SOCKET - DVD review

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.

In the end, that's all "Socket" really has going for it. The script tries to shows the similarities between drug dependency and the electrical charge; by and large, I think the point is hammered home. Maybe a bit too much, but maybe a viewer won't get it the first time around. (On second thought, the people who need to see the folly of their addictions won't see themselves in the Bill character anyway.)

VIDEO:
I'm torn as to what to think about the look of "Socket." There aren't any technical problems with the 1.78:1 anamorphic transfer which stem from the mastering process. Every single negative stems from the low budget nature of the film (it was shot in 9 days). First and foremost, most of the outdoor establishing shots are riddled with noise, near-blocking and a general VHS quality. Indoor shots fare considerably better, as does the electric color palette of neon green and cool blue.

The lighting, while not part of the video transfer by definition, is overexposed in some shots and not bright enough in others, lending a very contrasty look to the production. Facial features in medium and long shots aren't as detailed as they should be for a new film and the heavy use of red near the end of the film smears just a bit. Most, if not all, of these problems can be attributed to the source material and not the mastering by TLA.

AUDIO:
A couple options here, as is par for the course. English 5.1 and 2.0 tracks, neither of which stands up and demands attention be paid to it…though neither draws undue attention to itself, either. The 2.0 mix was slightly better than the 5.1, bringing a marginally deeper and nuanced sound to the track. This is a dialogue driven movie and, as such, rear speakers (and the sub) don't get much of a workout. It's a passable track, again hampered by what was recorded on set. No subtitles are included.

(Two notes: first, some of the early indoor scenes are quite obviously dubbed or otherwise manipulated after principle photography. Their sound does not match that of the rest of the film. And second, I could not toggle between the audio options using the AUDIO button on my PlayStation 3 remote. This is a problem I also had with the previous TLA release, "The Living and the Dead," though not on other discs.)

EXTRAS:
A smattering of the usual bonuses are coupled with an engaging and fun commentary featuring Abley, Long, Montgomery and other members of the cast and crew as they filter in and out of the recording booth. There is rarely a quiet moment in the track, with stories from the set and production issues permeating the commentary. Whether it is Long eating an apple before making out with Montgomery or the inspiration for the music (the remake of "Solaris"), no stone is left unturned. As with other TLA discs, the commentary can only be accessed from the Set Up menu.

Whatever might be left out, though, it mentioned in "Plugging in: The Making of Socket," a 34 minute featurette comprised of seven different sections (Rehearsal, First Day, Makeup, Production Design, Cinematography, Nine Day Schedule and Post Production). Complete with interviews from the entire cast and most of the key production personnel, the making of is more detailed (and, again, more enjoyable) than most. There was a real sense of family and friendship on the set which unfortunately doesn't come across in the film very well.

Rounding out the disc is a photo gallery with a dozen pictures, running just over a minute and automatically advanced with no background music. And a quintet of TLA Releasing trailers, all for discs already released: "Socket" (1:55); "Naked Boys Singing!" (1:00); "Amnesia: The James Brighton Enigma" (2:48); "Rock Haven" (1:46); and "Boy Culture" (1:46).

PARTING THOUGHTS:
I have to be honest: the sheer impracticality of the premise makes "Socket" a tough watch. While it is faithful to its own internal reality, it makes no pretense to take place in our world, drawing us out of the experience almost entirely. Most of the actors are just a bit too stiff (no pun intended, considering the nudity) and the production often reminds us it's low budget. And the ending? I have my own theory and the film doesn't give us any answers. Keep in mind, though, the commentary participants don't know either. Not even writer Abley. Is that really a good sign?