Call Me by Your Name
discussion
Question about the ending (spoiler inside)
Thanks for responding.i agree with you you can have special bond with someone of same sex or opposite.an you can't compare them nor does it take away from your other relationships.it just is an to me when that happens you can't even explain it.it just is .I have had the same chemestry .an it is unique an special when that happens.
I also thought that in the movie ending an the book where Oliver comes back at Christmas an elio gets mad.that because how his father was the he would have talked to elio an called him down.and I would have like to see how that played out.
Dess wrote: "After reading the book a couple of times, I have a theory I feel comfortable with. I could not accept an unhappy end when we have two people who obviously still feel a lot of affection for each oth..."I just realized that our theory of the ending looks really similar. So I totally agree.
It is still sad that they need 20 years to figure things out, but I things it is not so sad as to imagine that they will never live a life together.
For a movie sequel or (what I would prefer) a book sequel I would love to read more about the 20 or spacially the 5 years after der Drinks together and see what life has brought them in this time. And of course a happy ending 20 years later :)
I agree too.i am interested in the 15 years cause I believe elio did have a great love then that surpassed Oliver's love and I wondered why the it occurred to me you usually refer like that if someone has died young.if you divorced or leave them you wouldn't call them great especially how he refers to it.i think when he goes see Oliver that's important because something had happened previously to elio that he couldn't process and Oliver was the closest he had to a brother an he was the first person he was that intimate with .I think that's why he's thinking of death and why he wants to speak to Oliver before he dies.i think the next 5 years are important too.elio is unrealible remember early in the book elio wanted to change something in his diary so that years to come it would should what he wanted to happen instead of what really do.that probably not the first time he did that.i don't think in the end when they were in Italy was the first time they had been together in the 5 years.they we're not poor so why would it have been just email an text.they would have met.i think that during that time they were at least having an emotional affair.so that at the end of the 5 years with Oliver an possibly elios kids grown maybe elio knew Oliver was going to stay but couldn't believe it.you always question if someone loves you even when they say it .an you would proof.and they both were very romantic so that saying I love you wasn't enough.after the 20 years I would like to see.thst would be interesting.i am like you on the sequel ideas.
Anna wrote: "I just finished this book and absolutely adored it. One question that I am left with is this: throughout the story there seems to be an implicit understanding between Elio and Oliver that their rel..."Elis had to go back to high school. They couldn't just run off together.
Interesting thoughts about Elios loss. I am not sure about a love which surpassed Oliver's love. But I agree that something must had happen that has changed him. Maybe it was the death of his father, which has told him that he and oliver had something unique.What I also thing in the end is, that Elio says "he saw that nothing has changed till he has left". So I think maybe this could be a reference to the beginning of the book when Oliver has arrived. Both know that Oliver have only a short time there, and that he have to left. Again both know that they like each other, but they do not know how far the feelings go. Elio is not sure what Oliver really feels and he don't know how to handle the situation. And Oliver does again not really show what he really feels. Maybe he is still afraid.
But he did come back. And thats really a sign as we had said.
I think this shows that their love story will start again - in the same way as 20 years before, because in the end nothing has really changed.
IMHO you are reading far too much into it. Think back to your teens. Things happen that change you ... but everything else remains the same. Life goes on. Even after extreme heartbreak. You may see the world or yourself differently. But in actuality? Nothing has changed.I feel that there was an understanding. The teenager had to go back to school and live with his parents. Oliver had to go back to work. Live out his life. If there was some other way to play it out I think they may have taken the risk of trying. but this really wasn't realistic.
The movie falls short of the book and now everyone is in talks of a second story. I truly hope it happens. I can see enough momentum for a part 2
It's funny I think if the book had stopped where he movie did it would not have effected me so much.because like Bambi said future is open.its next 20 years an know that it effected them in some way.but the way Andre writes where he is ambiguous so that each person reading the story has there own interpretation.it has drove me crazy lol.and true situation don't change like you said it's your attitude and how you see it that changes
San Clemente Syndrome and Ghost Spots are wonderful. I'm glad the book gave all of that.Elio had considered those boys in Rome. He'd thought about it. We
don't know about Oliver. That he was so interested in Elio could make one assume that he was not new at the idea of a young man's touch
I'm glad you brought up the boys in rome.i remembered that too.i think Oliver has the same desire like elio ,we just don't know enough of his life before .I just how Andre is gonna write the second one.
