Home > The M.O. > Archives > 2007 > May > 30 > Entry
At the Movies: ‘Zoo’
The movie goes behind the scenes to tell the story of a group of men in rural Washington who practice ‘zoophilia,’ the act of sharing love with nonhuman animals. Now do you understand his nerves? I was happy to oblige, as was Tami, and what we saw was a film that is nothing short of visually breathtaking though often obsessed with its poetry of image and less with its narrative or purpose.
In July 2005, the Seattle Times broke a story about a man, named ‘Mr. Hands’ for the purpose of this documentary/re-creation, who died from a perforated colon following a sexual encounter with his stallion ‘Strut.’ The LA Times’ Kenneth Turan reports that the stories about the death were the most-read in the Seattle paper’s history. But Devor wanted to tell not the graphic story of animal-sex obsessed men and their acts of ‘love’ but reveal these men as living, caring human beings who happened to have rather twisted sexual proclivities.
The film opens with a shot of coalminers’ lights emerging from a dark shaft, an image that seems symbolic of the fact the Devor was endeavoring to bring these men and their once-buried perversions to the surface for more thoughtful analysis. Not a documentary in the truest sense, the film uses voice-overs from three fellow ‘zoos’ (the moniker given to zoophiles) along with dramatic, and often nonverbal, re-enactment of Mr. Hands’ and his cadre’s ritual bonding with their animals.
Shot mostly in the Pacific Northwest, and washed in enchanting blues and greens, the cinematography of Sean Kirby is some of the best I have seen in years. There is a strange disconnect with elegiac lighting that looks like it could have been painted by Caravaggio and the perverse nature of the actual story. Devor does not use graphic imagery of sex with animals and strays from discussing in too great of detail the physical acts engaged by these men and what they call their lovers. Instead, he paints a very real picture of troubled men from a wide array of socio-economic backgrounds (from truck driver to biospace engineer) who have come to realize that they simply relate better to animals than they do humans. As Coyote, the only zoo who actually physically appears in the film (the other two living zoos lent only their voices to the production), says early in the film, “I don’t need a high level of emotional interaction, be it human or otherwise.” He defends his passion for the animals by saying “you’re connecting with another living being who is very happy to participate.”
As you come to realize that neither the men nor horses were hurt in any of the acts portrayed in the film, for a split second you catch yourself wondering what the big deal is, such is the beauty of the film’s imagery in lulling you into this ethereal world of shadows. Then you remember, ‘Wait, these guys are having sex with horses!” In the end, the film does not attempt to manipulate viewers into seeing these men as sympathetic characters, it simply offers that they are well-intentioned perverts with a love for animals that anyone who is not ‘zoo’ could never fully understand.
As we briefly discussed the movie on the way out of the theater, we came to the conclusion that the subject matter was not anything we would ever think of again. And this is kind of the problem with the film. The choice of subject is so controversial and surreal and told in such abstractions thanks to its majestic visual beauty that you wonder why the filmmaker even bothered. Did he just want to show off his ability to create gorgeous images or was he actually hoping we would come away with a better understanding of these men? We were mildly perplexed, if only briefly - look, we all are human and we all have perversions, so who are we to cast aspersions at people who live such different lives than us? But, of course, we always came back to the thought - Come on…they’re having sex with HORSES!
If you want to see an exceptionally made movie with little to offer in the way of narrative (and guffaw at the sexual peccadilloes of others) check out “Zoo” while it’s still at the Dobie. But don’t go alone. You don’t want people thinking you’re a freak. Right, “Sam”?
Permalink | Comments (2) | Categories: Movies
Comments
Austinites love to be heard, and we're giving you a bullhorn. We just ask that you keep things civil. Leave out the personal attacks. Do not use profanity, ethnic or racial slurs, or take shots at anyone's sexual orientation or religion. If you can't be nice, we reserve the right to remove your material and ban users who violate our Visitor's agreement. Click here to report comment abuse.
By Sam
May 31, 2007 8:44 AM | Link to this
I don’t mind if people think I’m a perve, but why you gots to go letting people know I’m in my thirties?
By Drox
May 31, 2007 12:05 PM | Link to this
I found this movie very poignant. Afterwards, the group that went along with me had a very long debate that still is not resolved. Who better looking? Mr Ed. or Gus the field goal kicking mule?