Brotherly

I don't care very much about reviews that seem to be a display of the writer's feeling of self importance. Brotherly is a SHORT. Negative expectations are too harsh. Many facets of life are depicted in this stark black and white film. 1950's style parental abuse, an older brother portrayed as a heroic figure yet leaves his younger brother without any preparation. A recorded interview takes place in some institutional setting. Everything else is purely speculative, as was meant to be. I was very touched by the interviewee's first admission of sexual intimacy. The brothers are very attractive. Their interaction makes the film worthy of one's time.

This short movie touches a concept as deep as incest, putting into question its validity, and moving the issue of the permisivity of incest from a psychology perspective into a question of "how and when", not a question of "if". Yes, incest is a huge taboo in most if not all cultures, but in dire, desperate situations, such as having alcoholic parents, the rules of society tend to go out the window. It is a fact that we, specially children, need to feel taken care of. When that feeling isn't there, we tend to engineer ways to get it, and these brothers found the love they lacked, in each other

one of films who propose a choice to viewer. or only to ways. one - poetic, fragile, inspired images, insecure family and the links between brothers as refuge against alcoholic parents. the second, more delicate, is the incest. who could be explained in many manners. but who remains a taboo. and that does "Brotherly" a strange film. not only for subject but for the manner to show it. something missing, against nice photography, touching message. not only the presence of Paul in an interview room but the not comfortable scene of Michael depart. what is its meaning ? is it the source of interview ? sure, a good short movie uses the imagination of public. but, in this case, ambiguity is not exactly the right tool. I do not ignore the fact than the director has entire liberty to present what he wants. but the film remains an example of thin ice.

Deprived of a caring father or a loving mother, two brothers must fend for themselves in the midst of their parents' rampaging alcoholism. It's often said in psychoanalytic theory that the name of the father is the ultimate authority, which inscribes the child into the symbolic order. But what authority can be obtained from a parental figure that lives in constant stupor and drunkenness? Clearly, there is no such thing as a valid name of the father in the lives of these two kids, and perhaps that's why there are no clear rules for them save for survival, which in this case means to take care of each other. As the younger brother, aged 12, keeps wetting the bed, the older brother takes him to his bedroom, and helps him to get naked so that he can clean him up.

The child is very fond of the teenager, and looks up to him. There is no real affection towards mothers or fathers here, only brotherly love. Soon, the proximity of the two kids as they start sharing the same bed awakens something. Sexuality irrupts strongly for the child who experiences his first erection as he feels his brother's body pressed against his.

In a house ruled by two alcoholic adults, these underage kids find a special comfort and refugee in one of western civilization's oldest taboos: incest. There is an in-between area of sexual ambiguity, do they experience sex as a manifestation of carnality or rather as the one instance in which they can redefine their roles without fears or worries about the specular images of adulthood (their parents), and by extension, society? Carefully devised, J.C. Oliva's short film circumvents controversy by offering us poetic images and flashbacks sequences that makes us understand why these characters do what they do, without judging them or exploiting them.