to kuroko:
Your treatise on the movie “Shelter” is indeed thought provoking and rather enticing. Of course, it was rather silly of me to have posed this question in the first place: What would the characters of the movie “Shelter” be doing, saying and thinking after the movie has ended? The only correct answer is, of course, nothing. They instantly cease to exist upon the last foot of film clattering through the projector’s film gate.
They vanish like wisps of smoke as I believe we do when we have breathed our last.
But people have always loved to speculate on such things. Literary experts have been analyzing Hamlet for centuries: What was he thinking, what are his motivations? He was merely a figment of Shakespeare’s imagination and yet to many, he is more real a person to us than most of the people currently alive in the world. A chilling thought.
Tom Stoppard wrote a very interesting play, of which I am sure you are aware, entitled: “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.” It is about the two characters in “Hamlet” who are sent for by the King in order to sound out Hamlet and discover what is bothering him. Their stage time is relatively brief so Stoppard asks: What were Rosencrantz and Guildenstern doing when they were not on stage and the play was proceeding without them? That is the substance of Stoppard’s play and it is indeed interesting and thought provoking. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern meet the company of players enroute to Elsinore and the head of the company informs them that: “An exit is merely an entrance somewhere else.” Provocative, no? As they are riding toward Elsinore, Rozencrantz asks Guildenstern, “What is the first thing you remember?” and Guildenstern says. “Well, we set out today for this journey.” Rozencrantz says, “No, no. What is the first think in your life you can remember?” Guildenstern thinks for a time and says: “We were sent for.” He can’t remember anything before that as he didn’t exist before that.
So here we have “Shelter” a low budget film that, for some reason, has grabbed the imaginations and emotions of a fair number of people. Just read the reviews of Amazon customers and IMDb readers and you find they are largely entranced by the film. Why is that? Speculating about what becomes of the characters “after the film runs out”? All we have is the script that Jonah Markowitz wrote, the interpretations of the performers and the few speculations made by Markowitz in the commentary track.
From what I understand about sexual orientation, it is pretty well determined at birth or at least very early in life so I think it is fair to say the Zach is gay (or, at least, bisexual from the start). He is like many men who gradually become aware that they are “different” and are often greatly disturbed by it. They don’t want to believe it and try to cover it by leading an outwardly heterosexual life. Zach behaves in exactly this way: his tepid relationship with Tori and his being quite disturbed following his initial experience amounting to a few kisses with Shaun. When his sister, Jeanne, or his friends make any inferences to him in that regard, he draws away from Shaun, treating him coldly and ultimately breaking up with him in his car at the party. The two most touching scenes in the film are those between Zach and his two straight friends, Tori and Gabe, Gabe is sitting in the closed diner with Zach and is obviously hurt when he says to Zach: “Why didn’t tell me?” You can see it in his face. Zach tries to avoid the subject but Gabe says, staring down at his coffee: “I don’t care -- at all!” Then he looks up at Zach: “Have you....have you always known?”
After he has been accepted at the art institute, Zach meets with Tori (apparently for the last time): When Zach is about to “come clean” with her about himself, she cuts him off: “I already know. I’ve known for a while,” Zach, on the verge of tears (along with the audience) says, “You’re the only reason I wish I wasn’t.,” one of the most painful lines in the entire film. Tori asks him: “Do you love him?” and he responds: “Oh, come on.” This, I believe is the one time the word “love” is used in the picture. It is these two scenes that lead Zach back to Shaun along with the knowledge that Shaun sent Zach’s portfolio and application to the art institute leading to Zach’s being granted a scholarship. I think Markowitz wants us believe that Zach and Shaun’s relationship will be a lasting one, but he does have Tori say of Shaun to Zach in their last scene, “He’s a good guy, Zach. You don’t belong to people forever” and Zach asks, “Then why bother?” and she responds, “Isn’t it worth it?” and Zach nods and signs, “Yeah.” Zach seems to be saying that he wants his partnership with Shaun to be s lasting one but is prepared to accept it is even if it isn’t.
The scene when Zach returns to Shaun; Shaun asks: “Why are you here? What changed?” Zach answers, his voice slightly breaking, “I did.” I don’t think Zach is speaking of his sexual orientation but his attitude to life in general and Shaun in particular.
And in his final scene with his sister. Zach and Shaun arrive as Jeanne is preparing to leave for Oregon with her male friend, Zach walks toward her but then turns back and takes Shaun’s hand which denotes his bond with Shaun and disturbs Jeanne when she sees it. When Shaun goes into the house to check on Cody, Zach says to her: “Shaun is really great, Jeanne. He really cares for Cody and me. If Cody can’t be with you, this is the next best thing.” Later he says, “Jeanne, look around. Every kid should be so lucky. We’ll make in work. -- He;s in good hands, I promise.” This scene ends with Shaun standing between Zach and Cody with one hand on Zach;s shoulder and the other gently rubbing Cody’s head, definitely a father image. He turns smiling to Zach: “Are you ready?”
Their future life may resemble that suggested in the film “Maurice” based on the novel by E.M. Forster. set in early 20th century England.
The two male lovers reunite at the conclusion and decide to face the obstacles the future will hold for them, particularly at a time in Britian, when homosexuality was against the law. The present time, at least for the moment, will be kinder to Zach and Shaun, but it will still not be easy for them.
