Emily Gordon wrote:
>But there they are in the movie, with lots of tear-jerking loneliness,
>hotter than beans in a campfire and shirtless! I sympathize with
>anyone trying to make a full screenplay out of a short story that's as
>much about atmosphere as it is about narrative, but who do you think
>those boobies were for if not for box-office-boosting, freaked-out
>straight men?
>
I think the wives are there to show that the suffering of "individuals"
inevitably extends to and affects a much wider array of people.
>Anyway, difficult as it seems to be for most commentators to conceive,
>there may be many more women who find the idea/image of two men
>together erotic than current definitions of female desire may permit
>even them to recognize openly.
>
Absolutely. At any rate, I always thought it was sexy.
Joanna