“Young, Dumb, and Full of Cum”: Point Break’s Homoerotic Haze in Five Acts

Sam Reimer

Are we gonna jump or jerk off? –Johnny

I know it’s hard for you, Johnny. I know you want me so bad it’s like acid in your mouth, but not this time. –Bodhi

Discussions of homoeroticism in action cinema, especially of the 1980s and 1990s, frequently assume a troubled tone. The pronounced homoeroticism of these texts—from their display of male bodies to the dynamism of the camera—have led to reductive assertions that erotic percolations are indicators of latent queer orientations or activities. Rather than probing the ambiguity of these text, approaches often default to pop-analysis, aligning closely with Quentin Tarantino’s Sid in Sleep with Me (Rory Kelly, 1994), who claims “What is Top Gun? You think it’s a story about a bunch of fighter pilots…It is a story about a man’s struggle with his own homosexuality.” This isn’t to say that these verdicts are misplaced or unsubstantiated; both Patrick Schuckmann (1998) and Yvonne Tasker (1993) emphasize the consistent centrality of homoeroticism in the history of the action genre. However, Tania Modleski, in direct response to Tarantino’s accusative interpretation, discourages the conflation of homoerotic and homosexual (2007), advocating a return to the ambiguous potential that homoeroticism elicits. It is within this frame that I revisit ’s Point Break and reconsider the boundaries and bonds of Johnny Utah’s () homoerotic desire.

The return I propose and explore is partly in response to Eve Sedgwick’s call “to draw the ‘homosocial’ back into the orbit of ‘desire,’ of the potentially erotic…to hypothesize the potential unbrokenness of a continuum between homosocial and homosexual” (1-2). My approach is as much as reconsideration of homosociality as it is a redefinition of homoeroticism. Point Break is particularly appropriate for this objective as, like Sedgwick’s approach in Between Men, homosocial desire is explored through a central love triangle. Furthermore, the fluid relationship between Utah, Bodhi (), and Tyler (Lori Petty) complicates any assurance that Utah or the is confident or confined to an erotic course of action. However, Point Break moves beyond merely blurring the lines between hetero- and homoerotic desire or problematizing binary assumptions of sexuality. Instead, Point Break visualizes the emergence of homoeroticism next to and in spite of heterosexuality. In this sense, the film aligns with Hocquenghem’s mutable notion of desire and object-choice, which he describes as “‘and-and’ rather than…‘either/or’” (103). The absence of any clearly explicit sexual conduct between Utah, Bodhi, and Petty levels the erotic surface that Point Break presents, offering a picture of desire with countless unknown uses and objectives.

Due to the inexplicit nature of sexuality in Point Break, depictions of desire appear at the level of connotation, through glances, gestures, cutting, and observation. D.A. Miller, in his “Young, Dumb, and Full of Cum”: Point Break’s Homoerotic Haze in Five Acts Reimer

analysis of Hitchcock’s Rope (1948), emphasizes the affinity between closeted desire and connotation, and the prominent position of connotation in the communication of homoeroticism in commercial cinema. Furthermore, Miller suggestion that “perhaps the most salient index of male homosexuality…consists precisely in how a man looks at other men,” (124) points to a structural approach in surveying queer desire in such as Point Break. More specifically, this approach not only suggests the connotative effects of the gaze, but how gazes are exchanged and interact. Daniel Dayan’s suture theory takes these concerns and seeks to understand how they affect the structuring or structure of a given film. Central to Dayan’s methodology are the questions “‘Who is watching this?’ and ‘Who is ordering these images?’” (28), which stress the importance of monitoring perspective and subjectivity, and how they rub against and overlap with each other. These questions are especially relevant to Point Break, as Bigelow frequently uses voyeuristic shots from Utah’s perspective, to the point his gaze controls how the film ebbs and flows. When Utah’s controlling perspective is ruptured, it frequently occurs via cutting, with Bigelow interrupting to insert reverse-shots of Utah’s affected response to the images and objects he is observing. Kaja Silverman expands Dayan’s concept of suture, broadening it to include “features of the editing process which are common to all shot transitions,” (220) rather than merely focusing on shot-reverse-shot editing. More importantly, Silverman foregrounds the conveyance of desire through this approach, stating “Suture can be understood as the process whereby the inadequacy of the subject’s position is exposed in order to facilitate (i.e., create the desire for) new insertions into a cultural discourse which promises to make good that lack” (235). Dayan’s and Silverman’s conceptualizations of suture create a symbiosis between the viewer in the film and the viewer of the film, a closeness that functions to develop latent desires in the spectator, an alignment that fills moral fissures with potentially subversive yearnings.

