Poly in cinema

I think as humans we're more apt to spot differences than similarities.

Most of the world is monogamous and the closest thing in their minds to polyamory is cheating. I prove this by stating that there are a shit-ton of movies showing affairs, and more than a handful with allusions to polygamy. The number of films showing healthy polyamory can be counted on your fingers. To summarise this paragraph, monogamy is common, affairs are common, harems are common. Polyamory is practically unknown.

Your film explores polyamory. Its got plot so it's not porn. From a monogamous society's perspective, your film will be revolutionary. You'll be talking about a non monogamous practice they've never heard about. The difference will hit them on the face like a wet fish in Chinatown.

But you're here on a polyamory website. We see the beautiful young FMF romance as a monogamous fantasy that's doomed to fail. It smells like monogamous porn to some of us. The difference between what your film's trailer is showing compared to the polyamory we see scrapes our nerves on the inside like a colonoscopy being performed by a sadist with no bowel prep.

Like a person who is born of mixed race, you can sometimes find yourself shunned by both camps.

Like a diplomat, brokering a peace deal between two countries and being thanked by neither side.

In conclusion, humans have a tendency to more easily see differences than they do similarities. I feel you are indeed producing a progressive film to monogamous people by showing them aspects of polyamory. Very very few have done anything like this before. I'm sorry you feel that the feedback from this polyamory site is, in your own words, "a bit dissapointing." I'm hoping my support and theory that humans see differences more easily than they can see similarities helps you to rationalise some of the negative responses you see on this forum. I also hope the race analogy helps you see that this kind of response where you can be shunned by both sides of the conflict is actually universal to human nature and has nothing to do with your choice of film.

Hang in the Frazer. You said you're in our (poly) camp. I believe you and like Vince who said no publicity is bad publicity, I'll say your publicity is good publicity.
 
anamikanon said:
i am astonished no one has gone "unicorn" yet.

Well, let it not go unsaid.

Edit: Oops. Ok. Magdalyn did. I missed reading the post.

Sidenote: This is the second time in two days i'm editing the post to acknowledge magdalyn said something similar to what i posted just a few posts ago.
Click to expand...

lol!
 
Well, look at it like 50 Shades, ok?

To the vanillas, it was titillating, and probably many a mind was awakened by seeing it, to explore those ideas and get more information on something that was a nascent, unspoken desire deep in their hearts. It certainly had an audience, right?

But if you were to attend any BDSM event, and make mention of 50 Shades, you will get eye rolls and groans. (Setting aside what I hear about how horribly written the books were, and how horrible the movie was, and how the only thing that redeems it, is the set for his play room, which is the envy of all my friends.) Those of us who practice BDSM relationships, get mighty fierce about how the RELATIONSHIP portrayed is abusive, and fraught with problematic toxicity. Part of this too, is that BDSMers have been stereotyped as people who have deep and disturbing psychological issues (it used to be in the DSM unless I am mistaken) and those of us who do it know that in fact it can be unspeakably healthy and therapeutic and lovely. The community members I'm blessed with knowing are among the most self aware, healthy relating people I have EVER known.

50 Shades...did it do our community a service or a disservice? Or a bit of both? It's not realistic, that's for sure!

So the unicorn dynamic, that's not just a male fantasy, it's also a fantasy for many women. Heck, I occasionally fantasize about getting some kind of a threesome going, but I told Zen I refuse to make unicorn hunters of us...so if something naturally comes together, more likely a limited engagement play session than a poly relationship, well if it happens, it happens, but I am not one to seek or push for that.

As for relationships, it's far more likely that I would have a relationship with another woman, that doesn't involve him at all. That could happen anytime, I've got at least 3 women I know who would go for that. Even in configurations that involve multiple women, the V is more common than the triad and seems to work better.

The other question... I am not positive that attempts to normalize things always help the cause. There is this bizarre thing that some people (usually the followers of the status quo, or "muggles" as I call them) do where they get very threatened by differences. It's like they think, if this becomes too normal, people will expect EVERYONE to do it, whether they like it or not. Or...something? Like there can be only ONE right way to live and we have to fight it out. I think it's a stupid waste of time to go around being threatened by diversity, but that doesn't change the fact that it's exactly how a lot of people think. So when I see articles saying, "Polyamory may be the FUTURE OF RELATIONSHIPS" I cringe, HARD. Probably the author is trying to be helpful, but it just looks like a very in-your-face "TIMES ARE CHANGING AND YOU'RE GONNA GET LEFT BEHIND!" that provokes the muggles and confronts them...so they've got to, what, get with the times and become poly, or fight for their way of life? No real poly people are trying to send that message.

