been expected to be taking place between these two brothers (how often did you, the viewer, see one or other pull back from physically responding when you knew that, in real life, there likely would have been no hesitation?). In other words, while it wouldn't have been necessary to go into porn mode, there were a number of instances of "talking the talk" but very little in the way of "walking the walk." In fact it might be said that there was more "directness" of physical behavior in the much more secondary relationship scene, involving Harry and a former Yoga instructor of Max's, than there was between the two leads. Too bad, for Harry and Max were really what this movie was supposed to be all about.

(NOTE that, in the Director/Leading Performers Commentary track for this film on DVD, the issue of there not being more sexual follow-through is 'spoken at' but never actually 'addressed' ---although actor, Cole Williams, does express his surprise that there had always seemed to be a "pulling back" from these activities, once they'd started)

(4) In the end and at the very least, however, this film has to be recognized as a "start" at being more open in showing and describing a behavior that is as old as man and woman.