Shortbus

Director John Cameron Mitchell dares to take a retro-clinging America into the twenty-first century with this brave, humanistic art-house film wherein an ensemble cast of little known actors and numerous non-actors portray characters exploring emotions and relationships in a New York City underground club called the Shortbus.

As a gay couple with relationship problems, James (Paul Dawson) and Jamie (P.J. DeBoy), consult a young sex therapist named Sofia (Sook-Yin Lee) who, as it turns out, is in need of some therapy herself. The film's weak plot steers them to the Shortbus, wherein sex and open relationships trump everything else in life, as if people obsess about sex every minute of every day. The film's sex scenes are explicit and graphic, but never exploitative.

Most of the characters are to varying degrees pleasantly unique. I especially liked Justin Bond, the club's tour guide. The film's costumes and production design are terrific. Artwork is mod, as you would expect. And the film's music captures a progressive feel, and varies from nouveau jazz to the stirring humanistic anthem "In The End", performed by the entire cast, and led with flair by Justin Bond.

Unorthodox both in substance and style, in a society that too often demands traditional correctness, "Shortbus" is Mitchell's cinematic plea for cultural compassion and mercy, tolerance and acceptance. It is a cinematic theme that is much needed in America, where hatred and intolerance toward all things nonconforming seriously risk diversity of thought and behavior. At the very least, the film is a welcome change from your mainstream Hollywood assembly-line cinematic trash. I suspect, however, that "Shortbus" really is the wave of the future, particularly in forward-looking societies. More power to it.

First of all I am a "straight" man so I wont let this cloud my review of this film...

I found this movie hard to watch at times but the fact that this was toted as "real" sexuality peaked my interest in the first place. I thought I knew what I was getting myself into but even my own preconceptions were shot to hell by this.

If you have a problem with the interactions of 2 or more of the same sex partners then this is NOT the movie for you... But if you can keep an open mind then it may be something that may give you some insight into the homosexual culture.

Like most people I had seen sex in one form or another already on screen but that was something that was somewhat scripted... This movie was as real as you could get without seeing it live I guess would be its best compliment.... But its not all about just throwing people out there to have sex and film it.

There are deeper subjects that John Cameron Mitchell tackles, such as fears of not being loved as you once were by your partner, trying to achieve orgasm that a lot of women might have a problem and just finding true love....

As I said about the car wreck, even though the film made me incredibly uncomfortable I found myself trying to open my mind to other things so I kept looking back at the film, to see what the message thats trying to be portrayed to those with a closed mind...

This film is an unabashedly sexually charged and frank look at people, their relationships and how sex is intertwined into it.

The treatment is both naïve yet incredibly sophisticated—even while showing very intense sexual scenes, it doesn't sugarcoat or judge them, but merely explores them in a way that most American cinema is afraid to do.

It is as one of the actors says "Voyeurism is Participation" (or somewhat close to that). Simply by viewing it, we explore the actors interconnected relationships and hear the their stories in a way that makes us care about them and recognize their bruised humanity in ourselves, our friends and our neighbors (or at least as I have witnessed out my window) Somewhat close in spirit to "The Dreamers" but with a dash of neurotic comedy. Not so slapstick like "Another Gay Movie" but with the same laugh out loud, pee in your pants humor that had had the audience both fantasizing and roaring out in laughter at the same time.

Shortbus (2006) written/directed by John Cameron Mitchell (Hedwig and the Angry Inch) is truly not for the easily offended. It is the film like nothing I've seen before and I've seen many films. It should be named Real Sex and the City or Every Thing You Always Wanted to Know About Sex But Were Afraid to Ask had not the latter title been taken already by Woody Allen. Actually you don't have to ask anything - you will get more information and graphic answers that you ever would hope for. This is the film where the graphical sex scenes are in abundance, they are extremely explicit. John Cameron Mitchell means business, and he gets down to it. By his own words,

"In the old days, when you couldn't show sex on film, directors like Hitchcock had metaphors for sex (trains going into tunnels, etc). When you can show more realistic sex, the sex itself can be a metaphor for other parts of the character's lives. The way people express themselves sexually can tell you a lot about who they are. Some people ask me, "couldn't you have told the same story without the explicitness?" They don't ask whether I could've done Hedwig without the songs. Why not be allowed to use every paint in the paint box?" John Cameron Mitchell

But after the initial shock, you realize that there are ideas, feelings, the attempt to understand the important things - what do we want? What is sex for us? How to understand ourselves first of all, how to communicate your desires, how to fulfill them? Shortbus is totally honest; it does care about its characters, and tells their stories of struggling with all sorts of existential difficulties, sexual or not, without condescending, with the equal dozes of sweetness, wit, and understanding. The film was made by a talented filmmaker. The beginning scenes would certainly grab your attention while introducing a viewer to few New Yorkers whose lives will be intertwined later. The music score and the songs are nice and set a melancholic mood, they provide a welcomed rest for the passengers on the Shortbus. The cast that consists mainly of non-professional first time performers, did a convincing job. It is not porn, it is an independent dra-medy that uses sex scenes to answer many questions about life.

The DVD includes the documentary Gifted and Challenged: The Making of 'Shortbus'. I found the Making... quite interesting and a lot of fun.

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-