But hey. Shock and awe sells, or gets clicks, right?
:rolleyes:
 
Spork said:
(Setting aside what I hear about how horribly written the books were
Click to expand...

50 shades was written as fanfiction, not original fiction...as such, it caused a major uproar in the fanfic crowd, too . Just had to say that :p
 
Last edited:
Spork said:
Well, look at it like 50 Shades, ok?

To the vanillas, it was titillating, and probably many a mind was awakened by seeing it, to explore those ideas and get more information on something that was a nascent, unspoken desire deep in their hearts. It certainly had an audience, right?

But if you were to attend any BDSM event, and make mention of 50 Shades, you will get eye rolls and groans. (Setting aside what I hear about how horribly written the books were, and how horrible the movie was, and how the only thing that redeems it, is the set for his play room, which is the envy of all my friends.) Those of us who practice BDSM relationships, get mighty fierce about how the RELATIONSHIP portrayed is abusive, and fraught with problematic toxicity. Part of this too, is that BDSMers have been stereotyped as people who have deep and disturbing psychological issues (it used to be in the DSM unless I am mistaken) and those of us who do it know that in fact it can be unspeakably healthy and therapeutic and lovely. The community members I'm blessed with knowing are among the most self aware, healthy relating people I have EVER known.

50 Shades...did it do our community a service or a disservice? Or a bit of both? It's not realistic, that's for sure!

So the unicorn dynamic, that's not just a male fantasy, it's also a fantasy for many women. Heck, I occasionally fantasize about getting some kind of a threesome going, but I told Zen I refuse to make unicorn hunters of us...so if something naturally comes together, more likely a limited engagement play session than a poly relationship, well if it happens, it happens, but I am not one to seek or push for that.

As for relationships, it's far more likely that I would have a relationship with another woman, that doesn't involve him at all. That could happen anytime, I've got at least 3 women I know who would go for that. Even in configurations that involve multiple women, the V is more common than the triad and seems to work better.

The other question... I am not positive that attempts to normalize things always help the cause. There is this bizarre thing that some people (usually the followers of the status quo, or "muggles" as I call them) do where they get very threatened by differences. It's like they think, if this becomes too normal, people will expect EVERYONE to do it, whether they like it or not. Or...something? Like there can be only ONE right way to live and we have to fight it out. I think it's a stupid waste of time to go around being threatened by diversity, but that doesn't change the fact that it's exactly how a lot of people think. So when I see articles saying, "Polyamory may be the FUTURE OF RELATIONSHIPS" I cringe, HARD. Probably the author is trying to be helpful, but it just looks like a very in-your-face "TIMES ARE CHANGING AND YOU'RE GONNA GET LEFT BEHIND!" that provokes the muggles and confronts them...so they've got to, what, get with the times and become poly, or fight for their way of life? No real poly people are trying to send that message.

But hey. Shock and awe sells, or gets clicks, right?
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think that members of "communities" tend to be snobs when it comes to things like this.

50 Shades wasn't all that bad, but it was hip to knock it. Most of the initial bad reviews I saw were from BDSM writers. Members of the community followed along like sheep. Based on that, I wouldn't have even read them if it were not for Mary sending me the series. She wanted to get my take on it.

I enjoyed the movie. It was shot well. The story was good. The story resonated with me as a Dom who has dealt with curious vanilla women. You might be surprised to hear that my little group of friends saw Anastasia as the "bad guy".

So we righteous poly people see a FMF triad and immediately talk it down. It's hip to knock couples as unicorn hunters. That's sort of the default position , isn't it? Maybe we aren't as open-minded as we like to think.
 
vinsanity0 said:
I think that members of "communities" tend to be snobs when it comes to things like this.

50 Shades wasn't all that bad, but it was hip to knock it. Most of the initial bad reviews I saw were from BDSM writers. Members of the community followed along like sheep. Based on that, I wouldn't have even read them if it were not for Mary sending me the series. She wanted to get my take on it.

