>>PREVIEW
SHORTBUS
STARRING Sook-Yin Lee, Paul Dawson and Justin Bond
DIRECTED BY John Cameron Mitchell
Opens Friday, October 27
Uptown Screen
There’s been so much hubbub about Shortbus, you may feel like you’ve seen it already – or else just imagined it in some dream that caused you to moisten your bedsheets. John Cameron Mitchell, creator of the gender-bending glam-rock musical Hedwig and the Angry Inch, first drew titters three years ago when he announced his intentions of making a movie that featured unsimulated sex yet told a story about something more meaningful than the delivery of a pizza. His unusual quest gained notoriety in Canada when the CBC brass expressed consternation that one of their radio hosts – Definitely Not the Opera’s Sook-Yin Lee – would be getting down for the occasion (the film’s enthusiastic reception at Cannes in May seemed to quell any rumblings of disciplinary action).
Now Shortbus is finally about to penetrate the consciousness of the wider movie-going public and it’s mostly worth all the foreplay. In fact, it’s the feel-good hardcore movie of the fall. The colourful gallery of characters includes a gay couple pondering the possibility of an open relationship, a depressed dominatrix and Lee as a sex therapist who’s never had an orgasm. As they congregate at an arty New York salon, they rearrange themselves in various positions and combinations, the vibe being both cynical and oddly utopian – as the impresario played by Justin Bond quips, "It’s like the ’60s, only with less hope."
Presented with welcome frankness, the shagging serves chiefly as an extension of character and theme, adding texture to a funny and humane ensemble piece that plays like Woody Allen’s Manhattan with money shots. The film’s imperfections (a few iffy performances, an overabundance of final-act epiphanies) seem minor in the face of its generosity of spirit and love for its characters, a love that’s easy to share.
Of course, it wasn’t easy getting to this point, as Lee and Mitchell explained in interviews at Cannes. Says the CBC host, "It was exciting to me, this idea of making a story and exploring sexuality in a way we have not seen in cinema. I was very into it ideologically and totally wanting to jump into this weird experiment. Finally I got cast and I was like, ‘Eeek!’"
"Sook-Yin had a lot of nerves about it," says Mitchell. "All the actors did – I did. We’re doing this because we’ve come out of a culture where there’s such tension, guilt and natural fear about sex. It’s connected to our childhoods and our relationships. For many people, it’s the most important controlling instinct they have. We can see its power. The way that Sook Yin and I have to deal with such powerful questions is through our work – it’s the only way we know. Other people do it through their therapy or religion. And it’s paramount that it’s not just useful for us -- if it is useful for other people, then it’s useful for us, too."
Mitchell began the project by asking prospective actors to submit tapes on which they discussed some element of their sex lives. The 500 respondents were whittled down to smaller and smaller groups – Mitchell was careful to end up with actors who actually fancied each other – and the story and dialogue emerged out of workshops. Mitchell refutes any suggestion that anyone involved was in it for the money.
"We could’ve done so many other things to make money," he says. "It’s a labour of love for all of us."
The most direct inspiration for the film was real places like the salon featured in the movie. One such place featured both movie screenings, snacks and group sex.
"I didn’t really participate," says Mitchell, "but I found it fascinating. I’d see people eating over here and someone having sex over there. It was kind of all the same thing, all these appetites people have for art, food and sex. Sometimes they’re connected to love, sometimes they’re not, but they all are necessary in some way. If you pretend they’re not or you ignore one of those drives, they come back to haunt you."
Consequently, there’s some pain in Shortbus but on the whole, it’s a remarkably warm-hearted (and warm-elsewhere) viewing experience. Mitchell believes the film has good karma.
"It comes from good intentions," he says. "We’re trying in our own tiny way to remind people there are good things left in New York and America, people still trying to discover the truth in a certain way rather than hold everything at the borders. That’s what North America feels like for me lately – it feels controlled. This movie was about people who reject that, who want to find out as much as possible and meet as many people as possible."
The director believes this especially applies to Lee’s character. "Metaphorically, the orgasm is missing from the character’s life, which implies this weird lack of wholeness," says Mitchell. "But she’s this hero, the one who sallies forth for the Holy Grail. Anything it takes to unify her character’s mind, body and spirit, she will try. And that’s antithetical to Bush, to religious conservatism and to all those things which purport to know the truth in advance."
While Lee’s efforts have drawn a great deal of praise and support, back when the film was just surfacing at Cannes, it was hard to tell which way it was gonna go. But she had already decided that she would take whatever came her way.
"You could spend a lot of time worrying about lots of things," she says. "Worrying has gotten me in trouble in the past so my new thing is to just deal with it." |
Copyright ©2006 FFWD. All rights reserved.