MovieChat Forums > Walk on Water (2005) Discussion > A few thoughts on this terrific movie

A few thoughts on this terrific movie

posted 19 years ago by michelobguzzler
37 replies | jump to latest

I finally saw this movie and was pleasantly surprised at how good it was. Israeli films have been steadily improving the past several years and WOW is no exception.

Lior Ashkenazi- what a wonderful actor. I first noticed him several years on an Israeli TV show (I think he played a religious settler) and thought wow, what a hottie! Since then he's popped up in many Israeli TV shows and now he's done some great film work. I also enjoyed him in Late Marriage. The guy is mucho sexy- am I the only nut who thought he looked hot even when he was putting those drops in his eyes?

I guess the Germans' politeness prevented them from getting mad at Eyal for his bad attitude. After all, he's their employee. What right does he have to get mad at the sister b/c no one told him Axel was gay, or that she's not going home for the party? He really overstepped, don't you guys think? Though I can understand his attitude toward Palestinians, he really should have toned it down in front of his employers- or maybe he just forgot to keep playing the part of the tour guide.

Didn't we all think of Axel as our own little brother? He was like a big overgrown little kid. What a sweetie. I vehemently disagree with him re. his sympathies for Palestinian terrorists, but other than that he was so utterly likeable.

I liked the first half of the movie, the "Israeli" half, better than the "Berlin" half. The first half was so riveting while the second half descended into silliness at times in terms of plot and dialogue. And of course, that ending.....didn't like it.

Now, as to the "gay" element- I've read through the messages on this subject, including the one which quotes the director as saying that there was supposed to be an attraction between them. And I know the gay guys say they can see things in that area the rest of us can't (I'm a straight female myself)...

but I have to say that I didn't see any hint of a homosexual relationship between the 2 men. And believe me, I looked carefully! The only thing I saw was Axel surreptitiously checking out Eyal's um, "goods" while they were showering at the Dead Sea. Hell, who could blame him? But Eyal reacted with such casualness and nonchalance to Axel's nakedness. There was none of the awkwardness or self-consciousness that would have been there had he started to have "those" kind of feelings for the guy. Later when they're putting out the fire, he even looks over and remarks that Axel hasn't been drinking enough (BTW, Israelis are really careful about that- and rightfully so. It's so easy to get dehydrated without realizing it). Again- no awkwardness or any other weirdness.

And later in the movie where he's asking all those questions on how gay men have sex- I saw that as pure curiosity, nothing more. Axel was the kind of guy that it was so easy to get close to him, and Eyal simply felt comfortable with him.

The hug at the end- I saw nothing gay about it, no prelude to sex there. Just one friend comforting another. Actually, I prefer it to be this way rather than a gay thing. Not because I'm anti-gay or any such nonsense, but because it was more emotionally satisfying to me, more beautiful and complex, for Eyal to discard his prejudices and finally allow himself to get close to someone- to Axel of all people- to really let down his guard and ask for comfort. And Axel, though he may find Eyal hot and wouldn't kick him out of bed, is able to put that aside and just be there as a friend for this guy.

That, to me, is much more satisfying than saying "OK, now they're gay." I find their deep friendship to be a really beautiful thing.

And I know there will be those who say "No, they WERE gay, the director said so and I'm gay so I know..." Well, the beauty of cinema is that we can each come away with our own truth after seeing a movie. 10 people can watch the same movie and come away with 10 different truths. This is what I came away with, and I'm happy with that. If you come away with something totally different, that's fine too.

So all in all, I really enjoyed this flick and I can't wait for Lior's next offering.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jessierong 18 years ago

To the original poster. I'm a straight female and I saw the sparks between them very early on in this film, coming mostly from the side of Eyal for Axel, I have to say. I think that's the gay elements are definitely there, but it's still presented subtly and not too much 'in your face', so that the movie can be interpreted comfortably by a wide range of viewers.

To Tom. I've read a couple of your posts here after I watched this movie for the first time (yesterday!), and I have to say that your words are really insightful and helped me pinpoint a lot of what I was feeling while watching this film. Thank you! Oh and I also agree with you about what you said concerning great Canadian films. I'm Canadian and I feel the same frustration...