Almost immediately, the potential for homoerotic desire is established in Utah as he surveys a bank heist. The film initially follows Bodhi’s gang, clothed in suits and masks of U.S. presidents, as they hold up a bank. As they exit, one pauses, drops his pants, and flashes a CCTV camera, the words “Thank You” emblazoned across his ass. The film then cuts to a monitor where the same footage is rewound and paused on the perp’s posterior. When we initially see this man’s ass, it comes across as comical and lighthearted. But when this image is repeated, paused, and taken out of context, the image becomes decidedly sexual. The paused posterior now resembles a man waiting for intercourse rather than a thief exiting a bank. Additionally, rather than obscure the image, the monochrome monitor brightens his ass, illuminating the outline of his anus. As the camera pans away from the monitor we see that Utah is in control of the footage, distracted and allured by the suspended image. In this instance, we are sutured into knowing both who is watching and who is ordering. The reach of Utah’s controlling gaze is especially

2

“Young, Dumb, and Full of Cum”: Point Break’s Homoerotic Haze in Five Acts Reimer

seductive in this cut between a prone color and monochrome ass, as he appears to be structuring the film in accordance to the exploration of his desire.

This development of homoeroticism is immediately complicated when Utah investigates local surfer and future love interest Tyler. This scene uses traditional shot-reverse-shot techniques, cutting between shots of Utah’s perspective through a pair of binoculars and a close- up of Utah’s reaction to what he sees. Like the previous scene, this interaction has a peculiar sexual quality to it. Utah appears to be sexually interested in Tyler, gazing at her breasts and backside, but when we cut to Utah’s face it is devoid of expression, evincing the same blankness when he deliberated on the surfer’s ass. This affirms that “his sexual identity is blurred…a mixture of lots of competing impulses and identities, never quite there” (Redmond 118). The casting and androgynous look of Lori Petty as Tyler further muddies Utah’s desire and questions the root of his attraction for Tyler. In unison, these two scenes establish Utah’s main tension: he has erotic hetero- and homoerotic desires but is unable to conclude what this means about his sexuality.

After surfing together, Utah and Tyler walk along a beach and Utah sees Bodhi for the first time, elegantly surfing a powerful wave. The film uses modified shot-reverse-shot editing, intercutting between shots of Utah, Bodhi, and Tyler, creating unions and ruptures throughout. The tryptic structure of this scene plays on the enduring tension between hetero- and homoerotic desire, but the implausibility of Utah’s gaze suggest a sexual bias. When Utah initially looks at Bodhi, his perspective obeys the laws of spatial continuity. But as his gaze continues the shots of Bodhi shift to the other side of the axis, breaking continuity. These shots are framed tighter, and Bodhi’s performance becomes more and more elaborate, the waves sensuously lapping over his body and dashing across his face. The affected nature of this perspective moves Bodhi’s dynamic performance out of the realm of bodily spectacle and move it toward what Miller describes as “the spectacle of gay sex,” where we are left in suspense, “just about to see what we are waiting for” (124). Due to the function of suture, the just-about-to-see-ness in this instance, once again, is a union between audience and Utah. However, unlike Miller’s analysis of Rope, the queer pleasure of this scene is positioned more as an awakening than a reference to prior gay activity between the film’s male leads. Rather, what we are just about to see is Utah descending into a fully-fledged homoerotic reverie of Bodhi. The power of these shots stands in contrast to the mundane master shots of Utah and Tyler—often framed in the same shot—enforcing the idea that Utah’s homoerotic feelings are becoming more dominant and more intense than his feelings for Tyler.

