MovieChat Forums > Poster Boy (2004) Discussion > It looks dated

It looks dated

posted 18 years ago by WarpedRecord
5 replies | jump to latest

This film appears to be in a time warp. It's apparently set in the present day, but it looks like it could be 10 or 15 years old. References to ACT UP (remember them?) abound. One of the characters is dealing with her boyfriend's death from AIDS and her infection with HIV, and she uses the old analogy of being unable to get off the road as a truck comes racing toward her. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the whole "outing" concept seems pretty retro by now. Did anyone else think "Poster Boy" looks strangely dated, or did I miss something here?

[–] countygreeninc 18 years ago

It was filmed six years ago.

[–] harryrstevens 15 years ago

I agree. It reminded me of an alternate take on the main theme of "La Cage aux Folles" by way of "The Birdcage". While dress, acting, etc. are contemporary with the time of the filming, 2004, the theme is more '80's or even '70's. It wasn't a real big deal when Cheney's daughter's orientation became public in 2000 so the reaction of the Senator & the press was totally out of character for the time period. I found it difficult to believe that the Senator, his wife & the son's mother would not know that their son was actively gay by the time of the events of the film, since he had been active since the age of 14. After all, they had staff, were long time public figures and surely somebody would have figured out the son's orientation long before and made it known. It struck me that the screen play might have been written in the mid '80's, finally getting made 20 years later.

Other commentators have made the points that there are even more incongruities beyond this one. The actors did well with the material but all in all this screen play is a mess.

[–] WarpedRecord 15 years ago

Excellent points. I suspect this project took awhile to get off the ground with funding and the cast, but that seems unusual for an indie film. The screenplay does indeed seem like it's from the mid-'80s, and if they had just set it in that era it would have been a lot more believable.

It was nice to see names like Karen Allen and Michael Lerner involved in this, but for all the talent in this film, the screenplay and choppy direction made this a well-meaning misfire in my book.

[–] construct 15 years ago

I think the dating of the film fits best in 1995-96. The issue of gay marriage was hardly a blip until the Hawaii case in 1995, and the AIDS cocktail profoundly shifted AIDS activism starting in 1996. But then there is that pesky reference to marriage in Vermont. Civil unions in Vermont started in 1999. Oh, well!

As for the long gestation period of the project--One of the producers (Herbert Ross) died in 2001. So the film took a while to get financed. (The film was dedicated to Herbert Ross in the end credits.)

The strangely indeterminate time-frame for when the action would be plausible is hardly the film's worst problem. The point-of-view of the film is extremely problematic. If the film is grounded in Henry's interview with the reporter, where does Izzy's story come from? I guess it comes from Parker. Yet neither Izzy nor Parker have a single scene with Henry (as far as I remember). In my opinion, the film would have been much better if the Izzy/Parker subplot were left out entirely so that the other relationships could be fleshed out.

[–] WarpedRecord 15 years ago

I suspect the fact that it took so long to get financing for this film explains some of the time warp, and they probably tried to sound more contemporary by tacking on references to more current events like Vermont's civil unions. This film could have been seen as challenging 15 years ago, but now it just appears hopelessly retro, a relic of a period that appears rather naive now.

As for the Izzy/Parker subplot, I have to admit I don't even remember it now, three years after I've seen this film, and I don't think I'll be revisiting it anytime soon. But I at least wanted to acknowledge your reply, Construct.

(By the way, I did start reading "Looking for Mr. Goodbar," but I haven't gotten very far yet and have been sidetracked by other issues the past couple of weeks.)