Blinders

I have to agree with the other review; that wasn't even a film. It was barely a trailer and none of wat was suggested to be the storyline in the summary was actually portrayed on film other than the attraction of one of the couple to Luke (not a spoiler; it's in the summary). While Luke is a beautiful guy, he actually didn't look 'all that' in this film; how did they manage to take a beautiful guy, tell us he's beautiful, and film him so poorly? Also not surprised this is (model) Luke's only film to date, since he couldn't even convey 'Yeah', 'Yeah', and 'Mmm' (the total sum of his 'lines') remotely well, which is almost impressive in its unimpressiveness.

I didn't quite see what was so beautiful about the boy? And the whole film seemed a bit like a trailer, there wasn't all the information that I needed to understand the whole story. If I hadn't read the synopsis on IMDB I would have been completely lost By the end I thought it was just rubbish.

107.45/1000.

Boys on Film are good value as you get a lot of short films that otherwise would be lost, shown probably at Gay Film Festivals wherever they crop up. That I think this short ' Blinders ' is pointless is neither here nor there. It is on Boys on Film X which carries an 18 certificate. The why of that has many reasons, but certainly this film goes nowhere near an adult rating. Young man has a woman lover, and there is a quick flash of him nude on the bed with her. They see a beautiful young man while out dancing, and hey presto beautiful young man is sort of near nude on a rooftop sun spot in I presume an afterglow of something. Mumbled words with no subs despite they are American did not help. Tedious trip back to girlfriend. No spoilers as to what happens with her when he gets back. That is all folks and the ten minutes of running time gone. Why was this sort of bisexual getting nowhere film made ? Why was it selected to be in a compilation of films that are short, and to be frank where was the meat on the bone of any real substance ? It is kind of cute, but then I can see a lot of cute flicking through a magazine supplement. I want my ten minutes back.

I like it.

For aesthetic motif ( the other not exist ) , for the status of presumed essay , for the generosity to use the imagination of audience for a huge mountain of questions, for few scenes , for the final.

Difficult to write too much because , obvious, it is a film who you have significant chances to see it again and again, always first time, always being in mist about intentions of director and figuiring a presumed didactic purpoise of film, not exactly one about infidelity of a young guy , so fragile, thin and beautiful than he seems immaterial .

I admitt, with indulgence ( being teacher, the indulgence is a sort of second nature ) , I like it.