3

“Young, Dumb, and Full of Cum”: Point Break’s Homoerotic Haze in Five Acts Reimer

Utah’s presence at Bodhi’s bohemian party continues to complicate his sexuality through the introduction of heteronormativity. When Utah and Tyler arrive at the party, they initially set out in search of Bodhi, the camera assuming Utah’s point of view as it wanders through the festivities. After glancing at token sub-cultures of the early 1990s, we find Bodhi, seductively bending a woman over backwards while sucking on her shell necklace. The use of first-person, and the stalker-like aesthetic it assumes while searching for Bodhi, frames this reveal like a discovery of infidelity, a betrayal of presumed inclinations. This duplicity loosens Utah’s libidinous grip on the structuring of the film. Shot and the reverse-shot editing immediately follows, framing Bodhi and Utah in heterosexual partnerships. The loss of control and the introduction of heteronormative expectations, mirror Utah’s frustration and inability to engage in an exclusively homosocial interaction with Bodhi. Utah’s ability to manipulate and control the film’s structure is rendered impotent. Throughout the conversation that follows, Bodhi references his prior intimacies with Tyler and encourages Utah to have sex with her, telling him “Make yourself at home, what’s mine is yours.” Beyond the sexual frustration that is communicated through the film’s cutting and Utah’s irritated expression, this interchange emphasizes Tyler’s role as “an object of exchange” (Lane 120; Tasker 164)—one that is passed between Bodhi and Utah to facilitate homoerotic desires.

After this scene, it is implied that Utah and Tyler have sex, complicating our understanding of Utah’s sexuality. In contrast to the development of homoerotic desire, the way in which Utah engages with Tyler, in addition to their scenes of intimacy, negate the notion that Utah’s sexual preferences or orientation can be designated (or that he is designating them) into a singular binary. Instead, the development of homoeroticism, and the placement of scenes of intimacy between Utah and Tyler in the midst of this development, effectively make such a distinction impossible. Narratively, these scenes of intimacy prove to be important, adding erotic power and validity to Utah’s desire to rescue Tyler when she is kidnapped in the second half of the film. Speaking of this, Schuckmann suggests that Tyler’s disappearance “[clears] the space for” the film to focus on Utah and Bodhi’s homoerotic crisis (676). While there is a lot of validity to this claim, it is important to stress how Tyler’s relationship with Utah prevents the film from conforming to strict orientations or clearly defined desires. What is continually suggested is a continuum, an ongoing tension between hetero- and homoerotic desires, a tension that still factors into Utah’s erotic frustration even after Tyler disappears.

4

“Young, Dumb, and Full of Cum”: Point Break’s Homoerotic Haze in Five Acts Reimer

In his first physical confrontation with Bodhi, Utah’s refusal to shoot shows the degree to which his homoerotic desires have immobilized him. While chasing Bodhi after a bank heist, Utah falls and twists his knee, leaving him on the floor with two choices: shoot Bodhi or let him escape. After staring into Bodhi’s eyes, he hesitates and fires his gun in the air, granting Bodhi safe passage. Once again, this scene uses affected perspectives to emphasize the erotic nature of this dispute. As Bodhi and Utah lock eyes on each other, their gaze snakes closer and closer with each cut. Speaking on a voyeuristic trick shot in Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960), Silverman explains that “The viewing subject is made acutely aware of the impossibility of this shot—not just the technical but the ‘moral’ impossibility” (223). This notion is evident throughout this exchange, especially when each perspective zeroes in on the object that is threatening them: Utah’s trembling gun, and Bodhi’s crystal blue eyes. The moral impossibility, for Utah and the audience, is the type of desire that prevents him from shooting.[1] The double entendre of Utah’s firmly-gripped, shaking gun further connotes Utah’s pent up passion and his inability to pull the trigger on an aberrant desire. In a single turn, Bodhi flees and the film ruptures once more, shifting its focus to Utah’s sexual frustration.

