Terrible Movie


Pseudo-intellectuals love this movie I'm sure, but it has no focus, can't decide what it's trying to be, and is far too distracting with those strange fantasy scenes.

This movie is NOT about the life of a gay kid. Simply being a gay boy growing up has nothing to do with wearing make up or your mother's clothing. This kid came off as transgender even if the creators didn't mean for him to. I found it insulting to both gays and transgenders. Comparing the two is idiotic at best as they're two totally different issues. Not every gay male is even feminine let alone desiring to act like a woman.

For a movie with so few characters in it I can't for the life of me figure out why the character development is almost non-existent. A two hour movie and you learn next to nothing about a single character, including the main character!

Slapping a few random scenes together does not make a movie artistic. There were some haunting and creative scenes scattered about, but that is meaningless when they don't stand for a damned thing.

Whoever created this film tried way too hard and it all turned into a big mess. There's absolutely no point to miss, so I know for a fact I didn't miss anything. I'm just sorry I wasted my time watching it.

reply

How sad.

reply

In all honesty, the movie is only an hour and twenty minutes, hardly two hours.

As for the rest, I actually agree. I never thought I would, because I'm usually the one defending the "pseudo intellectuals" as soon as any movie more complex than Star Wars is being discussed.

The movie had no bearing, it really was just a bunch of random clips, overlayed with a headache-inducing humming and transparent spiders. Really, art is great, but this is just annoying.

I have to admit, I haven't (yet) watched the whole movie. Again, this is highly unusual for me, and I usually yell on other people reviewing things they haven't watched in its entirety, but I simply couldn't finish this movie. It just felt pointless. It gave me a headache.

I won't insult anyone, actor nor director, but this really isn't a very good film. The message might be well intended, and Fairuza is great as always, but this movie simply didn't deliver.

-----
fairuza.net - endemoniada.org

reply

I did sit throught the entire film hoping it would get better but I am going to have to agree with all your points.This movie just didn't cut it for me...very disappointing. I truly wanted to enjoy this film but it simply failed in the end.

reply

I think it's amusing when people talk of 'pseudo-intellectuals' to defend themselves against the charge of not being intelligent enough to grasp something.

Just because you don't see a meaning, it does not mean that there is not one for others to find or that a film even needs a clearly defined understanding of its own meaning.

People shouldn't watch arthouse films and expect to be spoon-fed a story.

reply

You took the words right out of my mouth, Shiva :]

To the original poster: I don't think the make-up and the womens clothing was the directors way of saying "Hey, look - this is what gay people do"
My personal opinion of labelling sexuality (straight, bi, gay, lesbien) is - I don't like it, and I don't think it is appropriate in this case - you like who you like regardless of your gender or that of the object of your affection.
The issue was unrequited love - between a boy for a boy - and it was outlining the difficulty Logan had dealing with his feelings for Rodeo because Rodeo didn't "swing that way". I think the whole 'transgender' thing was simply saying how desperate Logan was to be with Rodeo - even to the point where he wished he was a girl because thats the only way he could even stand a chance of Rodeo being sexually attracted to him. It wasn't, as I said earlier, a statement of "what all gay people do". It was just simply a matter of Rodeo liking girls, and Logan liking Rodeo. You see where his problem is there?

Also, I find the term 'pseudo-intellectuals' highly insulting.

But, to each their own - if you didn't like the movie, thats fine.

All those years he was happy? You know, total waste. Didn't learn a thing.

reply

I don't have a problem with the subject matter. I also am a big fan of art house films and never expect to be spoon fed anything. And I think I came away from the film getting the writer/director's point(s). My issue with this film is that it just was not well done.

reply

Not every gay male is feminine but some are. And I know a guy who is very much like the boy in this movie. He doesn't want to be a female yet at the same time he'll do things just the boy does in the movie. So I don't think it's insulting at all.

reply

You know, for someone who can judge who's a pseudo-intellectual, you think awfully black and white. Someone isn't transgender the second they experiment with something like wearing make up or their mother's clothing. Logan didn't at all come off as a transgender to me. And don't you think non-transgenders who are just gay have ever tried something like that?

I disagree that it wasn't artistic as well. I think the way it was showing the thoughts/imaginations/interpretations of the main character Logan was quite beautiful. I always think it's kind of a shame when someone can't appreciate that because they're too busy trying to find an overlapping meaning behind it all, when the seperate situations could be intriguing on their own. I'm not saying there was no meaning though - another part I disagree upon. How can you say for a fact there's no point to miss? How can you be the ultimate judge of that? How about the point of showing the development/growing of, the hoping/trying for and being disappointed by a first crush? A gay one, for that matter? Point enough for me. And in all that, there was a lot of character development for those who were able to pick up on it, just in an extraordinary way.

reply