It pains me, as a gay man to find that just because a film deals with homosexuality - it is automatically given great reviews within the community - even if the performances were extremely weak and the film as a whole was a vomitable cliché.
Am I the only one to feel this way about this film?
I think you may be. I rented this strictly because it was a "gay" film, but was more than pleasantly surprised by both the script, staging and most of all, the acting. I'm shocked to hear you call the performances "extremely weak". Stunned in fact.
I agree, most "gay" films are done on a shoestring, and scream that. Often, the only thing worse than the script in these films, is indeed the awful performances. However, I thought this film was a little gem, which seems to be the general consensus from the various film fests' reception to it.
I'd highly recommend this film to gay and straight audiences alike. The arch of "X" in this film is a great storyline for all to enjoy.
I actually find most movies marketed as "gay" themed to be exactly what you say -- a vomitable cliché. I think this avoided the clichés perfectly, lending itself to a deeply psychological romance and incredibly dynamic acting. I think the lead, Alex, and the old man, Gregory, were multi-dimensional characters that transcended the typical QAF or <u> Eating Out </u> lameness. It's definitely a moving story that you should re-examine.
shareI recently saw this movie and, although I did think it had its good bits (yes, I agree the actor who portrayed Gregory is pretty good, and Magyar is quite good as well, in a restrained way), in general I considered it shallow and at some points incoherent. Let's be realistic: the main actors have been chosen because they're eye candy for guys (and girls) who like this kind of guy. Joey and Andrew are constantly pouting, and X is constantly trying to look mysterious and interesting, as if saying "I'm so cool, I always have this deep look in my blue eyes and I barely speak". The dynamics between the trio keep getting incoherent all the time: initially Andrew is supposed to not like X, though he's frequently acting in a flirty way (and pouting) when he's around him. He's described by X as being a sweet, caring person who makes you feel comfortable when you're around him. I never felt that while watching him. I though he seemed simply vain. Then it turns out that he loved X, it's just he never was always to express it (though they have been living together for a year).
Then there's Joey, who all of a sudden confess to be deeply in love with X, and more surprisingly still, X also loves him, "it's just there's a hundred reasons why it'd never work". So he says.
They could have simply cut that part and no one would have noticed, it's so incoherent with all the previous (and subsequent) plot, and so absurd. Wasn't X deeply in love with Andrew? And I don't know if this is o blame on the actors or on the script, but I just can't believe that X loved a guy like Andrew, whom he treats with disdain and superiority through most of the film. In those moments in which he's more affectionate towards him (and they were rather nice moments), I always felt it was in a paternal way.
Then there's Andrew's ex-girlfriend wedding, and the incoherences reach a climax. Everyone in Andrew's family reacts to the news that Andrew is gay with complete normality, which is really sweet, but a bit too unrealistic as of 2008. The mother even lets some condoms in the room... Then Andrew, who is constantly acting as if he had double personality or something, meets his previous crush from years ago, and there you go, five minutes later they're already kissing, in front of X, the guy he's supposed to be in love with, and in front of the family, who is supposed to think X is his boyfriend.
Frankly, it has its good bits (despite everything I've said, still it's quite entertaining to see), but I wonder what would the opinions be if the eye candy was taken away and the actors were average guys...
Actually, I didn't find anyone but Magyar to be eye candy. Joey was an interesting character, but not particularly attractive to me, and Andrew was neither interesting nor attractive (again, to me).
There were other problems, as well. Voice-over narration is rarely a good idea, and it was only moderately successful in this film. Also, the ending suffered from Gregory riding in to save the day, rather than X really resolving his problems.
But having said that, I thought the acting and dialog were both strong, and I found X and Gregory to be fascinating characters. The relationship between the three housemates was also entertaining, and overall, I really enjoyed the film.
It's main problem, IMO, was that Andrew was only mildly interesting. I could see why X might fall for someone who was his opposite -- someone who did NOT sleep around, as Andrew was initially portrayed. That, combined with Andrew's dislike of X's hustling could have created sufficient dramatic conflict to make the film. But the decision to make Andrew start sleeping around a lot muddied that, to the point where it seemed at times as if the only conflict was X and Andrew being pig-headed about admitting their feelings for each other.
