My dissertation analyzes 21st-century gay-themed films from Argentina, Chile, Spain, and Uruguay, and seeks to determine how their portrayal of men who have sex with men (MSM), much more diverse and self-aware than before, integrates an identity- based paradigm for the understanding of sex between men, the “gay paradigm.” I explore the negotiation of gay identity, as conceived in the post-World War II period, with an earlier way of organizing masculine homoerotic interactions that I define as the “Mediterranean paradigm.” The former praises equality between MSM as the basis for community; the latter emphasizes the role that disparities of all kinds between sexual partners play in the development of homoerotic identities. All of the four countries that I address share this dichotomy, along with similar political experiences in recent history— military dictatorships, ostensibly seamless transitions toward democracy, and major strides for LGBTQ-inclusive legislation. I examine the representation of MSM in these contexts through three genres/themes seldom present in films from these countries before 2000. My first chapter addresses coming-of-age gay films; the second deals with films about networks and communities of gay men; and the third discusses the representation of migrant MSM outside the scope of gay identity, normally due to economic reasons. My entire dissertation, and particularly this third chapter, posits clear limits to the gay identitary model in the aforementioned countries. These limits are evident in the conflict between national projects and the constitution of stable, identifiable national LGBTQ communities. This conflict arises from the endurance of culturally defined sexual identities that stem from the Mediterranean paradigm: they predate the importation of gay identity, and have been defined through local strategies. As represented in these movies, they emphasize sexual passivity in men as a practice of political resistance; they negotiate feminine and masculine gender performance, rather than propose the reappropriation of hypermasculinity; finally, they favor more flexible social networks for gay men. In conclusion, I demonstrate how any purported link between the advancement of LGBTQ rights in these countries and the hypervisibility of gay men in their national cinemas must be strongly interrogated.