This is a short movie about a gay man, born without hands and feet, who lives in the French countryside far outside Paris. His need for physical intimacy (a need practically all human beings share) leads him to connect online with men who are turned on (or at least not repulsed) by his disability. The movie concentrates on one such connection, with a younger man who seems to fit the bill perfectly and travels (with considerable hardship because of the remote location) to spend a day or two with the protagonist.
I watched this movie with a lot of trepidation because of things said by amateur reviewers on other sites. "The sexual scenes were extremely graphic in nature and could easily disgust anyone" and "Warning: the sex scenes are not for the squeamish, since the protagonist is indeed a quadruple amputee" did not exactly inspire confidence. (He's not an amputee, by the way: he was BORN without hands and feet.)
Fortunately, those statements told more about those reviewers than about the movie. The sex scene (there's only one) was about as UN-graphic as a sex scene can be unless it came from Disney. No penises, no penetration, really nothing at all except a hairy bare bottom and the stubs of the star's arms and legs doing things fully-limbed folk might envy. But disgusting? Not the sex.
The first reviewer I quoted (like the second, who at least was more honest about it) must have been disgusted by the star's lack of hands and feet, because no sexual activity was shown (suggested, maybe, but not shown) that could accurately be called graphic, much less disgusting.
I liked the movie pretty well. It certainly wasn't the typical, tiresome American gay movie, either starring, produced or written by Matthew Montgomery (Thank God). It was interesting seeing how well Herve Chenais (the star) manages his disability: his handwriting without hands is neater than mine is, and he writes fast! Amazing.
Another reviewer mentioned his "uncomfortably needy demand for respect", but that's wrong too. He just wants somebody to treat him as a human being. If that's "uncomfortably needy", then God help us all, because we ALL want that, whether we have hands and feet or not.
The sex in this movie is not at all graphic, and there is nothing at all disgusting about it - in itself. If anyone is disgusted by it, the problem is in the viewer, not the movie.
I strongly recommend it to anyone who can acknowledge severe physical disabilities but look past them to see the person inside, who isn't really much different from the rest of us.
I watched this movie with a lot of trepidation because of things said by amateur reviewers on other sites. "The sexual scenes were extremely graphic in nature and could easily disgust anyone" and "Warning: the sex scenes are not for the squeamish, since the protagonist is indeed a quadruple amputee" did not exactly inspire confidence. (He's not an amputee, by the way: he was BORN without hands and feet.)
Fortunately, those statements told more about those reviewers than about the movie. The sex scene (there's only one) was about as UN-graphic as a sex scene can be unless it came from Disney. No penises, no penetration, really nothing at all except a hairy bare bottom and the stubs of the star's arms and legs doing things fully-limbed folk might envy. But disgusting? Not the sex.
The first reviewer I quoted (like the second, who at least was more honest about it) must have been disgusted by the star's lack of hands and feet, because no sexual activity was shown (suggested, maybe, but not shown) that could accurately be called graphic, much less disgusting.
I liked the movie pretty well. It certainly wasn't the typical, tiresome American gay movie, either starring, produced or written by Matthew Montgomery (Thank God). It was interesting seeing how well Herve Chenais (the star) manages his disability: his handwriting without hands is neater than mine is, and he writes fast! Amazing.
Another reviewer mentioned his "uncomfortably needy demand for respect", but that's wrong too. He just wants somebody to treat him as a human being. If that's "uncomfortably needy", then God help us all, because we ALL want that, whether we have hands and feet or not.
The sex in this movie is not at all graphic, and there is nothing at all disgusting about it - in itself. If anyone is disgusted by it, the problem is in the viewer, not the movie.
I strongly recommend it to anyone who can acknowledge severe physical disabilities but look past them to see the person inside, who isn't really much different from the rest of us.