[–] mmmhmmmm 18 years ago

"Maybe two straight women would comfort each other physically after a trauma (that sort of thing is allowed, even encouraged, by society)-- but straight men would rather die. "

I know PLENTY of straight men that wouldn't care a bit. Quite a few -believe it or not- would look at that other person as simply that. A person. Not as a man they have to appear macho in front of. Just as someone who could help them out.

Also, it was Axel that was doing the comforting. Not Eyal. He wouldn't have done the stroking-cuddling--whatever. But Axel would have. Eyal was too upset to care.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ThrownMuse 19 years ago

After all, he's their employee. What right does he have to get mad at the sister b/c no one told him Axel was gay, or that she's not going home for the party?

I thought the same thing, but it makes more sense in context with the Berlin-half of the movie. I thought the whole "you are going to pretend to be his tour guide" thing was a little odd. Would that really work? Do people get that friendly with their tour guides? I'm from the US, so I chalked this up to cultural differences that I didn't understand.

I also found it odd that Axel didn't think it was strange that Eyal showed up in Germany a short while after he vehemently stated he would never go to Germany.
Eyal tells him he felt bad about the way things ended between them and wanted to apologize...so suddenly he is spending an indefinite amount of time with him? This, I think, might be the key to understanding the alleged attraction between
the two men.

Eyal went there because there was new info in the case. But he also knows he reacted poorly to Axel's queerness and is working to change that. I got the impression that he wasn't changing just to get what he wanted, but because he and Axel bonded in an intense way that Eyal didn't expect. Perhaps Axel didn't react strangely to Eyal's arrival because he sensed this too. The director includes scenes that carefully point to the way that Eyal has changed. When he is in the gay bar, he doesn't feel uncomfortable because he's straight (like the first gay bar), he feels uncomfortable because he is Israeli. Also, he saves the lives of some of Axel's queer acquaintances. The fact that Eyal feels like an outsider in Berlin helps him bond closer with others who have "outsider" status.

I don't think it is clear as to whether the men ever had an a physical sexual encounter and I really don't think this is relevant to the film. If it did happen, the director excluded it for a reason, and it wasn't because American "rednecks" would object--they had to already expect they were getting a limited release in arthouse theatres here, so why would they bother editing anything out?

I think it is a pretty blatant point that because of Axel and his queerness, Eyal was able to see a side of himself that he had closed off or didn't realize existed. And that is why this is one of several reasons why this is a brilliant film, in my opinion. A straight-identified man learns valuable life lessons from a queer man (and vice versa), and it doesn't involve a "Queer Eye" sensibility (see: Cowboys and Angels.) Whether or not their relationship went to a physical point--and I'm not saying that it did or didn't--is not relevant to this message.

On a separate note, Lior Ashkenazi's performance was stellar. He is a rather beautiful man! Clive Owen has got nothin' on him.

You had to send a wrecking crew after me--I can't walk right.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] michelobguzzler 19 years ago

Tom, maybe you don't realize this, but you're starting to get ever-so-slightly mean (just a tiny bit!). When I wrote that I honestly didn't see any sexual thang going on between the 2 men, you responded with something to the effect that obviously I and others like me must find gay love to be disgusting and icky. Then in your most recent post on this thread you seem to be calling us total idiots for not seeing the gay thing.

Look, you seem like a nice guy, and I'm sure you don't mean to make anyone feel bad, but I must say I took offense. First of all, I don't have a problem with gay love/sex/whatever. I won't use the old "some of my best friends are gay!" line, but I truly believe that one's sexual orientation is something you're born with, and to hate someone because of who they are attracted to is akin to hating them because of their eye color. I think society can only benefit when gays feel comfortable enough to be out and not have to hide who they are. So lets put that whole "icky" (sorry if that wasn't the word you used- I don't have the post in front of me) nonsense to rest, shall we?

Along those same lines, I don't have a problem with movies featuring gay love. In fact, I find them fascinating because gay love is not a part of my everyday experience. So the whole concept interests me greatly. Ever see "Yossi and Jagger"? Good flick. I contend that in WOW there was no gay relationship not because it makes my nose wrinkle and grosses me out (it doesn't) but because I honestly didn't see it. If I had seen it, I would have no problem saying so and accepting it as part of the movie. But I really didn't see it.

And like I said in my last post, that's simply what "I" took away from the movie. That even though the director said they were gay and you claim the signs were there, I simply did not see it. And if I'm wrong, so be it- I can't be forced to believe something I don't believe, and I don't appreciate being mocked and made to feel a fool for that.

