Call Me By Your Name

[tchm]

My third time seeing this. I'm able to truly appreciate how delicate and sensitive the director's touch is especially in the love scenes. Even the peach scene. As for Chalamet, this quote from the Guardian sums it all up: "It is the kind of performance that isn't just down to actorly technique but openness and emotional purity." You listening, Academy members?

[LoveNDino]

Ladies and gentlemen, the great James Ivory

[OCClient]

Ladies and gentlemen, the great James Ivory

I love his answers about the possibility of winning and Oscar this time, so clever and so apropos. He had some very interesting things to say on a Q&A DVD extra included on the Cohen Media 30th Anniversary re-release of Maurice. Ivory is an interesting fellow.

Edited December 31, 2017 by OCClient

[OCClient]

I LOVE this collection of CMBYN scenes set to Debussy.

Check Chalamet's expression at 1:12.

 

SPOILER, this shows most of the kissing and love making you'll find in the movie unless I'm forgetting something.

 

[LoveNDino]

...unless I'm forgetting something.

How many more viewings till you commit to heart everything, down to the last sigh?

[LoveNDino]

I love his answers about the possibility of winning and Oscar this time, so clever and so apropos. He had some very interesting things to say on a Q&A DVD extra included on the Cohen Media 30th Anniversary re-release of Maurice. Ivory is an interesting fellow.

More of Mr. James Ivory!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9U_aDvvZ1f0

[TruthBTold]

I finally saw the movie and liked it but unfortunately did not love it as I thought I would considering the source material and people associated with the film, e.g., James Ivory. Before I say anything, there is a spoiler alert from here on in (not that I say that much). The main complaint that I have with the film is that ostensibly in order to pass censors much (if not all) of the "beyond kissing" sexual contact is simply missing. In the one scene I recall in the bedroom there is the beginning of sex however it then cuts to post-sex. In another, the Oliver drops to his knees to give Elio a BJ then almost immediately rises and makes some remark. While I understand that love is not necessarily all about physical sex for the short amount of time that the relationship lasts there would definitely be more than was shown. (This was really exemplified by the short trip that they take right before Oliver leaves. If you and your "lover" had only two days away from your parents/employer would you really not spend most of it having wild sex?) By contrast, during the film there was a scene with a woman with Elio that went on for a while that at the very least intimated very passionate sex. However, because there were no similar scenes between the two men I felt very little of the passion that I thought necessary to foster the emotions that end the film.

[LoveNDino]

I finally saw the movie and liked it but unfortunately did not love it as I thought I would considering the source material and people associated with the film, e.g., James Ivory. Before I say anything, there is a spoiler alert from here on in (not that I say that much). The main complaint that I have with the film is that ostensibly in order to pass censors much (if not all) of the "beyond kissing" sexual contact is simply missing. In the one scene I recall in the bedroom there is the beginning of sex however it then cuts to post-sex. In another, the Oliver drops to his knees to give Elio a BJ then almost immediately rises and makes some remark. While I understand that love is not necessarily all about physical sex for the short amount of time that the relationship lasts there would definitely be more than was shown. (This was really exemplified by the short trip that they take right before Oliver leaves. If you and your "lover" had only two days away from your parents/employer would you really not spend most of it having wild sex?) By contrast, during the film there was a scene with a woman with Elio that went on for a while that at the very least intimated very passionate sex. However, because there were no similar scenes between the two men I felt very little of the passion that I thought necessary to foster the emotions that end the film.

Garrett Schlichte of the Washington Post, in his essay agrees with you. He said that "sex between the two main characters is central to the power of the book. Pages and pages are dedicated not only to sex but also to the resulting passion, shame and acceptance these characters feel, and the beauty of how it emboldens them and their relationship. Most books are not necessarily visual, so imagination is required to fill in the gaps. Movies, however, are inherently so — and have the ability to make the implicit explicit. In his direction, Guadagnino chose the path of least resistance." I tend to agree, to a large extent, considering how explicit the sex scene in "I Am Love" between Tilda Swinton and Edoardo Gabbriellini was. However, on balance, I am extremely pleased that this film exists, and if it chose to be, um, circumspect about gay sex, so be it...

[hornytwells]

I finally saw the movie and liked it but unfortunately did not love it as I thought I would considering the source material and people associated with the film, e.g., ......