Me and my boyfriend watched the movie last night, I felt that it was a cliché, it was okay, but it was not the best. Of course what I did not like about it was hearing the main character narrate. It was so annoying. Other than that, I thought Joey's character was more dynamic, Andrew and X were a bore. I give it 2 stars.
shareBut the decision to make Andrew start sleeping around a lot muddied that, to the point where it seemed at times as if the only conflict was X and Andrew being pig-headed about admitting their feelings for each other.
Habataitara modorenai to itteshare
Mezashi-ta no wa aoi aoi ano sora
Actually, i liked this a lot better than i thought i would . i was pleasantly surprised. JOey was a tad annoying, but also endeering in his own way
I laugh in the face of danger....then I hide until it goes away."
-Xander Harris
I thought X was a hypocrital *beep* The rooftop scene between X and Andrew showed an inconsistency in what they really felt for one another. I dont get it in the gay community - if you like someone do u put them down to hide your true feelings because you're afraid.
Joey wass cute. the story was a little bore and expectant.
The acting was terrible. But I was really drawn into the film. If you've seen Noah's Arc on Logo, then you know Darryl Stevens is an awful actor. But I think the script could have been great in the hands of better actors.
sharei dont know how anyone can think any of these men can act..
i like the story line...just a little cheesy gay..if that makes any sence. nothing about the movie seemed real.
(my gay friend forced me to watch this -__- )
I feel the opposite way you did, Bast81. Most gay-themed movies I see are on the TV channel Logo, and are so awful (the last one I attempted to watch had a generic blond in low-cut jeans going from place to place whining, "am I a sterotyyyyyyype?" for the first 30 minutes) that I feel as disgusted with myself for even trying as I do when I'm stuck with only a SyFy original movie - which are the next-worst things in the film world.
I was pretty pleased, therefore, in finding this one tonight; a film with characters like ones I've known, in a household like ones I've lived in, and with tensions and secrets and unresolved issues like I've known many people to have.
What I especially liked was that how over the course of the film - and yes, some boring whiny sequences, admittedly, and through some awful filming - every one of the major characters learned to adapt in truly helpful and compassionate ways to relate more closely to the others. I was especially pleased that the younger guys found ways to pull the older Gregory out of his isolation. I ended up feeling very good after the film.
I think yours is the most fair-minded review of this movie on this entire thread. I completely agree. The characters--all three of them do in fact learn, grow and change during the course of the film. Even the Gregory character is changed by the end of it. At the end of the day, this movie had something to say, unlike a lot of other gay-themed films.
Sister, when I've raised hell, you'll know it!
Just watched the movie. The story had potential, and I do think the actors could act but in the end, I didn't want the two characters of X and Andrew together. I didn't buy their love story, so therefore I found the movie somewhat mediocre.
In these types of movies I usually am dying for the two leads to be together, but it just wasn't here.
If you love someone, set them free. If they come back, nobody else wanted them either.
I found this movie a real struggle to get through. I might have put on the subtitles and watched it at double speed to make it to the end. (Or if subtitles weren't available, I probably played solitaire to distract myself.) I do have to say that Patrick Bauchau as the elder Gregory Talbot was amazing. Bauchau is very much an underrated actor and he is far superior to anything and everything with this movie. Derek Magyar was adequate as X, but rather bland - although maybe that is how his character is supposed to be. But who wants to have the star of a movie be so bland? One thing that really surprised me about this project were the DVD interviews...the usually wooden Darryl Stephens (Andrew) was quite interesting as himself. He's just a horrible actor in everything I have seen him in.... And Jonathon Trent as the walking (annoying) stereotype Joey is interesting as himself - but not while acting. So that's the director's fault to take two interesting men and allow them to become almost unwatchable on screen. Boy Culture is possibly the worst gay movie I have ever seen.
shareNever finished it. I live in Seattle, watched for the locations.
atomicrocketpoplab a destination pop culture and lifestyle gallery Seattle WA
Boy Culture is possibly the worst gay movie I have ever seen.