Re. the hug- I admit, at first I did find it kind of odd that Eyal just glommed onto Axel like that. But it did seem like he was going through a mini-breakdown or something. His whole world has been turned upside down- he's not who he used to be (an ice-cold killing machine) and I think maybe now the full impact of his wife's suicide and WHY she killed herself has hit him. He even cries (tearless, I guess)- something he never does either. So in that context, it does make sense that he would fall into Axel's arms. And I still say that Axel was simply comforting him. Could be that he was attracted to him, I'm not disputing that. But at this moment he put that aside and comforted his friend. That's all I saw and you can yell "gay love" til the cows come home but I still won't believe it.

By the way, I see Israeli straight men hug more lovingly than American men. Sure, you might see some of that awkward, back-slapping, "We're hugging but we're still straight, dammit!" stuff, but you'll see a lot of long hugs, too. I saw this just the other day as I was driving in Tel Aviv. 2 men were engaged in a long, nice hug next to a car (I guess they were parting). One was religious and one wasn't, so I'm assuming they weren't a gay couple. I immediately thought of your comment when I saw that- funny, huh?

Sorry this is so long but one more comment- the Pia thing. I agree, there wasn't much going on there. But I do disagree with the "it's nice" remark re. her appearance at the restaurant. I didn't see it at all as politely evasive. Rather, I saw Eyal as thinking she did look nice, though not knowing quite what to say. He's not the gushing emotional type, and the situation probably made him a bit shy and awkward. "It's nice" was probably the best he could do without looking like an idiot.

I feel he thought she was pretty, but didn't want to pursue anything (hence the "okay, thanks" when they said good-bye)- don't forget, his wife just killed herself a month ago. Oh, and I thought it was funny that when Pia first saw Eyal, she took off her headscarf so as not to look dowdy, but then when she was saying good-bye, she put it on!

Final thought: I watched this movie again last night and I still did not sense any sexual relationship between the 2 men. I think Axel thought Eyal was cute, but I don't think Eyal's questions re. gay sex amounted to anything more than curiosity- and since Axel had become a friend, he felt comfortable enough asking him about the subject.

Can't we just agree that everyone will take something different away from this movie, that we'll each enjoy it perhaps at different levels, with different "truths", without being nasty to eachother? I disagree with your view re. the gay thing but would never "yell" at you that you're wrong or mock you for it or wonder aloud why you don't get it. Can't you do the same for those of us who don't agree with you?

I don't want to end this post on a negative note because like I said at the beginning of this too-long post, you seem like a very nice guy who wouldn't want to make anyone feel bad. No hard feelings, huh? I've thorougly enjoyed your insightful comments on this movie and you've been fun to spar with. Lets keep it friendly, ok? And please forgive me if I've been oversensitive- wouldn't be the first time!

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] michelobguzzler 19 years ago

"Willfull blindess", huh? Interesting. You know, this is getting a little tiresome.

Yes, I KNOW the director and writer said that Axel and Eyal had an affair. But they sure chose to leave it ambiguous enough so that the viewer could decide for himself! Eytan Fox directed a great movie dealing with gay love- "Yossi and Jagger". He knows how to show his audience a clear case of 2 men loving eachother. Why then, in WOW, did he leave it to the audience which way to interpret it? Why not show the 2 men having an affair? Could it be that they WANTED things left ambiguous, so that each viewer could take away something different?

I'm curious about "all the evidence" we're not seeing. Question: if the writer and director had not said that Axel and Eyal were having an affair, would you still have thought so? I'd like to know what signs pointed you to this attraction and affair. You know, I think it's extremely presumptuous of you to assume that a straight person can't see when there's an attraction between 2 men. An attraction is an attraction, no matter what the sex of the people involved. Can YOU spot an attraction between a man and a woman? Of course you can.

I assume you'll say that there were brooding looks and heavy silences between the 2 men that suggested an attraction. I don't buy it. First of all, Eyal didn't even KNOW Axel was gay until after the Dead Sea scene. Had he known, and/or started to feel his own attraction to Axel, there would have been some awkwardness, awareness on his part at being naked with this guy. But there wasn't. It was all completely casual. It never occured to him that Axel was gay and he had not a scintilla of attraction toward Axel. If anything, I got the sense that he felt protective of him, like a big brother.