Bodhi’s decision to run is seen through two shots from Utah’s perspective. First, we see a close-up of his eyes as he turns his head to run. Second, Utah’s aggravated perspective snaps back to reality, seeing Bodhi flee in a long-shot. This break of intensity not only signifies the removal of Bodhi’s perspective from this scene, but potentially the removal of Bodhi from Utah’s life. In response, Utah lies prone on his back, shooting his gun into the air, attempting to rid himself of his anger and agony. The cutting between gun and Utah’s anguished face connote a masturbatory act, one where Utah is attempting to release himself of his homoerotic desire. In comparison to other depictions of sexuality in Point Break, this scene is especially important as prior to this scene the film had only implied that Utah and Tyler have had sex; we never see them consummate their relationship. Instead, the only sexual act we witness is this, an act that is motivated and instigated by homoeroticism, but involves no-one but Utah. The scene closes on a long shot of Bodhi’s feet running away from the scene, contrasting with, and suggesting the cause of, Utah’s immobility.

5

“Young, Dumb, and Full of Cum”: Point Break’s Homoerotic Haze in Five Acts Reimer

In the film’s climax, Utah jumps out of a plane and ambushes Bodhi, hoping to prevent him from getting away one last time. Prior to this confrontation, Bodhi kidnapped Tyler, promising Utah that she will be released if Utah lets him go. A major tension leading up to this showdown is manifest between Utah’s desire to save Tyler and his desire to arrest Bodhi (an act that can be seen as a homoerotic union Bodhi can’t walk away from)—embodying Utah’s paradoxical and ambiguous desire. Initially, Bodhi jumps out of a plane alone, leaving Utah with a gun in his hand but without a parachute to jump with. After deliberating, Utah’s desire overcomes him and he dives out of the plane in pursuit of Bodhi. Utah eventually catches up with Bodhi and compels him at gunpoint to give himself over to the FBI. Schuckmann correlates Utah and Bodhi’s desire for each other with “a longing for death,” (676) a suggestion which is most clearly articulated in this scene as Utah risks his life just so he can hold Bodhi one last time. This is further evident in Bodhi’s refusal to pull his parachute and his willingness to die in Utah’s arms. Furthermore, Bodhi’s eagerness to die suggests an understanding and commitment to a homoerotic relationship, a commitment that Utah ultimately wavers on. The cutting between a close-up of Utah embracing Bodhi, long shot of Bodhi and Utah plummeting to the ground, and a shot of the ever-approaching ground from Utah’s perspective, constructs and heightens Utah’s moral dilemma. The refusal to align with Bodhi’s perspective reaffirms his life objective—to seek the largest thrill regardless of the cost. The view through Utah’s perspective reveals him lacking, scared to die entwined with Bodhi, scared at what that scenario might suggest. Instead he chooses to live and throws his gun away so that he can pull Bodhi’s ‘chute, hoping that he will find safety on the ground. When Utah and Bodhi crash into the ground, Utah injures his knee, leaving him, once again, immobile. After fumbling under the sheets for a few seconds, Bodhi emerges from the parachute and flees, freeing Tyler when he gets to his car. The scene concludes by cutting between a close-up of Utah as Tyler embraces him and kisses his neck, and a shot of Bodhi driving off into the distance seen through Utah’s perspective. Throughout this sequence, Utah has a queer expression on his face, seemingly on the verge of both ecstasy and tears. This obscure expression, his refusal to physically and emotionally engage with Tyler, and his fixed gaze on Bodhi, epitomize Utah’s amorphous sexuality. The scene’s final shot builds on this the triangular configuration of desire, beginning on a medium shot of Utah and Tyler before craning up to show Bodhi’s car driving off into the distance, creating an uncertain, but still present union of homoeroticism, homosociality, and heterosexuality. The objective and continuous nature of this shot, when organized alongside the rigorous shot-reverse-shots that precede it, suggests a fluidity between these states, a fluidity that is present to the spectator, yet unknown to Utah.