 

Re your remark about the BJ scene- isn't the reason he rises to his feet and "makes some remark" is because he becomes aware that Elio has recently had an orgasm and asks him what happened-ie the peach scene? Personally speaking, I did not find the lack of more explicit gay sex to equal diminished passion-if I need to see more explicit gay sex there is always gay porn. I found the love making scenes way more convincing than say Brokeback Mountain where a little spit seemed to make first time anal sex entirely smooth and comfortable.

[rogerG]

Much like Brokeback Mountain, I'm on my third viewing of this film. I can't seem to let it go. My heart wishes to cling to it. Thanks to all who posted the various links to fun and informative videos.

[TruHart1]

I finally saw the movie and liked it but unfortunately did not love it as I thought I would considering the source material and people associated with the film, e.g., James Ivory. Before I say anything, there is a spoiler alert from here on in (not that I say that much). The main complaint that I have with the film is that ostensibly in order to pass censors much (if not all) of the "beyond kissing" sexual contact is simply missing. In the one scene I recall in the bedroom there is the beginning of sex however it then cuts to post-sex. In another, the Oliver drops to his knees to give Elio a BJ then almost immediately rises and makes some remark. While I understand that love is not necessarily all about physical sex for the short amount of time that the relationship lasts there would definitely be more than was shown. (This was really exemplified by the short trip that they take right before Oliver leaves. If you and your "lover" had only two days away from your parents/employer would you really not spend most of it having wild sex?) By contrast, during the film there was a scene with a woman with Elio that went on for a while that at the very least intimated very passionate sex. However, because there were no similar scenes between the two men I felt very little of the passion that I thought necessary to foster the emotions that end the film.

From one festival round table or another I saw online, the director, Luca Guadagnino, stated that the original James Ivory screenplay had love scenes between Elio and Oliver that were much more graphic than those Luca chose to depict on screen. As I understand it, though Luca himself is a gay man, he felt that for this particular piece, he wanted a more romantic depiction of the short-lived ultimate fulfillment of Elio's and Oliver's passion/love. The entire film leads (some might even complain quite slowly, just as the book) to that first night they spend together, followed by the anticipation of Oliver's departure and Elio's loss, to the inevitable end of the affair as their short final trip together ends. It appears to me that the director was not worried about censors at all, but had a vision of the finished film he wanted from the beginning of production. As with the choice of music, the choices in cinematography and the underlying through-feel of the film, the director chose to make the love scenes lyrical, rather than graphic. Yes, a disappointment for many but I don't believe (JMHO) anyone thinks the film is not a complete and beautiful piece of work.

 

TruHart1

[OCClient]

I doubt if Sony Classics would have picked it up if the film showed male frontal nudity in the love making, and also doubt whether Hammer and Chalamet would allow their junk in the final edit. In fact I read that both actors had clauses in their contracts about that, so that unless something changes, the sequel will also not show any of the frontal nude clips Guadagnino might have.

 

I understand how this seems incongruous with hetero sex and affection shown in cinema, especially cinema filmed outside the US with non-American actors, that might show these nude scenes more honestly. Ivory has talked quite a bit about that, how decades ago, mail frontal nudity was shown in Maurice and A Room With a View, and in each case was so well done, IMO. Lovely films, by the way.

 

Earlier this year Ivory gave an interview, I believe it was Variety, where he called out US cinema for the double standard concerning male frontal nudity, how narrow minded we are over here in the States.

 

That said, I think the movie is fine as is. A agree with @TruHart1's conclusion about that.

Edited January 1, 2018 by OCClient

[OCClient]

How many more viewings till you commit to heart everything, down to the last sigh?

 

Like how many times Oliver went down on Elio?

 

Like the time when Elio grabbed his own stiffy through his jeans.

 

Or how I wanted to see up Elio's so badly during the jack off scene but the damn bed post blocked all but an imaginative view of the dark, secret place beyond, up his lovely shorts.

Edited January 1, 2018 by OCClient

[rogerG]

Luca Guadagnino said in a few interviews that the movie is not about gay sex. It's about love, first love, and family. He had no desire to shoot explicit sex scenes. He explains why in a number of interviews.

 

Hammer also says in an interview that he did not want his daughters being harassed in grade schools with photos of "daddy's dick," which is why he initially hesitated to take the roll. One has to assume that Guadagnino assured Hammer that his movie would be different from the book.

[TruthBTold]

Luca Guadagnino said in a few interviews that the movie is not about gay sex. It's about love, first love, and family. He had no desire to shoot explicit sex scenes. He explains why in a number of interviews.

