MovieChat Forums > Big Eden (2000) Discussion > Am I The Only Gay Man Who Hates This Fil...

Am I The Only Gay Man Who Hates This Film?

posted 17 years ago by mooninbalance
26 replies | jump to latest

I had really looked forward to seeing 'BE' as the premise was great. Big city gay boy goes to rural tiny hometown due to family crisis. And from the way the film begins, I was expecting a realistic, touching and possibly bittersweet tale of relationships, and the added suspense of not knowing whether the story would turn out happy or bleak.

What happened? We suddenly (around the time of the leap into the lake early on) segue out of this and into a parallel universe where old ladies cook goodies and play matchmaker to two gays. Where old men in current rural America sit whittling and coyly plot how best to get two men together?!Puh-lease!

And the leading characters are frankly, more unpleasant and uninteresting than any two people you'd encounter in an elevator.

And oh yes, the shy Native American/French chef and the "running scared" bit. Maybe cute the first time or two, but after the 14th or 15th time, it did get old.

Maybe if the audience had been forewarned that this was just the most sheer of fantasies ("Gay Eden" for a title, perhaps) it might be different. Seriously, my feeling is that if some gay guy in Montana had bopped his head falling from a horse or something, and had fantasized about a perfect rural gay life, before coming back to reality, and if the leads had been attractive and sympathetic, who knows? This could have been a fine film.

But as it was, for what it was, I didn't find the picture romantic, poignant or amusing. Just a sort of insane 'Brokeback Mountain.'

I sat disappointed throughout but long before the final scene I had lost all capacity for shocked disbelief that in rural Montana, for the love of God, the citizens were just having one of their ordinary pro- homosexual dances, complete with knowing winks and kindly grins as the unlikeable guys (and a few more, as I recall) pair off.

A lot of gays seem to like this film, and they have every right to do so.
I just can't understand why.

[–] batboy126 17 years ago

To tell the truth, I agree with pretty much everything you said about the film. At the same time, I can't help but like the damn thing.

If you look at the film as a straightforward story, love story or family reconciliation story or whatever, it doesn't seem to work; but I don't believe that was the intention. I think it was intended as a bit of a fantasy -- maybe not the dream sequence you describe, but a slightly tongue-in-cheek story which isn't meant to be entirely realistic. Finding an oasis of perfect tolerance in rural Montana is too improbable not to be intentional, especially when the main character is returning from New York, only to find more acceptance among the ranchers and church ladies than he did in the big city.
I think the audience was forewarned; the use of Eden in the title hints at a perfect, but unreal or inaccessible, place. The movie also moves gradually from the predictable to the slightly odd to the unreal and dreamlike.

Parts of the story I did find a bit excessive. The worst was the elderly widow who arranged a gathering of young, single women for Henry to meet; then, on discovering he's gay, simply makes a U-turn and throws a similar gathering of young gay men. That was over the top, yes; but it introduced us to the fact that Henry's assumptions about Big Eden are wrong.

I can't argue about the attractiveness of the characters, although to be fair the three men involved in the 'triangle' were the best looking members of the cast; and I think they were intended to come across as fairly ordinary. Personally, I found all of them fairly sympathetic, if a bit taken up with their internal struggles.

The slightly fantastical approach allowed for some very nice scenes that would never take place in reality. One was the post-hospital scene in which Dean kisses Henry. The idea of a straight man loving his lifelong friend enough to try and overcome his own inclinations is, I think, unprecedented in the movies. I can imagine the opposite situation taking place -- a gay man trying to make love to a woman he is fond of, possibly out of pity as in the Dean/Henry situation -- but not two men. It's sweet, it's effective, it tells us something about Dean, and it starts the process of Henry getting over his obsession with the past. It's a great scene, BUT it is not, literally, realistic.

The point is, I think that once you get away from the whole issue of whether any of these things are likely, the story has a charm of its own. Just my take on it.

Mein Führer! I can walk!

[–] lordofthelake 17 years ago

I am gay, and this film is garbage.

[–] gayspiritwarrior 17 years ago

You don't care to say why you think so?

[–] lordofthelake 16 years ago

Because it's trite and cutesy and lacking in substance, rather like Jeffrey, and a slew of other gay films.

[–] gayspiritwarrior 16 years ago

You mean you think it's trite. The simple fact of so many people disagreeing shows it's just a matter of opinion. Some people like "Jeffrey" too. It's possible to like something even while recognizing it's not profound or important. You can put me down as one gay man who likes this film very much indeed.