I agree. The book didn't hurt me as much as the book. But I like the thoughts that there is more of their love story and ai like to interprate whats "between the lines". But of couse there are many ways.At the end I feel comftable with my thoughts about the end. And we will sie whats coming up in part 2.
Marc wrote: Elio had considered those boys in Rome. He'd thought about it. We
don't know about Oliver. That he was so i..."
I think we can make some assumptions about Oliver and other men based on the fact that in bed with Elio he knew just what to do. It clearly wasn't HIS first sexual experience with another male. Whether he had actually experienced love with another guy before is very much unclear, and I'm thinking probably not, based on his struggle to identify his feelings for Elio after their first night together ('For me it's something else which I haven't figured out, and the fact that I can't scares me.'). But nothing about the way he handled their encounter that night indicated that he'd never done any of that before.
Dess wrote: "Why it takes Oliver five years to take the next step, I do not know. Let’s say he needs the time to sort his life and figure out what he wants to do now that he knows about Elio’s feelings."
I have a personal theory that part of the reason it takes Oliver a further five years to approach Elio again is due to his sons, and where they're at in life, and how that has affected his marriage overall. When he and Elio meet at the university, Oliver says that his elder son will be 17 in three years, so he's 14 at that time. When Oliver comes to Italy again five years later, that means the elder son is about 19, and doubtless off at college. I don't think we're told the age of Oliver's younger son but there's the implication that he and his brother aren't too far apart in age, so he is probably about to start college or is already there.
Quite frankly, this is a period of time in a lot of marriages where there is major adjustment, as the life of the couple will no longer revolve around the kids and their comings and goings, etc. Andre Aciman even wrote an essay about that stage of life for The New York Times a few years ago. And this empty nest period is when some marriages fall apart, as the couple is forced to deal with each other as a couple again, without the kids between them as they have been for so many years, and some find themselves unable to make the reconnection. Now throw on top of that kind of situation the fact that Oliver had been awakened from his 'coma' and had achieved the clarity you mention regarding his and Elio's mutual feelings, and I think you've got a strong possibility that the things which had been holding him back were no longer in place...and that's why he finally took the step of visiting Elio, very possibly hoping to revive their relationship. I hope.:)
Artgroupie I agree too .and also there age n 20 years .like midlife crisis that men experience an you question the rest of your life.i don't think he can regret the marriage because if not for that he wouldn't have his sons.but I do wonder if he regrets the love that he missed out on with oliver.i also think now he had been with a few other guys before oliver.but I think the were quick encounters where there were so fast that he didnt have the time to really connect with them an in Italy I don't think he was looking for anything but when he saw elio.i think he thought this was his last chance before he went back home.because I think even though he was on a break from his girlfriend he probably knew he would marry her.i think the elio was just a normal horny teenager an he had those feeling an he just wanted to try one time.we see evidence of that early.i just don't think they both realized that sex is just not sex sometimes.an you can connect on a profound way.an you might regret it later just because of the pain of not being able to be with someone.but you don't regret the experience.in the book an the movie especially it was captured so beautifully .I also don't fault them for the decision not to be together then.i honestly an I know some people did.i just don't know how they could have been together.that elio at 17 you feel like your life gonna be full of adventure an anything can happen.an even Oliver at 24 probably felt like that too.i know Andre wrote the book in 4 months but I wish he had extended the story more for the 15 and the 15 years.really in those times we get thoughts from elio an we get that they Him remember on a day he might have been depressed so that if it were a day he was happy they would have come across different.also when he is telling us the story is at the end of the 20 years or is it as he's going along or is it 40 years done the road and he is recalling his life.can someone tell me.an also when elio goes to visit him first at the university.i didn't understand when Oliver first saw him.did he think he was someone else .I got the feeling something could have been implied but I missed it.please explain.
The music they picked for the movie were great and fit perfect.especially words are futile devises.because even with his dad's speach an it was great were all human an you can't control someone else or your feeling.but not to remember something because of the pain would make the whole experience wasted.an I think even though maybe they didn't heed all the advice especially the parralel life the could look at it fondly.it might have taken them awhile to figure out how.but life is hard an decisions that we make it society makes for us are often hard to live with.where you just want to blank it all out an feel nothing.but that is wrong and it takes patience and time to learn how too
Because Elio is the narrator, it's difficult to understand Oliver much of the time. Last night at a book reading/signing event sponsored by the NYC Parks Department (go figure), Aciman stated that he wrote the book from Elio's point of view because he didn't have much of a bead on the Olivers of this world; he identified with the Elios. He also declared several times that the ambiguity of some of the book was intentional, and that it's ambiguity that interests him.