Hammer also says in an interview that he did not want his daughters being harassed in grade schools with photos of "daddy's dick," which is why he initially hesitated to take the roll. One has to assume that Guadagnino assured Hammer that his movie would be different from the book.

 

One can film "gay sex" without it being explicit, i.e., bodily parts being exposed. Mr. Hammer need not have been worried that his dick had to be shown in well photographed love scenes. I am not sure what the director meant by not wanting the film to not be about "gay sex" as that is what much of the relationship consisted of and certainly what the father's confession at the end was somewhat about. I happened to watch the movie "Bound" again which was filmed in the mid-90's. There were explicit sex scenes that were not really "explicit." Because the plot included these passionate, explicit, and even somewhat uncomfortable sex scenes the later plot made sense that these women would potentially sacrifice so much for each other.

[tchm]

I know! What kind of "gay" movie is this? No dicks? Nobody committing or even contemplating suicide? Or murdered for being gay? No escort in sight within miles (and an excuse to show more dicks!) No angry or disappointed parents? No druggie or alcoholic or somebody with STD or AIDS? I think I'll go and rent Eating Out (#10 I think it is now?) to wash away the bad taste this film left behind. And see lotsa Dicks!

Edited January 1, 2018 by tchm

[rogerG]

One can film "gay sex" without it being explicit

Not well, according to Guadagnino. He says most sex scenes look contrived or gratuitous to him. If you can find the interview, he speaks quite frankly about this. I found his thoughts and artistic vision a true inspiration.

[OCClient]

Not well, according to Guadagnino. He says most sex scenes look contrived or gratuitous to him. If you can find the interview, he speaks quite frankly about this. I found his thoughts and artistic vision a true inspiration.

That makes sense. Unless a director is trying to pull of something like Lars von Trier. in Nymphomaniac, when does a scene need to show boinking and why?

 

The book really aligns with that, how it never actually describes a hard cock slipping inside somebody's hole, rather explains the feelings about that: Elio's fears, the longing, the regret, the anger and so on. If the book or the movie actually showed or described boinking it might miss the point, how this is a story of a young man's desire, and the vulnerability and pain that goes with that.

[N13]

I know! What kind of "gay" movie is this?

 

Of course, it is not a "gay" movie nor was it intended to be one......whatever that is (Although the rest of your quote is perfect)

[hornytwells]

Of course, it is not a "gay" movie nor was it intended to be one......whatever that is (Although the rest of your quote is perfect)

i think the post was meant to be funny......

[rogerG]

What kind of "gay" movie is this? No dicks? Nobody committing or even contemplating suicide? Or murdered for being gay? No escort in sight within miles (and an excuse to show more dicks!) No angry or disappointed parents? No druggie or alcoholic or somebody with STD or AIDS?

I assume the post was meant to poke fun, too. However, Luca Guadagnino (and some of the actors) speaks to many of these issues in interviews on the internet. The word "gay" is not mentioned in the movie. Neither of the boy lovers says "I love you." No serious protagonist, either. Guadagnino says some Hollywood studio turned him down for financing because the mother needed to be more hateful and disapproving. He refused to make the movie others dictated to him. In fact, he specifically moved up the time frame of the story to early 1980's. Guadagnino wanted to capture a time just before AIDS struck, when life and minds were more free.

[LoveNDino]

Neither of the boy lovers says "I love you."

One can argue that when Oliver said to Elio to "call me by your name and I'll call you by mine," it was in fact, a declaration of love.

[OCClient]

One can argue that when Oliver said to Elio to "call me by your name and I'll call you by mine," it was in fact, a declaration of love.

IMO Oliver was in love with Elio by the things he said and the expressions on his face. "Do you know how glad I am we made love?" and "I could kiss you right now."

[rogerG]

One can argue that when Oliver said to Elio to "call me by your name and I'll call you by mine," it was in fact, a declaration of love.

Definitely no need to argue about that. "Call me by your name and I'll call you by mine" is a wonderful, brilliant, especially poetic way to say I love you. When Elio says it on the final phone call with Oliver, it's effect is devastating. I'm tearing up as I write this.

[OCClient]

I just read on another Site they've chosen the title for the sequel. It's............

 

OK, Now Call Me by Someone Else's Name

Ba dump bump!!! (I'm here all week. )

 

But I do wonder what they'll come up with for the sequel title and mostly whether Ivory would pass this time after the production steered clear of the frontal nudity.