So this angel comes to Earth and...

Oh, sorry, wrong film.

I'm fascinated by ethics. I am by no means an expert, but I know an act of kindness when I see it. When I see it depicted on screen, a true, genuine, compassionate act of kindness, I get so excited. The painter Zoret's actions in repeatedly giving to the (titular) man he loves, the untouchable man in the arms of a woman, are repeated acts of kindness. While I could write a book on my pleased surprise at finding a homosexual love story in a film from 1924, I'd much rather focus on my delight at such beautiful humanity.

That Zoret's love is unrequited doesn't matter. That he ignores the obvious love at his side doesn't matter. He gives and gives out of simple love, and that's beautiful.

December count: 7/10.

sad and gay are antonyms and yet here we are

Silent Summer

Carl Theodor Dreyer's Michael is a beautifully made film of lust and desires, lost amidst lonely success. It shows us a fancy world of fine art and luxury, but highlights mistrust and deception that undermine all that is wonderful. While technically implicit, this is a film with undeniable gay characters and their relationship troubles. The young Michael is easily led astray, into an immoral heterosexual relationship that breaks the heart of the man who truly loves him. Michael is a film about art and creativity thriving from emotional torment. Love and loss define creation. A life's work can be beautiful, even if you die alone. Dreyer's film is one of close-ups and faded edges, reducing the film to just its characters. Here love is uneven and at times hurtful, but nevertheless its purity gives the world light.

“You started dinner without me?”

It’s not just the complexity and nuance (as is such) of the subject matter that feels ahead of its time (which it isn’t, we just believe mainstream culture’s take on how people digested cultural norms back in the day, we forget that from cavemen to moon men people were progressive before they weren’t but that mostly human beings are individually more nuanced than their wider cultures are) but also the filmmaking is playful, dynamic and smart in an ahead of its time kinda way.

But more to the point, don’t fucking fall in love with a rentboy, let alone a straight rentboy! Have your fun and then let them run. 

The actors are perfectly cast.

During the Swan Lake scene I don’t see why they couldn’t use Tchaikovsky’s music, pretty sure that shit is public domain. 

This is the version I watched (make sure to put on the caption) - youtu.be/te5x9eywSCk

I want to remake this one day

"Michael is part of an early run in Dreyer’s career, when the man who would later turn in one film per decade was a jobbing director making a film every year. Some of these films are partially lost due to poor archiving, and Michael itself was thought to be missing for many years. Despite – or because? – of its inaccessibility, Dreyer retained a fondness for the film, often claiming it as his favourite early work. Watched now, it doesn’t quite escape the confines of genre, but its intense close-ups point the way forward to The Passion of Joan of Arc, even if the lavishly detailed sets are a bit of an outlier in Dreyer’s usually spartan world."

Read more at The Geek Show.

Michael tells a story of unrequited love between a gay artist and his muse. The relationship is not shown explicitly, mostly by looks, gestures and at times hand holding. The painter would give an endless kindness and affection for his muse, Michael, until on his deathbed.
Every frames looks so painterly with a good performances by Walter Slezak and Benjamin Christensen, not to mention the subject matter that way ahead of its time.

Now I can die in peace for I have known a great love.

Construida a base de emociones, gestos y acciones que te sumergen de lleno en los personajes. La soledad y el tormento que supone son tratadas brillantemente con la interpretación de Benjamin Christensen y Walter Slezak tiene un encanto magnético. Le pesa que Dreyer es sumamente repetitivo y su montaje tiene un ritmo muy lento.

so movies with gay people have been sad since day 1? checks out

An early silent movie from Dreyer, far from beign one of his masterpieces, but still with some interesting attributes, like its early movie portrait of homosexuality or the great performance by (the also famous director) Benjamin Christensen.
2021: 18/801

Carl Th. Dreyer applies his considerable skills to the Call Me Brokeback of 1924. The director of Haxan plays a famous artist who takes in a "model" and spends years in unrequited yearning for the young man. You can lead a twink to the lube but...

Nothing special in terms of form, but the drama is exciting nonetheless.

foi exatamente aqui que inventaram o sugar daddy

Michael’s a little bitch

last scene at accidental 0.30 speed kinda crazy creepy. you’re distressing the twink

The most interesting thing in this movie was the tension created between the thesis (homosexuality) and anti-thesis (heterosexuality). Mr. Zoret's thesis, which was ofcourse homosexuality, revolving around Michael was soon to be challenged by the Countess' anti-thesis and finally to bring a synthesis. The synthesis here is the natural selection. Michael, being a heterosxual, was attracted to the Countess defying the thesis created at the beginning and thus, the death of Mr. Zoret was obvious to bring up the fruitful synthesis.

pretty gay

“Michael” is an early showcase of Dreyers immense visual talent. The combination of the music and video is truly haunting and just gorgeous to look at. 

But I did think the queer aspect of this film, which is what it is most known for - is lacking. This is to be expected for the year but ultimately that made the film a little lacking for me regardless of how stunning the images were.

1924 COLLECTION

CARL THEODOR DREYER RANKED