Scott wrote: can someone tell me.an also when elio goes to visit him first at the university.i didn't understand when Oliver first saw him.did he think he was someone else .I got the feeling something could have been implied but I missed it.please explain.What's implied in that passage ("You probably don't remember me," I began, as he squinted somewhat, trying to place me. He was suddenly distant, as if stricken by the fear that we had met in a place that he didn't care to remember. He put on a tentative, ironic, questioning look, an uncomfortable, puckered smile, as if rehearsing something like, 'I'm afraid you're mistaking me for someone else.') is that Oliver has been having sex with men behind his wife's back, and has run into some of them in public situations where encountering them is uncomfortable or problematic - or fears doing so. When he is approached in his classroom by the older, bearded Elio, whom he doesn't immediately recognize, he initially thinks it's a situation where he's being approached by someone he'd had a brief encounter with, and is preparing to deny knowing him. But then he realizes who it is.
Or at least, that's what Elio thinks. Is it part of his unreliable narration, or did Aciman drop that information in there very purposefully? You could make an argument either way...
For those interested, here is the link to The New York Times piece Andre Aciman wrote about his experience with empty nest syndrome: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/gar.... The essay is also included in his book Alibis: Essays on Elsewhere under the title 'Empty Rooms'. (Keep in mind that the NYT has a paywall, and only allows people to read 5 free articles per month.)
Artgroupie wrote "What's implied in that passage ("You probably don't remember me," I began, as he squinted somewhat, trying to place me. He was suddenly distant, as if stricken by the fear that we had met in a place that he didn't care to remember. He put on a tentative, ironic, questioning look, an uncomfortable, puckered smile, as if rehearsing something like, 'I'm afraid you're mistaking me for someone else.') is that Oliver has been having sex with men behind his wife's back". Thanks, that's something that I wouldn't ever have considered. I'm not convinced necessarily. Elio was continually imagining that Oliver was glaring hostilely towards him. Early in the book he recounted how at diner one evening he was quickly describing his analysis of a piece of music and he caught Oliver glaring at him. There were other instances as well. It seemed to me that Elio misread Oliver's "glare." It seemed more likely to me that Oliver was awestruck by Elio at times and sometimes couldn't hide it. Elio misunderstood the look in those instances, and I think he probably misunderstood it here as well.
Scott, Aciman did say that Luca G. had approached him about the possibility of a sequel. Didn't elaborate more than that, though he seemed game. He is attached to his fictional characters. I thought this was interesting too. He also said that after seeing the movie he no longer remembers how he envisioned his characters when he wrote the book. He sees the actors from the movie.
Another thing, he said he was blown away by that last long shot of Elio in front of the fire, stating that it was something that words could not possibly express.
Jimpanzee wrote: "Because Elio is the narrator, it's difficult to understand Oliver much of the time. Last night at a book reading/signing event sponsored by the NYC Parks Department (go figure), Aciman stated that ..."That Aciman made the comment about ambiguity makes me glad I didn't ask him about Anchise, whether he was gay or not, which I assume he is! I already assumed if Aciman wanted us to have so many details he would have included them, and so we should figure it out on our own. Sort of like Vince Gilligan, when people want to know if Fring and Max were lovers in Breaking Bad. If you have to ask.....too bad for you! That kind of thing,
Jimpazee that makes sense with the glaring..the last shot blew me away too.you could see all the emotion.i wonder then he if aciman can see different ending since he can envision the characters . although if can't get a feel for the way the Oliver's of world think then he might have to have some help him with that point of view
Artgroupie, adding my thanks, too, for the link to the NYTimes article. Enjoyed it.Aciman's focus on preparing himself for the day that his kids leave home seemed very Elio of him, don't you think?
I was thinking that too.i also that that if he wrote from the elios of the world.then probably elio probably been married. I kinda see aciman as the older version of elio.
