This is not a fluffy BL story that is for sure. The relationship between the main leads is twisted and intense and S/M abusive. Having said that I didn't regret watching it ... it was sort of interesting thinking about the 'whys' of this strange relationship and some of the unexpected twists that occurred.

In short:
For me this movie is about love ... what is it ... who can have it ... and under what circumstances can it be ‘had’. It is a kind of fascinating melding of greek philosophy and S&M. The reason for my thinking this was the reference to Plato’s feast (the TV documentary they were watching on the TV). Maybe I read too much into that TV documentary, but for me it seemed relevant to the story.

In detail:
Plato’s Feast was kind of symposium or talk fest, where all these philosophers ate, drank and talked a whole lot of philosophical shit. In respect of the TV documentary, it particularly referred to the feast held at Agathon’s (a poet) house. At that feast, the topic of discussion was “eros” or “love”. Quite a few philosophers had their say about what they thought “love” was ... in particular:

Pausanias believed that loving attraction was not always sublime, that it could sometimes be ‘base’ because there were two kinds of love from the goddesses Aphrodite (Aphrodite was the Greek goddess associated with love, lust, beauty, pleasure, passion and procreation). One kind of love was Aphrodite Heavenly and the other kind was Aphrodite the Vulgar so therefore it must follow that there were two kinds of love - heavenly love and vulgar love.

Aristophanes, on the other hand, spoke about the myth that original inhabitants of the land were androgynous i.e. they were both male and female at the same time aka the Androgyns. The Androgyns had 4 legs, 4 arms and 2 faces that looked in opposite directions. When they wanted to move, they moved on their 8 limbs like a wheel. The god Zeus didn’t like the Androgyns so he ordered Apollo to cut them into half. Afterwards, even though the Androgyns were now separated, the memory of the connection with their former half gave rise to a desire to search for their other ‘half’ in order to restore their original nature and integrity. However, this was not as easy as it seems as if they were 'wicked' the gods would 'cut' people into even smaller parts.

Anyway, given the above as a kind of background to the story, it is not surprising that the two male leads have the same sounding name Ichikawa Mitsuo … the only difference between the two is how they spell their family name "Ichikawa". One spelt it with the kanji for the number "one" i.e. "Ichikawa" / "一川" (one river). The other spelt it with the kanji for 'city' - "Ichikawa" / "市川" (city river). Is having the same name symbolic of them being each other's other half ... they are the same but different ... same coin, different sides ?. This is interesting as when both Mitsuo’s meet in high school … right from the beginning, you can see their two very distinct and seemingly different personalities but there was a hidden S&M kind of connection / attraction between them none the less. Since their first meeting they have 'danced' around each other ... like a pair of orbiting neutron stars that spiral ever closer together. One receives from the other, one gives to the other … one receives abuse, the other gives it … one masochistic, the other sadistic … one gets a girlfriend, the other takes her for himself ... “No. 1” Ichikawa is “City” Ichikawa’s dog and will come to his 'call'.

After high school the two Ichikawa's go their seemingly separate ways. “City” Ichikawa comes from a Yakuza (gangster) world and is a low level ‘dog’ for the Yakuza Boss. “No. 1” Ichikawa is a Systems Analysist and true to his "number" name, is brilliant on coding. They had no contact with each other until that phone call.

When “City” Ichikawa "murders" his girlfriend … the only way he can keep it secret from his Yakuza brothers, is to call his own “dog” from high school. That "City" Ichikawa still has "No. 1" Ichikawa's phone number after all these years is interesting. The rest of the story is really about the “dance” they have with each other against the backdrop of murder and the brutal gangster life … and in doing so, how they slowly grow in awareness that despite how their lives have gone, despite the predicaments they get into, they are best together ... live together, die together. They are two sides of the same coin … each is the "mint" (as in stamping) to one side of the same coin ... one has no meaning without the other ... hence "Double Mints" ... not the peppermint kind but the coin minting kind (well imo).

So this for me is a love story with a twist ... and it is fascinating. Who is it that deserves love … what kind of love do they deserve … ''heavenly love vs 'vulgar love' … if the love is consensual, is one kind of love necessarily 'worse' than another kind of love ? … I am not into S&M but who am I to judge what other people need in their lives so long as it is informed and consensual ... “love is love” be it ‘heavenly love’ or ‘vulgar love’. Interestingly, regardless of the type of love had between people, when it is informed and consensual, there seems to come with it a potential degree of personal 'evolution' … so in that sense can all kinds of love be 'good' love ?.

The ending of the movie had an air of bitter sweetness … I think they were both going to Korea knowing they would meet their deaths there … but in so doing, they would meet it together as "one". The movie is a bit of a mind f*ck ... but that is the way I see it at this point in time ... maybe if I watch it again in another year or two I might see things differently ... who knows.