In the Closet

Having heard so much about Brent Corrigan's fantastic porn career, I was kind of hoping that the nudity would be a bit more sexy, especially having fallen totally in love with him in 'Another Gay Sequel'. And actually he plays a compete weirdo here, not really a good representation of his acting abilities I'm sure. I wasn't keen on the other guy at all. The concept wasn't bad actually, but the production was terrible.

There are only two characters in Jody Wheeler's short film: Griffin, a talkative, lighthearted, outgoing and self-confident guy; and Press who is shy, stern, clumsy and hermetic.

Jody Wheeler ponders on duality from the very beginning. Here opposing archetypes face each other and, more importantly, define themselves by their differences. If Griffin has had plenty of sexual experiences, Press is still a virgin; if Griffin is active, Press is passive. In spite of those differences, they seem to complement each other as Griffin explains: "You're alone, I'm alone. Together we're not".

Are we doomed to loneliness without the other? Does everything have to obey the duality imperative to the extreme? If language is the key to understand the world, then it's no wonder that a binary system is the most suitable approach. Ferdinand De Saussure defined language as a system of oppositions, in which everything could be reduced to signifier and signified. That's why Press, indeed, affirms that it's all about dichotomy "light and dark, day and night, come out – go in" (one could also add "human - inhuman").

Without spoiling the end, if we blindly follow the "black and white" rule, without acknowledging the shades of grays, then it's only logical that coming out of the closet implies also something coming in. But what will remain forever trapped in the closet after Griffin and Press sleep together? Neither the signifier, not the signified, that's for sure.