I saw the James ivory article too.i think he's 89.i figure the movie is couple years off.maybe they didn't think James ivory would be around.an while he did do the screenplay.it just seemed to me he just copled the book.of course I don't know anything about screenplays.i also think Luca g wants to space the sequels out maybe he wanted to have younger screen writer so the stay more congruent.aciman is 67.i think Luca is is 45 or 46 .I like the idea of sequel but unfortunately if they don't make enough money of the next one they might not get a third.an I kinda don't think armie an timothy will do the type of nudity an sex scenes that might garner more money.i think the nudity was fine in this one.an I don't think they needed anymore.but American actors have to worry about future work.and there so much homophobia in the U.S.as well as other countries I just have to think the actors worry about type casting.i also thought aciman write 1 or 2 more books on the characters an then adapt it to maybe miniseries for Netflix or Amazon.plus I really don't want to have to wait 5 or 10 years for next part
Jimpanzee wrote: "Artgroupie, adding my thanks, too, for the link to the NYTimes article. Enjoyed it.Aciman's focus on preparing himself for the day that his kids leave home seemed very Elio of him, don't you think?"
You are welcome, everyone, for the NYT link. I enjoy Aciman's non-fiction very much, and I recommend his two collections of essays.
It is interesting to me that he has stated it's Elio he identifies with, and that even he finds Oliver to be somewhat unfathomable... because he essentially gave his own life circumstances to Oliver: long marriage, sons, career as an academic on the East Coast, writer. It seems that as both Elio and Oliver are halves of the same whole, so is Aciman both of them.
Mymymble wrote: It's very interesting (well to me) that Aciman said he was meeting Luca back in November to discuss the sequel, but at the BAFTAs couple weeks back, James Ivory said no-one had approached him for a sequel. So that meant one of two things: either Aciman is planning to write the screenplay himself, or that (oh noes) the sequel's backburnered.While Ivory's age is very possibly a factor in his (non-)involvement with the sequel, I think it's more than that. It's no secret that he and Luca did not see eye-to-eye on various aspects of the script/film. They also had an arbitration with the Writers Guild of America over Luca getting a co-screenwriting credit, which ruled in Ivory's favor. I think they respect each other but aren't all that interested in working together again.
Artgroupie I had saw interview that armie said that he enjoy making the movie but he would be mad at Luca after a day of shooting.do you have any idea what that was about.i just figured Luca wanted to push the envelope more while armie didn't.i saw I am love an that one graphic scene I could see where Luca would want to shoot something like that.an timothee being so young I wonder how far his parents would have let him go before they said no.i got the feeling armie was protecting him on set.
Artgroupie wrote "(Aciman) essentially gave his own life circumstances to Oliver: long marriage, sons, career as an academic on the East Coast, writer." Nice one! Laughing at myself for missing something that was in plain sight.
Thanks for the article mymymble.when I read it it was like that was the first director that saw more than a pretty face.
I'm surprised he was so honest in the aricle
Jimpanzee wrote: "Artgroupie wrote "(Aciman) essentially gave his own life circumstances to Oliver: long marriage, sons, career as an academic on the East Coast, writer." Mymymble wrote: But Aciman also said he never knew what Oliver was thinking. So, a paradox?
It would seem so.:) Maybe it was an attempt to anchor the character to things Aciman was familiar with, in the service of making him understandable to his creator? Hmmm.
Alex wrote: "I think their relationship can't precede due to outside circumstances, mostly on Oliver's part. Oliver chose a simpler life with a wife and his occupation as a professor. Elio was always ready and ..."Although I know everything you wrote is true, it hurts. I have always thought that love lasts forever and that it can overcome everything. Anyway, I enjoyed reading your explanation. It was honest, simple and perfect. You are awesome!
I love hearing that people are interpreting ambiguity at the ending, especially from the author himself, but I wonder about the end of the 3rd part where he says "neither realizing tonight would be the last time they make love ever again".And then at the beginning of the 20-years-later passage he says that it was "last summer" that Oliver came for a "one night" visit. Which, to me, means he came and went in one night and that, at the very least, by the time he is recalling this (the year after the 20-years-later passage) they still are not together.
Anyone else wonder about this?
Eric wrote: "I love hearing that people are interpreting ambiguity at the ending, especially from the author himself, but I wonder about the end of the 3rd part where he says "neither realizing tonight would be..." I assumed the narration was 21 years later or nearly so when the book states "last summer." I didn't think they lived in the same house for the rest of their lives until Aciman was slightly critical of the assumption they went their separate ways, that we don't really know if Oliver got into a taxi the next morning.
