Socket

---

It is best to ask a simple question before "Socket" begins. Do we want to be optimistic or pessimistic, glass half full or half empty? The answer to that question will decide how we see this movie, billed as the first gay science fiction thriller. After being struck by lightning, a surgeon (Derek Long) is invited to join a group of people who literally get a sexual charge out of electrocuting themselves. This group, however, can control their impulses; Dr. Bill Matthews (Long) can´t. So he develops an unorthodox surgical procedure to help them all get off.

As for me, I prefer to be positive and upbeat about any film. There has to be a positive aspect to every production: cinematography, production design, a standout acting job…something. While "Socket" isn´t completely without merit, the second half makes a strong case for the glass half empty position.

The first thing we need to look at is the basic premise. I´ve heard of sounding, a form of sexual pleasure where a rod is inserted into the male genitalia and stimulated to the point of orgasm. I´ve never heard of mild forms of electrocution for the same purpose. (To be fair, the characters here don´t necessarily "plug in" in a sexual capacity. Their reasoning is more akin to charging a battery.) But one has to wonder about the logic of this practice within the film´s reality. Matthews is a doctor; his new boyfriend Craig Murphy (Matthew Montgomery) is an intern at the same hospital. And everyone else involved with their little group seems to be of sound mind and body. Doesn´t it ever strike these intelligent people as dangerous to be sending electricity through their bodies, no matter how small of the voltage might be?

With each passing minute, Matthews becomes unable to satiate his need for electricity. Implanting sockets and plugs into his forearms isn´t enough; he starts killing people to plug into their bodies. He simply can´t control himself. It´s a direct allegory for drug use, and a decent one at that, if it weren´t so preposterously stupid. Aside from the simply surgical issues surrounding metal in the body, how does blood not spurt out of the wounds each and every time the plug juts out of an arm like Wolverine´s claws? How does no one notice these gaping marks on everyone´s arms, indicating some sort of problem?

That´s my biggest issue with the movie: it doesn´t make a lick of sense. I can accept a great many things in the science fiction or horror/thriller genres. I can accept Jigsaw and Amanda creating elaborate puzzles for regular Joe´s off the street. I can accept a race of cybernetic life forms intent on destroying humanity. Why? Because they are within the realm of possibility. This? From a conceptual level right down to a basic survival level, the premise doesn´t make sense. When Bill gets charged from a wall socket, isn´t that enough to at least burn his hair a little bit? Maybe cause some disruption to internal organs? Anything?

Considering the principle photography spanned a grand total of nine days, I´m willing to overlook a lot of the production shortcomings, from audio problems to lighting dis-continuities. I can´t overlook the plot, nor can I stress how insipid it really is. These actors, by and large all friends of writer/director/producer Sean Abley, are serviceable enough in their roles, though Long is a bit too stiff early on and never learns how to emote with any regularity. The other members of "the group" appear to have approximately six lines each (directly from the commentary), not allowing their characters to be developed in any meaningful way. The relationship between Murphy and Bill is predicated on getting electrocuted, not on any personal level.

So you´re probably wondering where the "glass half full" comes in, right?

To be perfectly frank, one of the major selling points here is the full frontal male nudity. As Abley states, if he was going to do a gay movie, he might as well throw in the bread and butter of the genre. Both Montgomery and Long are given more time than normal to show off their wares, though the nudity is always tasteful and realistic. That is, they don´t parade around naked, preferring instead to be naked as real people would be. Additionally, Montgomery points out he was very happy Abley allowed both him and Long to keep their body hair intact for the shoot.

The other, less puerile, positive aspect to the film is the way it approaches the characters. In short, we know most of the people on screen are gay, their sexuality is mentioned once or twice in the film and it never becomes a major (or minor) plot point in the story. These people simply are who they are. Does it seem like something to hang the proverbial hat on? No, but for an audience used to having sexuality be the driving force for a film, to have a plot where no one raises an eyebrow when a man says boyfriend or a girl kisses another girl, it´s something. Matthews is a seemingly successful surgeon in a hospital where people apparently know his sexual orientation, yet don´t care. In reality, this wouldn´t be the case, yet in "Socket"-where the bar to qualify as reality is so low-it seems like a natural fit.

---

---