Eyal was not the most emotional, emotive person. He seemed rather shy, even a bit uncomfortable in social situations. Most of his communication with these people, who he did not know well, was transmitted in heavy silences and brooding looks!

And what about all the people who saw this movie and did not see anything sexual between them: remember who the audience for this movie is. Most redneck yahoos wouldn't bother seeing a foreign film. Who wants to read when you go to a movie? I think we can safely assume that many viewers were of a bit higher intelligence, more open-minded, maybe a little more sophisticated than the average theater-goer. As I've said before, I have no problem whatsover seeing gay love in a movie. And I'll bet that most WOW viewers wouldn't either. Yet many of us, upon honest and deep introspection, simply do not see a homosexual relationship between these guys. Try as we might, we simply don't. Are we all homophobic gay-bashers who secretly know that they were gay but are so disgusted by 2 men having sex that we refuse to admit it? Give me a freakin' break already.

I'm proud that I live in the only country in the Middle East where 2 men/2 woman can kiss in the street without fear of arrest or stoning. Where we have had a gay member of the Knesset. Where, despite being such a tiny country, we have more than 1 gay pride parade a year. Short of becoming gay myself, I don't know how to convince you that I am not a pathetic homophobe who is shocked and frightened by gay sex, rather than someone who applauds gay rights but simply did not see anything sexual between the 2 men in the film. I'm becoming increasingly annoyed by your accusations that I'm being willfully blind and refusing to see what's "obviously" there.

I'm more convinced than ever that despite all their intentions and statements, the director and writer still chose not to portray a clear homosexual attraction/relationship in this film. It would have been so easy for them to make it even the tiniest bit obvious, but they didn't. You and I saw the same movie, but we saw 2 different movies. And I think this was exactly what was intended.

And with that, I think I've had enough of the gay aspect of this movie. I'll be happy to discuss other parts of this great film, but I am simply talked out on this subject. We're going around and around on this and I'm dizzy. You know you're right, I know I'm right. We'll never be able to convince eachother so I'm opting out. I hope my comments don't inspire another diatribe on your part with just more of the same old same old. But whatever, I've had enough. Moving on now!

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jessierong 18 years ago

I thought that the baby thing came as expected, oddly perhaps. Since the affection between the men were so obvious to me, I just thought that due to various cultural/moral reasons they cannot be together, so Pia is simply the one that reminds him of Axel, and that she is the one that's closest and the most similar to Axel. I'm thinking this because as you said, there's just no chemistry between Pia and Eyal. And as they teach in film class, everything in a film is the way it is for a purpose...

[–] Czails 19 years ago

Wow...you two (michelo & tom )!...but it was interesting what the two of you had to say....it makes me want to watch the film again...just to see if i missed anything. I watched it alone just now, but will ask my girlfriend to watch it with me next time...to see what she thinks?

I loved the first 1/2...really wasn't happy with the ending...but then maybe it just needs more thought. Nothing wrong with that. So great to watch a movie that deserves thought (if ya know what i mean)

Anyway...Great Movie!

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] a_hat_trick 19 years ago

Why is everybody looking for an affair? Can you not have a close male relationship develop that is not sexual? I think they develop like brothers. They are forced together, so to speak, and come to terms with each other. To read a romance between them ruins it and makes it more of a soap opera.

My overall opinion of the movie, not that anybody asked: There's lots to like about this movie but also lots to roll your eyes about. Eyal's reaction after the grandfather dies is poorly acted, for instance. It just doesn't seem believable. The transition the character makes is nearly believeable, but we don't see him suffer and think enough to explain this turn around. In the hands of a more mature script editor and director who could pull more out of his actors this would have been a truly top notch film. As is, it's a bit to "television" for me.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bama1111 19 years ago

I think that Eyal assumed that because they were German he should expect them to be less tolerant of him and therefore he should be the same. They did not seem to be what he expected and I think his actions, to him, are a kind of justification for his thinking that they aren’t really what they seem to be. Not being a Jew I can’t honestly say how I would have felt, in the same circumstances, knowing of their relationship to the Nazi officer. I did think that Eyal’s behavior with Rafik’s uncle was certainly unjustified. If the buyer thinks it’s a fair deal and the seller does too, then it’s a fair deal.

