Set in Montreal in winter where the city is snowed in, a middle age businessman Christophe meets Micha, a Russian acrobat recovering from a horrific injury, while house-hunting. Christophe takes the apartment and the two begin a torrid love affair full of dom-sub relationship and maybe a little love and care for each other (?). Micha wants no strings attached and hence don't exchange even names. Christophe has a very sick mother who he is dealing with and Micha has become very bitter and jealous because his acrobat routine is now being done by someone else. The film ends as random as it starts. Micha causes the new acrobat to have an accident on purpose on the final day, there by taking his revenge (he thinks his accident was die to the rival member) and then leaves Christophe on his own.
Yes, there is nothing much more than what I have mentioned above as the summary of the film. The relationship between the two men is sort of toxic. There is forced sex, but there is full on sex scenes. The dick is shown hard, full on suck and fuck and even ejaculation. The film goes whole hog. I guess the idea was to show that both these men are using sex to let out their frustration, anger and loneliness. Of course, its clear Micha is using Christophe, for whom this is probably the first m2m experience for his money, food, housing but also gives him great fulfilling sex. It wasn't very clear what issues does Christophe have with his mother. Maybe, that would have made things very relevant. Other than this, we have plenty of long drawn shots of construction sites for whatever reasons and then a lot of shots of acrobats practicing, which was actually quite decent but after a while gets very repetitive. Remove all this and the 2 hour plus movie could be reduced to under 40 minutes. Thankfully both the men are good looking and doesn't hurt to watch full blown sex scenes once in a while. There are unexpected moments like when Micha gives Christophe a golden shower or when the latter burns Micha's back with cigarette butts.
This is the problem with "arthouse" cinema. Sometimes makers are so much in their own head, they forget that the film needs to mean something to some section of the audience, at least. (3.5/10)
Comments