A homosexual relationship in an Orthodox Jewish community in the heart of Israel is a controversial premise, and one which must balance a lot of different interests and opinions. Eyes Wide Open does this incredibly well, and with considerable style, nuance and flair. But it still left a bad taste in my mouth…

Homosexuality and Orthodox Judaism are two lifestyles without any common middle ground. This simple fact lies at the heart of the story of drifter/outcast Ezri and devout butcher/family man Aaron, and fuels it with great potential for an incendiary affair.

Being set in a vehemently Orthodox community, there is none of the innuendo that already came with the cowboy imagery of Brokeback Mountain, (now apparently the benchmark for films about gay love if reviews so far are anything to go by). What there is, however, is a danger beyond societal disapproval. The risk taken by two men who fall in love is one that extends to immediate physical danger at one extreme, and eternal damnation in the other. This is about as tense a backdrop as a film could have.

The beauty of the film doesn’t come from a publicity-seeking exploitation of taboos, or even of a dicey dance between its extremes, actually it comes from the slow, simmering relationship that is suddenly struck up between Aaron and Ezri, and the calm-yet-cruel reaction that slowly but surely emerges from those around them. Suggestion and subtlety are the bywords here, and for a discerning arthouse viewer that is an undeniable recipe for absorbing viewing.

My problem with the film, however, comes from the message that seems to underlie this tumultuous relationship. From the moment the relationship blooms to its final conclusion, drenched in religious allegory as it is (and admittedly was always likely to be), there is an uncomfortable implication that Ezri was merely a tempter of the weak, a sinner who flits from place to place ruining the lives of devout Jews. This image is enhanced by the physical basis of the couple’s relationship; there is far more foundation in lust and in flaunting oppressive rules and regulations than in any serious bond between the pair.

Should you choose to accept this view of the situation, there is a further logical step that is worse still, and that is that all of the scenes of intrusive interference from community members, and all of the thuggish attempts to force the flock away from sin, were not tyrannical incursions into inpidual freedoms, but justified attempts to save fellow believers. A conclusion which I personally take issue with.

Nonetheless these are personal opinions, and that the film can have such powerful conclusions drawn from it is merely another testament to the powerful, emotional, absorbing and thorough way that this film deals with a controversial issue. It never languishes into love-story territory, nor does it descend to cheap sensationalism, it takes the high road and as a result I believe many viewers will reap rich rewards from this film.