Taekwondo

It was the film "The Blonde One" that led me to "Taekwondo." I was so taken by that film by Marco Berger, that I was eager to see another. Maybe I should have quite while I was ahead.

The Blonde One is a beautifully crafted film, with a strong plot, and superb acting - coupled with excellent direction and camera work.

Taekwondo didn't live up to my expectations at all. The movie is an hour and 48 minutes - but it easily felt like 3 hours. While there is certainly the eye-candy aspect to this film, with some great shots of some great looking guys, the movie seems s-l-o-w and nearly plotless.

Taekwondo is more like looking in on an adolescent vacation. Guys being guys without parental oversight.

There is some sexual ambiguity and tension between what I would call the two main characters - the owner of the house and his friend from Taekwondo. One might (or at least I did) expect that sooner or later SOMEthing will happen between them. But nothing does. Some interested glances here and there. Some almost-touching closeness. But it's always diffused, interrupted by someone walking in, or by a game that suddenly breaks out among the guys.

We watch the guys shower, swim, play tennis or kick a soccer ball around the tennis court. And the guys seem to sleep a lot. Maybe even they are bored by the lack of plot. They play hide-and-seek. And talk about their sexual conquests with the girls, or ruminate over fidelity, still unsure what their relationships with girls are supposed to look like. And now and again they conjecture on whether this or that one is gay.

The director keeps the film somewhat interesting with nice camera perspectives that often focus on a body part - like a crotch or butt. There are glimpses of bare butts and sometimes guys bare it all. But there's not enough story line to string it together, and the movie is ultimately pretty boring.

Where do I even start with this...

The movie is the worst type of movie there is; a film made to look like it had no script, just a bunch of half naked or fully naked guys shooting the breeze for almost 2 hours. There is no real story, aside from the very glossed over part of the two leads being in the same Taekwondo class, but the rest of the movie is as follows;

-Naked dudes swimming -Half naked dudes sleeping -Half naked dudes smoking -Half-naked dudes discussing women -Naked dudes walking around the house -Semi-clothed dudes talking at a dinner table -Dudes put some clothes on when 2 girls arrive

Throughout the whole film, we have one of the main characters, who is gay, and wants to know if his Taekwondo partner (who invented him to this boys outing) is also gay. It takes 1:40 minutes for them to finally give in to the entire purpose of this film, and I for the life of me just don't understand who would find this entertaining. My partner had a theory, though; the director used this film as a reason to hire a bunch of straight actors he just wanted to personally see naked. The same way Hollywood directors add nude scenes with women in their movies, as an excuse to see the people they're attracted to in the buff. Wouldn't hiring an escort be much less work and offer you more bang for oyu buck? I really just don't understand these types of movies.

This really isn't a gay film, especially if you discount the literal last 2 minutes of it. It's a movie about a group of men, which are all straight, doing straight dude things. Nothing about this movie is even remotely gay because none of the characters are gay, and this is really just the type of movie in the genre I can't stand. I don't watch gay films to see a bunch of straight men talking about women as if they've never seen one before in their lives. I have the gym and real life for that nonsense. I watch these movies two see two guys fall in love, and when you can't even be bothered to show me that much, than what did you really accomplish?

A disappointment of a film that missed the mark of what it means to be gay cinema in almost every regard.

The movie was a bit too is low for my f Taste but it is a good movie and also it is good for the eye candy.

That could have been made in a 30 minute short movie but the story can be very compelling.

In 2014 I thought and wrote of Berger's Hawaii... Berger's use of eroticism is a bit obvious in this. Perhaps because I've seen his moves before, they stand out as a bit contrived.

It seems for Taekwondo the only effort to stretch and evolve has been to up the ante of sexual tension with more men and more (much more) nudity. Again Berger shows us that eroticism is introduced by so much more than sex. Its still an animal notion of combined human attraction, contact and bond. The movie clings to his oft used narrative "will they or wont they" but here it felt reduced to teen angst. I recognized some effort to add questions of machismo, sexuality (as usual) and questions of the bonds of friendship. If you've seen Berger's wonderful "Plan B" or "Sexual Tension" "Absent" or "Hawaii" you've see most of the tricks and many of the shots also used in this movie as well as pacing, shot composition, and narrative exploration before, but in a better movie than this one.

In 2013 Marco Berger wrote and directed 'Hawaii', a film whose central premise was a will-they-won't-they relationship between two young men whiling away the summer in a nice house. Two years later Martín Farina made 'Fulboy', a documentary about a football team that was characterised by random conversations and far too many extreme close-ups of various body parts that made it difficult to know who was talking at any one time. So what is the result when Berger and Farina make a film together?

Hosting a group of male friends at his family's nice house for a summer break, Fernando also invites Germán, a team-mate from his taekwondo class. While the rest of the gang - usually clad only in shorts and occasionally in nothing at all - engage in random conversation, Germán wonders if Fernando is going to come on to him. But is Fernando homosexual anyway?

There are definite flaws in this film: co-director Farina's love of the body-part close-up is well in evidence, although thankfully slightly tempered since 'Fulboy' - most times the viewer eventually finds out who is talking! There are also times when closer attention to continuity would have been welcome: the girlfriend of one of the men suddenly disappears without explanation, and the appearance of a pet dog toward the end of the film is similarly unexplained - where was he before - locked in the shed?

I also felt the film dragged slightly in its last third, although it is hard to know how it could have been shortened: with something always happening on-screen - albeit in an extremely relaxed fashion - obvious padding is kept to a minimum. The actors are all convincing in their delivery of the mostly inconsequential, occasionally offensive, conversations: not obviously ad libbing but also not declaiming as if they were in Shakespeare. And - crucially for this film - they all appear content with the paucity of their wardrobes and pleasing casual nudity. So, despite the film's weak spots, I'd happily watch it again.