The dialog Markowitz provided for this film is sparing. He knew just how much to say and how much to withhold, leaving it for us to infer from what we think we see and hear. The players of the cast of this film, especially Trevor Wright and Brad Rowe have brought their characters to life with Jonah Markowitz dialog and body language, facial expressions and eye contact that is natural, unforced and subtle.
Thank you for your fine and thoughtful essay.
reply
share
kuroko
12 years ago
BGtaylor82:
You've given me a lot of things to think about which is a pleasant surprise. It's said that all good films by default should be thought provoking, yet somehow they don't always spark debates that hold my interest for too long such as this one.
After my first viewing, I was sort of sitting on a fence as to liking it completely and thinking it's barely above average. I prefer lesbian dramas, as they're somehow less tragic or tend to aim for a happy ending. I even made a thread about what I considered to be plot holes, but after another viewing and no doubt thanks to your insight, I can comfortably say that I enjoyed the movie a lot more.
Thank you also for bringing up "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead" and "Maurice". I will check them out.
I think I would've liked seeing more from Shaun's perspective to fully understand his motivations. It was hard for me to see beyond his savior role and he seems to not have inner conflicts or doubts at all, but it's clear that it's Zach's story and we're looking at him from Zach's point of view. I'm not sure where exactly does Zach fall on the Kinsey scale, but even if it's likely that he may have had thoughts about experimenting with another guy, there is little that suggests that prior to meeting Shaun. I can accept that some people just don't like labels, and Zach may very well be one of them. I think Markowitz does raise yet another interesting point there.
So we will never know what happen to them, but in spite of my theory about them not having a happy ending, I understand that it's not the point of the story. Just like any other character-driven films, it's not about the destination but rather about the journey. I have to agree with you that the combination of Markowitz' writing, effective dialog, and the acting and directing make Zach and Shaun's journey stand out above other movies I've seen. To me, it goes beyond being a refreshing portrayal of same sex relationships, as I feel it's also a story of the struggle to balance obligations, family and love relationships, while holding on your own dreams and aspirations and trying to make them come true.
I do believe this movie can and will resonate with audiences of all kinds, and it's up to viewers to continue to spread a positive buzz for it. Thank you again for the time you've given me and your insightful perspective on this movie.
reply
share
bgtaylor802
12 years ago
kuroko
Thanks for your thoughtful message. I've included a statement that I recently sent to another forum as a possible explanation as to why "Shelter" has positively affected so many of the people who have seen it. I hope you find it interesting.
The director, Jonah Markowitz wrote the screenplay and he was very clever with it. The picture begins with a credit roll over shots of Zach (Trevor Wright) skateboarding around town (San Pedro, CA).
Assume we are seeing the film for the first time. We follow Zach home and into his house and we pretty quickly see his situation. We also quickly find out that he is the central character of this movie. (Later we see that there is scarcely a scene in it without Zach’s presence). We see that he is an unselfish young fellow, depended upon and sometimes taken advantage of by his elder sister, Jeanne. He clearly loves his little nephew, Cody, Jeanne’s son, whom she probably had out of wedlock and Cody clearly loves Zach. We know nothing of Zach’s sexual orientation for at least the first fifteen minutes of the film. But by this time we have become rather attached to Zach. He has at least one part time job to help support the family that he lives with. We see him drive his friend Gabe, whom he knew from High School, to join his friends on their way to college. But we see that Zach is not going to college; but he does have a serious interest in art. We like Zach, who, as portrayed by Trevor Wright, is charming and physically very attractive. And here is Markowitz’s trick: It isn’t until Zach meets up with Gabe’s elder brother, Shaun, that we begin to suspect something and it isn’t much longer until we discover that Zach may well be gay. But by this time, Jonah Markowitz has his audience, gay or not, hooked -- on Zach, of course. We’ve come to identify very strongly and sympathize with Zach before we find out anything about his sexual urges. And that, I think, pretty much explains, why this movie has gotten such overwhelming approval by those who have seen it.
It is the scene, after their first romantic encounter, when Zach takes Cody with him to visit Shaun for dinner. Later, Cody is sleeping, and Shaun and Zach are having a conversation about Zach’s responsibilities to his family. Shaun finally gently takes the wine glass out of Zach’s hand and taking his hand urges him to his feet and they simply embrace for a minute. With this Markowitz has his audience exactly where he wants them -- completely helpless.
Anybody see it differently?
reply
share
kuroko
11 years ago
I had my reservations about Zach being so naturally into Shaun and hooking up so easily, especially for someone who was heterosexual up until the hug scene.
Though I still think the happy ending was short lived, I like this scene as it goes beyond the physical attraction and hints that there might be more to it between Shaun and Zach. The simplicity and intimacy of it, just two people being vulnerable and embracing each other, makes it easy for anyone to relate to regardless of sexual orientation. So Shaun's savior complex may be kicking in at that point, but oh well. We don't know anything about previous relationship, but surely Shaun is not about to make the same mistakes, don't you think? ;)
On a separate note, I do agree that Wright being physically gifted helps the audience sympathize with his character, but it would be an injustice not to commend him on conveying a sense of vulnerability, angst and anger in Zach. I do hope that other filmmakers take notice of this guy because he's talented to boot.
reply
share
bgtaylor802
11 years ago
Kuroko:
We really don't know about Zach's prior sexual orientation. Current thinking is that a person's sexual orientation is determined before birth. That being the case, Zach kept his sexual feelings pretty much to himself until he became involved with Shaun, making it all the more poignant.
"Shelter" is six years old, now and time is going by for Trevor Wright. The bloom of youth is indeed an ephemeral thing.
reply
share