Films of 2014

As 2014 draws to a close, here's my verdict on the films I saw at the cinema during the year, in descending order of enjoyment:

The Grand Budapest Hotel  - a hilarious performance from Ralph Fiennes made this one of the most enjoyable films I've ever seen at the cinema.

Locke - proving that you don't need flashy explosions or CGI to tell a story, this film with Tom Hardy is gripping from start to finish, which is particularly impressive, since most of the time all we see is him driving his car while talking on the phone.

Edge of Tomorrow - intelligent sci-fi which benefits from a good script and a good performance (rather than his usual star turn) from Tom Cruise. Nice also to see a strong female character (Emily Blunt)

The Imitation Game - a beautiful recreation of the period, and strong performances, but I was left unmoved.

The Equalizer - the usual strong performance from Denzel Washington is frittered away in a film that uses nearly half its runtime for the setup and offers excessive gore as (meagre) compensation.

Godzilla - another film that spends way too much of its running time on the set up (it's a good hour before we see Godzilla) and gives us characterisation-by-numbers. Yes, Aaron Taylor-Johnson is cute, if you like that sort of thing and no, he doesn't get his kit off.

Non-Stop - once again, Liam Neeson plays a troubled hard man. The film insults our intelligence by showing us the big clue not once, but three times. Hopefully, Julianne Moore got a shedload of dosh to be in this turkey.

Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit - Chris Pine is as wooden as his name suggests, Keira Knightley does her best and Kenneth Branagh fails hard in his portrayal of a gangster. Kevin Costner collects a pay cheque.

3 Days To Kill - the absolute stinker of the year by a country mile. What could have been either an action thriller, a comedy thriller or a family drama is completely sunk by being a tepid blend of all three.  Kevin Costner collects a pay cheque.

"Homewrecker"

The title of this post is the one-word message I received a while back when I had a profile on DaddyHunt. It came from a photoless profile of a man in Fort Worth, Texas. Having had no contact with this man before, I was surprised to receive such an accusatory message. I responded, suggesting that his message had been intended for someone else. The reply came back that it was for me, because on my profile I state that I’m willing to hook up with partnered men. Although it was probably an exercise in futility, I wrote back and drew his attention to that sentence as it appeared on my profile “Willing to hook up with partnered men, as long as you’re not breaking the rules of your relationship”.

To me, the final part of that sentence makes all the difference in the world. When two (or more) people are in a relationship, they get to make the rules and those rules can include an element of sexual non-exclusivity. If some guy in a relationship is free to hook up with me, and I want to hook up with him, what’s the harm and furthermore, who else’s business is it?

Gay men, have quite varied opinions on sexual exclusivity in relationships. Many, like me think sexual exclusivity isn’t that important and/or have trouble delivering it, so don’t promise it. As RuPaul once said “Don’t let your mouth write cheques that your ass can’t cash”. Others are very much in favour of sexual exclusivity. All to the good, if that’s what you agree with your partner(s). Lots of people say that feelings of jealousy would quickly derail any open relationship for them, so closed is the way to go. Of course, sexual non-exclusivity is a continuum ranging from the occasional three-way or hookup when you’re out of town to, well, as much as you can handle.

What I find very surprising, however, is the vehemence with which some gay men condemn open relationships. It’s very common to see on dating profiles that men aren’t willing to hook up with partnered men (which is perfectly reasonable). What’s not so reasonable is the condemnation of someone’s open relationship – the idea that looking for sex outside the relationship means the relationship is superficial or in trouble and that those involved should work more on their relationship rather than seeking outside sex. Maybe those condemning open relationships should spend that energy working on their own (presumably-closed) relationship.

My most successful relationship was open. Neither of us believed sexual exclusivity was any kind of ideal, and so didn’t think it was worth striving for. Why waste energy like that? The arrangement worked out well for us – we were both into some sex that the other wasn’t, so we got to have that sex with other people and still have sex, intimacy and love with each other. Our relationship only ended because one of us died. (Aside: it’s a weird cultural idea that relationships that end with death are a success and those which end any other way are a failure – but that’s another blog post.)

There was a time when people would say that the only kind of relationship that was authentic was that between a man and a woman. Now, thankfully, more and more people are realising that relationships can encompass all kinds of sexualities and genders – love is what counts. It’s rather disappointing that some gay men haven’t realised that yet.