When Eyal, Axel & Pia showed up at the gay club it seemed to take Eyal a while to realize where he was. I never had the impression that there was anything sexual or romantic between the two guys though. I think that when they were bathing, after swimming, and Axel went into his commentary on the circumcision (less) state of European men, Eyal might have gotten the hint of Axel’s sexual preference. I really don’t think that the possibility of Axel being gay was something that would have crossed Eyal’s mind. At least until he actually found out. In Ayal’s line of work (considered “manly”) he probably took for granted that he didn’t know any gay men. So, for me, finding out that they had a relationship, other than what we see, is surprising but it doesn’t change the essence of the story.

I don’t totally agree with a comment I read that Axel was the reason that Eyal couldn’t go on with his life killing people. I think the letter his wife left was the catalyst for change. I think that getting to know Axel & Pia probably enforced his feelings but even Menachem, who read the letter, felt that he had lost his edge because of what she wrote. He made the comment that Eyal wasn’t ready for the mission and that his shooting skills had suffered because of that letter. As he said, Eyal’s next time at the shooting range was markedly worse than we saw him earlier.

As for Eyal being comforted by Axel, at the end, I agree that men generally have a hard time expressing, to another man, anything that would appear to make them weak. However, given the circumstances I didn't find it unusual that Eyal acted the way he did. I personally feel that most men, in circumstances like these, would react the same way. If the pain is bad enough you tend to forget about being a "man" and you take consolation where you find it..

There are a couple “plot points” that were a bit unbelievable, too. One, as someone mentioned, was his showing up in Berlin. In my opinion, that may have given Axel the impression (if he didn’t already have it) that Eyal was interested in him. When he came to the house of Axel’s parents he was introduced by name and the Mother didn’t seem to be interested in who he was or how he came to know their son. I would have thought she would be more interested considering he was Israeli and they had a Nazi in the house. I expected that Axel would have mentioned he was the tour guide. When he left the house, after the appearance of the Grandfather, it seemed to me that he could have called the Hotel where Menachem was staying rather than driving there and back. When he came back, would the front door have been left open for him to just walk back in? Did no one wonder where he had gone particularly with the Mother having made the comment that for all they knew he could have been a agent of Mossad?

I like where the story went but I thought that the first part (in Israel) was tighter than the second part. Overall I think it’s a terrific, thought-provoking movie.

Emperor: Tell me how he died.
Captain Algren: I will tell you...how he lived.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] julianlukasfan 19 years ago

Here is a link to a very nice Q and A interview with Eytan Fox from the Windy City Times. It is dated "2005-03-16" so its kinda old, if this had been posted, please forgive.
In this interview he spoke of his views on Walk On Water. He also mentioned a little on the scene when he saw Axel and Arab guy, Dana International, his upcoming film tentatively titled The Bubble and of course about Lior Ashkenazi.

http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=7686

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] geyfmani-1 19 years ago

I love how the whole article the moderator keeps saying things like "as a gay film-maker..."
He's gay we get it.

You don't see interviews with Spielberg stating "as a straight film-maker..."

This type of difference is what keeps groups so divided, and they do it to themselves.

The confirmations from the director are not evidence of clear-cut homosexuality. The most "confirming" line is:

WCT: You also touch on that when Axel picks up the Arab guy and then Eyal’s horrible reaction to that.

EF: Right because first of all he’s homophobic and on the other hand, he’s jealous and doesn’t want to admit it. All these emotional things are happening between he and Axel and he doesn’t understand it. Plus the fact that he’s losing control. He didn’t know that Axel was gay and he wants to regain his power over the situation. Israel’s a very complicated place but a very interesting place as well.

So let us break it down:
1) he's homophobic "he hates gay people"
2) he's jealous "you can be jealous in a non sexual way, he has befriended this man who is showing him that he can grow as a person"
3) All these emotional things are happening " emotional things between men can be non homosexual, in fact for most of the world emotional things happening between men are not homosexual"

This is not the clearcut evidence that Eyal is playing hide the kosher frank with Axel.

Given, the director and screenwriter are fagelehs, there probably are homosexual feelings built in, just like straight screenwriters and directors build in heterosexual feelings into their work.