"The value of an idea has nothing to do with the honesty of the man expressing it."--Oscar Wilde

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sassb1991 17 years ago

Maybe thisisnt the right thread for me, simply because I am a lesbian and I loved the film, but I feel the need to say that I love this movie regardless of its unrealistic qualities. I am the type of person who in childrens movies where I know that a child cant always grasp the concept of whats realistic and whats not and I will tell you whats unrealistic in the movie, regardless of (how do I say this?) the magical factor of a childs movie. Take Night at the Museum for instance. I had no issues with the things at the museum coming to life at night, it was little things (such as the toy remote control car being driven by the two figures [without anyone holding the remote] than the car blowing up by hitting snow. I had a big issue with that)Sp by this you can tell I like my movies to be realistic but for Big Eden, the whole concept of the town being so accepting gave me no issues what so ever. Regardless of how attractive the characters were (to be honest, I wasnt really paying attention to that) I found the stroy to be sweet and I loved the character development and plot. I also like how there was no sex scene in the movie because I think that could have really downsized the movie. Overall I loved this movie, I thought it was sweet and an actually quality gay movie (those are hard to find)which I could just sit down, watch, and feel for the characters. I am also a person who had a problem with Brokeback Mountain (which I thought was an ok to bad movie. So this is my opinion, I respect yours but this is mine.

[–] hanazdad2 16 years ago

What's the real problem? Just romance and no gay sex?

Movies are usually fiction unless an autobiography or documentary.

If you want real life watch the news. What straight or gay movie for that matter does not use a lot of writers licence, fiction and old fashion storytelling to spin a tale. What action movie is realistic? This is just good old style entertainment. And if your life experience is different and you have no imagination I can see why this romantic tale of discovery is stale to you.

Go rent some porn that is probably more into your class.

[–] davidinberkeley 16 years ago

**Slight Spoilers***

I'm gay and found the film a little unlikeable for reasons that were much different from yours.

I was able to suspend disbelief around most of the elements you disliked (thought I can't quite say why). What bugged me and pulled me out of the film were:

-Long lingering looks at things in an already beautifully-photographed film.
-The ragged exposition and resolution of Henry and Dean. There are some things that go unexplained about both that only added disbelief to my evaluation. (Probably I should say more in a different thread)
-The Native American being shown, yet again, as silent, mostly un-smiling and mystical.
-Dean's character is summarily reconciled, making him seem more like something put in to color the plot rather than an actual character. His story with Dean could have been a separate film from Henry's (more conventional) story with Pike, and one that I would have found more complex and interesting than Henry and Pike.

It's worth seeing for the average person who isn't as picky as I am, but I doubt I'll care see it again myself, except for the few scenes of Henry and Dean's story.

[–] MetalAngel 15 years ago

This film simply isn't for everyone. I consider it to be a nice, heart-warming, ABSOLUTELY fictional gay dream.

The setting- the fact this gay romance happens in rural Montana (of all places) is not a flaw that makes the movie a flop, but it's a statement. It transmits a yearning: for gay love and homosexuality to be seen as something normal (not as an issue) even in the most conservative of places. I mean, this story could NEVER have happened where it happened...but wouldn't it have been nice and inspirational if it had? Ponder.

The acting- with the possible exception of Tim DeKay, the other two men involved in the love triangle give substandard performances. Pike seems alternately brain-dead and sultry, the main character seems boring and uninviting for most of the film. But, hey, this is a film about cheesy clichés: boy with a crush on his best friend at school, boy grows to become a shy and uninvolving man, man meets another man who goes head over heels for him but doesn't realize it because he's still in love with the friend, etc...
I mean, it IS a cliché...but aren't clichés our guilty pleasures every once in a while?

Simply said, DON'T look for depth, artistry and wit in this film. Don't even look for actual political correctness in it. But you can surely be entertained by it. Like I said, it's not accurate...but in every gay man's eyes, it damn well should be!

[–] fl1 14 years ago

-Dean's character is summarily reconciled, making him seem more like something put in to color the plot rather than an actual character. His story with Dean could have been a separate film from Henry's (more conventional) story with Pike, and one that I would have found more complex and interesting than Henry and Pike.

See "Question about Dean": http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0212815/board/nest/59444343.

[–] artguylarry 15 years ago

In response to the original post, let's just back up a bit and rethink the elements you don't seem to like about this film. First off, the residents of Big Eden were not paying matchmaker to "two gays." They were playing matchmaker to two people becoming very fond of each other, who just happened to be men. Sure, it is still all pretty far-fetched when you come back to reality and remember the world we live in. But so what? This may not be the way the world is, but it's a damn sight close to a world we are hoping to see one day. A world where it isn't necessarily accepted to love someone of the same gender, but rather where loving someone of the same gender is never even thought of as different. And what is so wrong about catching a glimpse of that on film? Granted, it has been a while since I have seen Big Eden, but I am not sure I recall even hearing the word "gay" used in this movie. Because gay is not an issue. This is what we want. For people to watch us dance together at the town picnic, and not be shocked by it, because there is nothing to be shocked about.