Through the depiction of Utah’s perspective and reaction to Bodhi, Point Break presents homoeroticism as a desire that doesn’t restrict one to singular sexual acts, unions, or orientations. But Point Break also visualizes homoeroticism as an unfulfilled desire, a desire in which men are afraid to act upon. Rather than acting as a precursor to more fulfilled or emboldening portrayals of queer desire, the portrayal of Utah’s non-prescriptive desire functions as a baseline for social and sexual discovery. The use of the suture throughout the film helps implicate the viewer further into this expanded view of passion and destabilize normative approaches to sexuality and sexual identity. Furthermore, Point Break suggests that homoeroticism needn’t be conceived as being prescriptively sexual; it can function as a cohesive force between individuals, or an emboldening impulse that can redefine an individual or group’s identity. This notion is especially important due to homoeroticism’s relationship with homosociality, and how homosocial

6

“Young, Dumb, and Full of Cum”: Point Break’s Homoerotic Haze in Five Acts Reimer

formations are frequently limited and held back by homosexual panic. Like Utah shows in Point Break, homoeroticism in homosocial constructs is frequently a latent force, one that still needs to come out of obscurity. As Sedgwick encourages, the homosocial needs to be brought, “back into the orbit of [desire],” (1) because only then can homoeroticism function as an uncertain, potentially unstable, and potently binding force that has the ability to alter hegemonic barriers. Whether it be sexual, social, or otherwise, Utah’s longing gaze continues to pierce our present, reconceiving homoeroticism as unknowable, persistent, and seductive.

[1] Sean Redmond comments on this interchange, suggesting that through their glances “They are outing one another. Utah cannot shoot Bodhi and Bodhi knows this: they are in love with each other, and all that was once encoded as male melts into the air” (120-1).

7

“Young, Dumb, and Full of Cum”: Point Break’s Homoerotic Haze in Five Acts Reimer

Work Cited

Dayan, Daniel. “The Tutor-Code of Classical Cinema.” Film Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, 1974, pp. j22–31. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1211439.

Hocquenhem, Guy. Homosexual Desire. Allison & Busby, 1978. Print.

Lane, Christina. Feminist Hollywood: from Born in Flames to Point Break. Wayne State UP, 2000. Print.

Miller, D. A. “Anal Rope.” Representations, no. 32, 1990, pp. 114– 133. JSTOR. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2928797.

Modleski, Tania. “Misogynist Films: Teaching Top Gun.” Cinema Journal, vol. 47 no. 1, 2007, pp. 101-105. Project MUSE. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/224149

Redmond, Sean. “All That Is Male Melts into Air: Bigelow on the Edge of Point Break.” The Cinema of Kathryn Bigelow: Hollywood Transgressor, edited by Redmond and Deborah Jermyn, Wallflower, 2003, pp. 106–124. Print.

Schuckmann, Patrick. “Masculinity, the Male Spectator and the Homoerotic Gaze.” Amerikastudien / American Studies, vol. 43, no. 4, 1998, pp. 671– 680. JSTOR. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41157425.

Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky., and Wayne Koestenbaum. Between Men: English Literature and Male Homosocial Desire. New York: Columbia UP, 2016. Print.

Silverman, Kaja. The Subject of Semiotics. New York: Oxford UP, 1983. Print.

Tasker, Yvonne. Spectacular Bodies: Gender, Genre and the Action Cinema. Routledge, 1993. Print.

8