I enjoyed the movie. It was shot well. The story was good. The story resonated with me as a Dom who has dealt with curious vanilla women. You might be surprised to hear that my little group of friends saw Anastasia as the "bad guy".

So we righteous poly people see a FMF triad and immediately talk it down. It's hip to knock couples as unicorn hunters. That's sort of the default position , isn't it? Maybe we aren't as open-minded as we like to think.
Click to expand...

I am not surprised by anything, as I never bothered to read the book(s?) or see the film. I was busy enough living the life, learning from what was in front of me, so it seemed...redundant. Also, it's not my thing insofar as I like fantasy and sci-fi and horror films. No creatures? Boring!

I just got plenty-an-earful from my discussion group compatriots, and a link to a Youtube video of Gilbert Gottfried reading aloud from the book, which sent me into hysterics. I recommend that to anyone...just...not at work, or where kids could hear...
 
Since 50 Shades has been brought up, let me say that if I aspire to anything, it's integrity, and 50 Shades is not a film with integrity, it is a film made by the studio filmmaking machine in order to turn a buck. Perhaps the book had some sort of good intentions, but the movie's intention is to get people to pay to see it so the studio can line its pockets. That doesn't preclude it have some merits or even being a "good movie", but like almost all films that are purely driven by capitalism, integrity is something it does not have.

I'm sure that, despite infinitely more emotional and psychological complexity and a lot of good intentions, my film won't be perfect. And there will be people who dislike my film (perhaps a lot of people, and perhaps adamantly). But the one thing I can absolutely promise you is that it will have a hell of a lot more integrity than 50 Shades.

:)

Frazer
 
I am glad to hear that, Frazer!

And despite my statements (which probably come off as frank criticism, though my intent is more "you may see reactions of this sort, and this is why, just keep it in mind, k?") I do wish you all the very best of luck.

Now personally? I would be more interested in your movie if it was a love story involving monsters, or demons, or muppets. But I'm an effects junkie! That's what I chase in films. Get Guillermo Del Toro on board and let's see what happens LOL!!

For what it's worth though, I really do think that there is an audience ready to see romance involving more than one man, bisexuality in males IS interesting because if nothing else, it's relatively novel. Bi girl stuff is almost commonplace anymore. I was playing around with it in high school, in the 90's. It ain't shocking. Girls kiss girls ALL THE TIME.

But have you heard of Torchwood? The Doctor Who spinoff? While Captain Jack was way more gay (like the actor himself is) in that series, the premise of the character and his popularity among fangirls in the Who-verse was that he was a deliciously scandalous slutty bisexual who would pretty much charm the pants off anything in space and time. Even when it was only HINTED at, it was delightful and naughty.

Look, I think that you can tell a great love story, and your movie might be awesome. I just think that it's really not that boundary pushing for today's society. I think that Southpark is more shocking, frankly. But who says you've got to make a movie that challenges people in big ways? Nothing wrong with a nice romantic film, if that's your thing. *shrug*
 
It's a combo of pushing limits and not pushing limits.

I could make an experimental film with the textures of decaying walls and slaughter house images cut against hard core porn with industrial noise as the sound track, but the audience for that would be very finite, and the only people who would stumble upon it would be people predisposed to want to see that sort of film. Or I could make a romantic comedy about white upper class straight monogamous people. But "the middle path". It has to be engaging and watchable by the audience I want to see it (a broad audience), but it also has to have ideas that expand the cultural conversation about sexuality, love, difference, meaning, etc.

I think we're now doing the thing that the rules of critique forbid, which is taking around the thing rather than about it. This is my fault because I don't have a movie for you to watch yet, and once I do, there will be something to talk about. So stay tuned, and when it's available, I'll make a free stream available to those of you who have been good enough to engage in this conversation. Then you can decide whether it's shit or genius, and we can talk about the thing, not the maybes of what the thing might or might not be.

Thanks!
Frazer
 
Looking forward to seeing it too.