Here is my real point, sexuality (this is not limited to homosexuality) cheapens this film. It cheapens the film just like sexuality would cheapen Lost in Translation. I don't care if it was a woman showing Eyal a new light, him being sexual with that woman would have cheapened the movie as much as a sexual relationship with Axel. The director understood this and in his interview said:

Yes, definitely. I’m not shy about doing gay sex scenes—I’ve done that for television and in my movie Yossi & Jagger—but somehow I felt it took the focus away from what was really important which was the emotional stuff. The fact that this straight guy needs this gay guy in order to change or to become a better person is what was more important.

This is what the film is about, so you can read all the homosexuality you want into this movie but this is not what it is about. The movie is about personal growth from an unexpected place.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] julianlukasfan 19 years ago

Hi here is another link to an interview with Eytan Fox about his ideas on Walk on Water. If this already had been posted, please forgive.

http://www.sovo.com/print.cfm?content_id=3508

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rcusickjr 18 years ago

Hi all,
I have to say that while the director was provocative in showing us a little male-to-male attraction, in the end Eyal and Axel were just friends.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rcusickjr 18 years ago

Because Eyal ended up being married, all the stuff that happened earlier was -- I think -- just to playfully provoke us into think there could be something between them.

If the director wanted to make a gay statement, he would not have had Eyal marrying Pia in the end. He would have had Eyal and Axel together in Berlin (or Tel Aviv).

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rcusickjr 18 years ago

Actually, since you mention the ending, what was more disappointing to me was the decision to have Axel end the life of his grandfather.

I think that scene should have ended with Axel phoning the authorities (or something similar). That would have been the "right" thing to do.

Richard

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tim_spec 18 years ago

" what was more disappointing to me was the decision to have Axel end the life of his grandfather"

But Axel has also been influenced by Eyan by this point as well as the other way around.

Early in the film Axel is saying people should understand why suicide bombers become suicide bombers.

Towards the end of the film he is telling Eyan that he wished that he had killed the skinhead who was attacking them. "Sometimes, its the right thing to do" he says or words to that effect.His grandfather would have been only to happy to kill a gay man like Axel in his time, and would have felt much more sympathy for the skinheads than his grandson.

There is also a slight difference between what Axel does and what Eyan was meant to do. Eyan was going to give him a lethal injection. Axel just turns off the old man's oxygen and his monitors. He will probably die, but like everything else in this film, it's not spelled out 100%

[–] baynesco 18 years ago

Fairly good suspense movie with some glaring lapses of plausibility

1. The Israeli hit-man walks into a restaurant on his first day in Berlin, and surprise surprise, there sits his boss.

2. Axell is obviously not the sharpest pencil in the box. In spite of g;aromg evidence (e.g. his prowess as a fighter when he tackles the skinheads, and his showing up in Berlin so quickly after declaring he would never visit Germany --etc., the script never indicates that he has even a faint suspicion that this guy may be more than a travel guide.

3. I do not know anything about Israel's policy on immigrants so I am not sure that this implied criticism is valid. Pia is German. Pia (according to Mossad files) is the grand-daughter of a wanted Nazi warm criminal. Yet Pia,having left her original relationship with an Israel man lives, apparently permanently on a kibbutz in Israel. This might at least be explained

arby

[–] tim_spec 18 years ago

1. He may in fact have been followed by his boss. The fact he was actually staying there was a bit contrived yes.

2. He like me might have naively assumed that seeing as every able bodied man ends up in the IDF, they are trained how to fight like that.

3. Not sure either. Maybe there is a more open door if youre on a Kibbutz. Or maybe it suited the Mossad to have here within its jurisdiciton. She filled out her forms, her request was granted, she was "lucky", because they were after Opa.

[–] tim_spec 18 years ago

"but I have to say that I didn't see any hint of a homosexual relationship between the 2 men."

The beauty of this film is that it's not in your face. Here's a couple of hints you might have missed.

1) The way Eyan can't take his eyes off Axel's body when he takes his shirt off for the first time after he falls in the water.

2) Eyan's behaviour towards Axel and the Arab guy that he meets. Everyone seems to assume that its driven by racism. In fact I think it was driven by jealousy. He was already unfriendly towards him in the club before he knew he was Arab, and he certainly hated driving the two of them around on the day after.

Certainly by this point there was no sex, rather a growing emotional involvement.

[–] Iconoclast321 (429) 7 years ago

Nice comment. I also liked the ambiguity, and could have even done without the tacked-on ending - but it's the decision of the filmmakers, and in real-life the character it is based on did marry the sister (and did have a fling with the brother too, btw).