Is this technically a gay show? Even after getting through the whole thing, that's still kind of tricky to answer. There's never any physical intimacy shown between the two leads, not even a single kiss. What it gives you instead is something that goes way deeper than that. It traces an emotional bond that spans a full decade between two guys who are both dealing with their own baggage, and what they share basically amounts to being soulmates. The story moves across Japan, South Korea, and Berlin. Honestly, whether people want to call what they have a romantic relationship or not doesn't really matter to me. A relationship doesn't need a label like boyfriends attached to it to actually mean something. And closeness doesn't need to be physical to feel genuine. What this show captures is something quieter but way more powerful, a bond rooted in understanding, respect, and just showing up for each other. Across eight episodes, each running 35 to 45 minutes, this is one...
The plot is simple. Kent and Harvey have been in a relationship for 7 years. Kent has been always into orgies and in fact he met Harvey at one hosted at his place, but sparks flew and they two decided to date. Kent even had Harvey agree to an open relationship which Harvey was ok with. But no win present, Harvey has had enough and he asks Kent to stop this and that they should ficus on just them two as a couple. The duo get into a few heated yet nuanced arguments around why Kent cannot change, why Harvey thinks it is important to stop doing this and how the duo need to focus on thier town individual sex lives. Clearly the two men very much like and love each other, but 7 years later , the two want different things in life. Harvey has definitely made up his min to end the relationship if Kent cannot change his ways, but is this going to be easy for him?
The film is just under an hour and at the onset it seems like this may be a bad bad film, but it does go into nuances of the whole concept of open relationship and just puts forward one more perspective. The film doesn't take sides, but it shows us where both these individuals are coming from. As an audience, you can see both points of view and why individually they both make sense, and it's difficult to take sides. You just listen to both sides and based on your individual beliefs and your opinion on the whole concept on an open relationship, you will take away different thing from the film. Personally, I think the film would have done less with the sexual orgy scenes because somehow that took away the seriousness of the subject for me. Also with such a short run time, this could have been either a better short story or add more material to make it a proper story with a culmination and not an open ended theme. It's also about expectations. I wouldn't have thought much of the film, but when you know the director, you expect something more. (5/10)
Comments