Maybe you could include an issue with couple privilege, i.e. the newest member being upset with not being able to be out to her partners' friends or being not counted on longterm something. Have a conflict in the triad which leads to a near breakup (and reconciliation if you with to). That would be real, educative and might please those who are not happy with the stereotype :)
 
kdt26417 said:
I know of four movies with an MFM V:

  • "December Bride" (1990).
  • "A Small Circle of Friends" (1980).
  • "Bandits" (2001).
  • "Paint Your Wagon" (1969).
Plus I know of two movies with an FMM triad:

  • "Threesome" (1994).
  • "Three" (2010).
Frazer's trailer looks good and I've put "The Deep Sky" on my list of movies to see.
Click to expand...

Bandits is actually one of my favorite movies. I love how smooth they just make it work. A little hostility, at first. Then they are all happily together in Mexico.
 
Of those I listed, December Bride is my fave.
 
vinsanity0 said:
I think that members of "communities" tend to be snobs when it comes to things like this.

50 Shades wasn't all that bad, but it was hip to knock it. Most of the initial bad reviews I saw were from BDSM writers. Members of the community followed along like sheep. Based on that, I wouldn't have even read them if it were not for Mary sending me the series. She wanted to get my take on it.

I enjoyed the movie. It was shot well. The story was good. The story resonated with me as a Dom who has dealt with curious vanilla women. You might be surprised to hear that my little group of friends saw Anastasia as the "bad guy".

So we righteous poly people see a FMF triad and immediately talk it down. It's hip to knock couples as unicorn hunters. That's sort of the default position , isn't it? Maybe we aren't as open-minded as we like to think.
Click to expand...

I am not in the BDSM community but I have done some research out of pure curiosity. That being said, I thought Anastasia was the bad guy too. I felt she was to blame because she kept talking about how much she didn't want to do it but kept going back. She agreed to everything and even signed the "contract". You cannot view someone as a monster, keep entering the monsters den, and expect to come out unharmed. It may not be a popular opinion but I agree with you.
 
I thought Anastasia was just sexually naive. Society has all these unrealistic expectations for sex and yet never actually talk about sex. Even sex ed doesn't actually discuss the actual act of sex in any detail. Blaming her for getting it wrong is like blaming the intern or the work experience student for getting things wrong.
 
It might be a good illustration of what we call in the community, "sub frenzy."

Bear in mind my commentary has been limited by the fact that I've neither seen the film nor read the books.

But in the kink community, we see new subs come in all bright eyed and excited and they just can't wait to do the things and kneel and be collared and they want it all right now! And we've got to try and caution them to take their time and learn and chill out before they get themselves into trouble. Risky behavior is a classic hallmark of it.

And it is also classic predatory behavior for Doms to hover around the fringes waiting for new faces to appear and try to swoop in on them. I've seen that, heck when I was new, I had a few people try it on me. But I'd done my reading and my research and I brushed aside their advances...but not without listening and watching and noting how they behaved and appeared. A typical move is for a predatory Dom to get one of his existing subs to try to "bait" or recruit newbies for him. He will tell them that they mustn't interact with others, and it will seem he is being protective, but he's really truly isolating her from both the wisdom of the community itself, and from rumors of his own bad behavior. Within a few months, the new young sub has moved into his House, and is singing his praises...within a year or two, she realizes she's in an abusive and manipulative relationship and is trying to escape, and posting red flag reports about him on Fetlife.

But I have seen older women fall victim to sub frenzy, too. Especially in the rebound phase after the end of long relationships. I would say that my fling with the Worm King, some of the things I did were very risky and those choices were part of that. I was not being sensible. But at least I was not in danger of signing any contracts...I'm too much of a business nerd to go about such things as that lightly, even if BDSM contracts have no legal standing whatsoever.
 
Last season's little program, Trial & Error. Sadly, Lithgow won't be returning (as a regular, at least), but he played one Larry Henderson, "a compulsively eccentric poetry professor accused of the bizarre murder of his wife."

One of the early "reveals" is that Henderson's been having a steamy affair with his trainer, Alfonso. But even before that, we learn his wife was doing the local constable. Basically, everyone becomes a potential suspect, because of the conventions of monogamy. Her last words (in the final episode) were remarkably sweet.
________________

There've been a few moments in the hit-or-miss Scandal where two of Olivia's string of lovers candidly mention to each other a reason for their love (obsession?). I've wondered at the time whether someone on the writing staff might be nonmonogamous.
 
I'm not sure it's a ....great example of Triad but House of Cards Season 4 and 5, is one with a MFM V.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top