Marc I missed that to.does that mean when is recalling the 20 years that when Oliver came to visit he he is recalling what happened the previous year or is it that he came the year before an it's the second visit he's recalling
Just a question did anyone read James ivory latest article where he complains of lack of frontal nudity in cmbyn he was mad at Luca you could tell.he more or less said more nudity would have been better cause it would have been more natural an that the lovemaking scene should have shown that instead of Luca panning out to trees.he said actors had not frontal clauses in their contract.which I'm sure they do.just wanted to see if you thought there should have been more nudity.for me I think Luca filmed it right.i think more nudity would have taken way how their love was potrayed.especially first love.in the follow up movies if we get any then I think frontal would be good.i know the book was very explicit.an Luca could have filmed it more explicit an it would have been great but I don't know if it would have touched me the same way.although I don't know of armie will ever show his goods.i think Timmy would if price was worth it.what are y'all thoughts
Yes it was.he did seem angry too .which you got an oscar.so I don't understand the attitude
Scott wrote: "Just a question did anyone read James ivory latest article where he complains of lack of frontal nudity in cmbyn he was mad at Luca you could tell.he more or less said more nudity would have been b..."Ivory already complained in another article last October that American cinema and actors are too unreasonable about male frontal nudity. He is just being honest. Ivory believes in the value of beautiful actors and the value of honest portrayal of sex scenes.
Marc wrote: He is just being honest. Ivory believes in the value of beautiful actors and the value of honest portrayal of sex scenes. Exactly, Marc. I would also add that Ivory, who has been responsible for some of the best cinematic literary adaptations ever made, is all about respecting the book and doing it justice when he adapts one. And there is nothing coy about the way the sex between Elio and Oliver is depicted in the novel - nor does the explicitness take away from the sensuality of their relationship and interactions. When Ivory made Maurice three decades ago, he included matter-of-fact nudity between the male lovers. It was not gratuitous, but yes, you did see more of their bodies than your average American actor is willing to show. It didn't detract from anything, but rather added to the realism and intimacy. As someone who dared to depict a gay relationship that way so long ago, I just don't think he's all that interested in making concessions to the sensibilities of a straight audience, nor does he buy into the reasoning Luca gave for cutting away from Oliver and Elio's first night together. He wants parity for male nudity and same-sex relationships onscreen. I think there is respect between him and Luca, but it's pretty clear they had some differing ideas and clashed plenty during the making of the film.
James has been on record for a while now saying he doesn't think there should be a sequel, although obviously it's not up to him, and that he considers this chapter of his creative life closed. It's clear that Luca and Andre Aciman have shut him out from the sequel, but I doubt he cares much. He's got other projects he's pursuing.
(Re: Merchant/Ivory as a couple - their relationship was known in the film industry and to the media for many years, but they rarely addressed it directly - sometimes they did, depending on who they were talking to. But they never talked about it in as much detail as Ivory has been doing lately - see his recent interview with The Daily Beast: https://www.thedailybeast.com/james-i... .)
Loved room with view watched Maurice last night.the nudity was well placed I think now it could have been in cmbyn but it was such a short nude scene in Maurice that the same amount in cmbyn I don't think would have added anything.and I don't think he would have got an Oscar..love Simon is pg.it like America wants PG gay and they can accept it but if it's R gay show which is more realistic then American have a hard time.i think James had a good point to put it in there but I think Luca was right in the direction
Scott wrote: "Loved room with view watched Maurice last night.the nudity was well placed I think now it could have been in cmbyn but it was such a short nude scene in Maurice that the same amount in cmbyn I don'..."Maurice was so many years ago. Homophobia was much greater back then. Ivory did a great job. The M/M sensuality was so believable and well done. The nudity was so natural.
I expect it is disappointing to Ivory after all these years to run into push back on nudity, and see the lack of stronger financing for such a project. With how great the book is, I understand that disappointment too, how it took far too long to make the movie happen. T.C. and A.H. were nearly too old for their parts by the time CMBYN was finally filmed.
I agree I also liked the happy ending on Maurice I wander if James had his way if the ending would have been different.and I don't understand why there s push back on nudity.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Call Me by Your Name (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
At Swim, Two Boys (other topics)Call Me by Your Name (other topics)
I don't think that Oliver has experience with other guys. I like the thought that both did think they are straight, but the special connection between them showed them that love and desire is not bound on gender or race - you can fell in love with any human in this world and it is okay.
That's why I also do not believe that they are unhappy being with women later in their life. But what they have will never be comparable to other relationships. But it is not because they are "gay" - it is because they have a special and unique connection to each other.