And for the posters who seem to want to bitch because Arye Gross is "not that attractive," you're all probably just pissed that he doesn't have a gym bod, and doesn't walk around naked through two thirds of the film. Arye Gross is not UNattractive, he is just average. And I think that was the kind of character Henry is supposed to be. An average guy.

[–] SirFrancisBeaverhausen 15 years ago

I just watched this movie for the first time because of Arye Gross. He has always had a cutely nebbish-like appeal to me. Not drop dead gorgeous with a killer six-pack, but a dorky cuteness. BIG EDEN isn't supposed to be a realistic film. But almost a fantasy or fable. And it succeeds well in its intentions. My big quibble is that I didn't feel any chemistry between Arye Gross and Eric Schweig. There was a definite connection between Arye and Tim DeKay though, and I also found the Henry/Dean story more interesting. As someone posted elsewhere, it would have made for an enjoyable and involving movie itself. Or at the very least further exploration in this one.

"WHAT KNOCKERS!"
"OH--SANK YOU DOCTOR!"

[–] gmariamm 15 years ago

I don't think the movie is about a pro- homosexual town people. I think the title 'big eden' says it all. if there is an eden on this earth people would have taken the fact that gays amongest their citizens as a natural fact. I also liked the main characters because they are normal everyday people. who would have believed that all/most citizens of the US are as gorgeous, charming, physically fit as actors we see on the screen everyday? I really liked this movie, but may be because i am not gay and do not know what is authentic or not.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fl1 14 years ago

mooninbalance said:

What happened? We suddenly (around the time of the leap into the lake early on) segue out of this and into a parallel universe where old ladies cook goodies and play matchmaker to two gays. Where old men in current rural America sit whittling and coyly plot how best to get two men together?!Puh-lease!

You have a point here, but I agree with bashingbatboy126:

If you look at the film as a straightforward story, love story or family reconciliation story or whatever, it doesn't seem to work; but I don't believe that was the intention. I think it was intended as a bit of a fantasy -- maybe not the dream sequence you describe, but a slightly tongue-in-cheek story which isn't meant to be entirely realistic. Finding an oasis of perfect tolerance in rural Montana is too improbable not to be intentional, especially when the main character is returning from New York, only to find more acceptance among the ranchers and church ladies than he did in the big city.

[–] jdmartin61 14 years ago

I saw this wonderful movie for the first time today.

Wow, everybody! While the movie didn't exactly 'blow my skirt up,' this homo man liked it, overall. There are many examples of (to me) good and mostly bad "gay movies" and yet I enjoyed this movie very much.

I am an almost 49-year-old (Yea!) dedicated lifelong homosexual man and I saw this movie for the first time today. I came right to 'imdb' to read the general thoughts on this film because I like and respect everything about imdb.com, that's why this discussion thread means so much to me.

In my life up to now I have seen many films with "gay" stories and themes, many of which I simply don't like. So many of them always seem to involve young kids trying to figure out their "sexuality." Other movies seem to portray "fringey" kind of gay characters (even today!) that one simply can take or leave. I am fortunate in always knowing, all through the 'bad' and the 'good' of "growing up," that I was a homosexual man and nothing else. "Big Eden" was a very welcome change in showing "mature" and settled characters.

The argument about the relative "attractiveness" of the lead characters is completely meaningless to me. All the characters in this movie were attractive.

Remember that most of the people in the movie had always lived in or had spent their younger years in, this tiny burg, so they all had a kind of "lifelong knowlege" of each other. Remember also that Henry and Dean had both left their hometown many years before and that Dean (married > divorced) with two children had come back to live in Big Eden whereas Henry had worked to go away and never return to the town except maybe for one day, or so, if necessary. In the movie, Henry's circumstances cause him to stay much longer than one day.

And please consider this: "Pike Dexter" had never moved away from the town and had never thought of himself so much as "gay" vs just a comfirmed "loner" (andt he had gone to school with both Henry and Dean many years before so he already knew both of them, and everybody else, in his own way) and Pike Dexter was a successful man in his home and everybody knew and liked him; and now Henry has come back to town and stayed there at length to care for his ailing grandfather. These are all things to consider when one tries to analyse the story.

Pike Dexter is more of the lead character in this story than either Henry or Dean. (And the actor who played Pike is attractive!)

I'm ranting right about now but I mean what I say ,even so! LOL

John Martin,48, Contented Homo Man, Fort Worth, Texas, USA

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] stonash7 12 years ago

LOLLOL I feel the exact same way about this movie

[–] lordofthelake 12 years ago

It's gay trash.