Such a frustrating disappointment

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Eroticism. music. voyerism. a sort of dialogue. and the map of entire worlds. a film inspired strange states. because each viewer discovers it from different perspective. as homoerotic poem. as provocative. as work of Jean Genet and that fact impose a sort of respect. as a form of pornography. as an early short movie from a long history of a minority. more important, itssavage beauty. proposing nothing except solitude, desire and the sketch of freedom.

On watching this film I was struck by the timelessness of its message and its continued relevance today. Most surprising to me was that it was made/shown in 1950, but it could easily have been made today. I'm actually rather angry that I had to stumble across this film by accident online, instead of seeing it on any of the numerous gay and short film channels or festivals. It deserves to be seen.A lot of comments have been written noting its supposed "surrealism" and "metaphor". While that's all well and good, this is quite simply a straightforward and common story of prison loneliness (Kiss of the Spider Woman), homophobic oppression by a closet case (Outrage 2009/II), and love winning over all. Newsflash: Just because it's gay doesn't mean it's mysterious.The only things preventing me from giving this film the full 10 ... umm ... points, are some jumpy editing, and the fact that both prisoners are knocking on their shared wall, but they are shot from the same angle so it looks like they are knocking on different walls.

This film by Jean Genet is a very symbolic, surrealistic, and depressing film, presenting, through a series of disturbing and highly erotic images, upsetting metaphors for our desperate human need for love and union with another, and the barriers to fulfillment.Because Jean Genet's own sensibilities were homosexual, all the characters in the film are male, and the eroticism is more accessible to men who either share his tastes: for such men, many scenes of the film can be very arousing. For others, the film will probably open up a window into the experience, and for still others, many scenes may provoke disgust and revulsion. Again, because of Genet's own tastes, there is an element of sado-masochism mixed into the eroticism: indeed, all the characters but one are oppressed prisoners, literally in "bondage." However, aside from the unusual sensuousness of the film, and the surprising explicitness, the film is full of unforgettably great imagery, honest and deep emotion, and enormous poetic beauty. It is a very slow-moving, dark, oppressive film, and should only be viewed when the viewer is prepared for a contemplative, surrealistic journey; in spite of its short length (about 25 minutes), it is a very compact film, and can feel quite draining, emotionally.It is a little gem, and I regard it as one of the "essentials" of film.

Genet's only film is a stunner. A short glimpse into the existence of a tortured soul.It must have elicited some gasps in 1950. If I was gay I would probably watch this film every week. I'm not, so let's just say that the images will haunt me for the rest of my days...