A Hole Lot Of Glory - Glorious (2022)

We need more films about gloryholes; there, I said it.

Although, let’s be honest, said films already exist; they’re just shooting towards a slightly different viewer, a fact that is hard to swallow for some people.

And if you don’t know what gloryholes are, this post and this movie aren’t really on-brand for you.

waits patiently for departure

Anyway, now that the pure ones have left us, it’s time and space for us perverts to discuss Glorious; yeah, it’s a horror film about a gloryhole. a Shudder original directed by Rebekah McKendry and starring Ryan Kwanten and JK Simmons, in the most joyfully fucked up two-man narrative one can get since Waiting For Godot. The film serves us comedy, horror, camp and grandiose threats to the entire universe, with some truly shocking and uncomfortable twists; you know, the type of stuff you want from your horror.

Glorious begins with Kwanten’s Wes driving his packed car, so tired that he’s getting lost in dreams about ex Brenda (Sylvia Grace Crim.) Like a sensible young man, aware of his dangerous driving, he stops off at a rest area.

But because he isn’t sensible at all, the un-stocked vending machine leads to him raiding his own supplies of whiskey, setting fire to his collection of polaroids and memories, and waking up the following morning with no trousers. After making his way to the filthy bathroom to puke, he discovers a cubicle wall covered in the glorious art of a monstrous god, a gloryhole in its mouth; on the other side, Simmons’ character starts conversation with him, discussing fate, godliness and their joined presence at this place and time, suggesting that they both have parts to play in a divine struggle between good and evil.

With a 70-something minute run-time, Glorious doesn’t waste time establishing its setting; Simmons’ god-like Ghat is a being so powerful that neither Wes (nor us viewers) can truly see them; when Wes tries a sneaky peak (as one does, in the jacks…right?), he is brought back to painful memories of his early interactions with Brenda.

Ghat both is and isn’t a divine power though; they are hiding in a filthy bathroom cubicle after all. Simmons' delivery is reminiscent of his camp J Jonah Jameson in the Spider-Man movies, a man whose ego and power are trying very hard to make up for a tiny penis; in comparison, Ghat’s power is huge and they are well aware of the world, calling attention to their pronouns and lack of gender.

Ghat’s pronouns draws interesting attention to the fact that there is something asexual about this film, despite the film’s name and location. which may be nothing more than an important interaction between Wes and Ghat defining the future of the universe; the gloryhole itself is nothing more than a talking point and a tease for both Wes and the viewer. Wes even spends his time thinking about how and why the characters are expected to interact, delivering a montage in which he prepares for the expected act; the moment in which he places his dick into the hole, preparing himself for the glory of the moment in which is cock might be worshipped by a god-like being, is pathetic and laughable - perfect for the characters interactions, given that Wes is an egotistical failure who doesn’t quite get his part in the world.

In teasing, and ultimately, ignoring these elements of sex and sexuality, Glorious instead explores elements of body-horror that are, like Ghat, lacking in genitalia. The closing beats of Glorious are too delightfully twisted and horrific to spoil, flipping and turning on its characters and their intents , showing them both to have been a beautiful manipulations of the film’s viewers; the final beats are uncomfortable to watch following an investment in these characters, with Wes definitely not the quirky entertaining ‘hero’ that he poses as, while Ghat takes his place as a hero (of sorts.)

These closing twists and beats are indeed glorious, amazing character studies teasing and brutalising the viewer, with a punch to the balls that is made all the more uncomfortable because the film does not take itself too seriously (up to that point.) Such comedic moments are great, with Kwanten and Simmons’ deliveries delightful enough that one wonders if Simmons is, indeed, just hiding in a cubicle. There are gorgeous beats of gore, body-horror and divine god-like battle that are delightful for such a relatively small production.

Glorious is something I will be watching again, and I will be begging and teasing other people to watch.

But…

Yeah, I’ve been edging along here, just waiting to ruin this gloriously sexy moment.

My little boner-killer here is not important to Glorious, or its narrative, both of which are damned good. But there’s just something about the very name and purpose of this film that has made me feel like it’s lacking something. Because Glorious just isn’t as queer as I expected, needed and wanted it to be. Sure, we’re treated to a gloryhole and that hilarious beat in which Wes decides he is fit to put his cock through for Ghat to…do whatever they need to do.

But I kept expecting some queer revelation of Wes’s life, some reason for his “break-up” from Brenda, some disclosure of his tastes or his antics that made the threat or promise of a filthy blow-job more than just a handy plot point or joke. While Wes’s tastes are addressed, and a key point to his downfall, absolutely none of those polaroids are dick-pics, dammit!

The film also serves us that montage of the male ego, with Wes preparing for the moment in which, maybe, he will be blown by Ghat; at no stage does Wes think that maybe, just maybe, it might be him who does the blowing? While I don’t find the beat helpful to the queer promises of the film, it speaks wonderfully of the male ego: it’s also a fitting moment for Wes’s character. But there just isn’t a sufficient comedic, hot or uncomfortable tease in which Wes might thinks that, maybe, he will be the one who must get on his knees and swallow.

I’m a gay guy (you’ve…seen this website, right?) so I’m fully aware that it’s my own tastes that might expect more queer stuff from this film. But even setting the name and concept aside, there are other opportunities that miss the tease of a queer narrative here; Kwanten, a man who spent so much of both Home & Away and True Blood showing off his body, spends most of Glorious in his boxers, subject to the disgust that is a public toilet, none of which is played for any kinky fetishes or the (gay) male gaze; Wes is just this pathetic twat, so pathetic that the film really makes you wonder what Brenda saw in him. Similarly, there are opportunities to give the Ghal/Wes interactions some BDSM/top/bottom vibes, and the camp delivery suggests that Simmons is fully aware of that; but the film just doesn’t know how to make things pop there.

None of this should take away from Glorious: it’s a fucking good horror film, one that will probably reach a decent and larger audience because of the very fact that it isn’t leaning too heavily on the queer specifics.

Just…if you’re going to include those specifics in the name, pay a little bit more attention; buy a guy dinner and a drink (and check his swallowing technique) before you force him into the bathroom for la petite mort.