MovieChat Forums > Rock Haven (2007) Discussion > Not the best but not a total failure

Not the best but not a total failure


i actually really enjoyed the plot because every bit of the story plays true to the trials me and my friend ( or how ever you phrase that) had to endure . This movie literaly tells our story ; however, the lines seemed forced , scenes skethcy like a bad play or a porn flick , but you must keep in mind that this is a independent film, still on that note this was for the most part at the bottom end of medocracy.

please tell me what you think, or did anybody else have a close relationship to this movie .

reply

I identify with Brady but I find Clifford to be very annoying. He's written like a predator and I'm glad that he and Brady didn't wind up together in the end. They had nothing in common and IMO not much chemistry (though this was probably due to the poor writing and directing).

There is no way (no matter how attracted I would be to a person) that I would allow myself to be seduced the way Brady did. Clifford comes off as a selfish, spoiled brat looking to fill his own desires without taking into consideration Brady's inner turmoil. At least that's how I perceived it.

reply

Clifford comes across as a predator?
Well, I've got news for you.
Whenever one person wants to seduce another, it generally comes down to that!
We are ALL predators in one way or another. And to give him credit - he didn't decide to seduce Brady only to satisfy his OWN desires, but also for the desire he saw Brady stifling in himself. From that point of view, coming on to him was doing Brady a favour.

reply

Well said, pogostiks.

I suppose that it's a matter of perspective and experience, but I didn't see Clifford as a "predator" in any way.

But we can all have different reactions to something. I recall that Gene Shalit created a dust up when he said in his review of Brokeback Mountain in early 2006 that Jack was a "sexual predator." He later issued an apology for his choice of words.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Shalit

reply

i thought the acting was pretty good. i know what you mean, though. i think the awkwardness, mostly between brady and clifford, seemed kind of natural, because that's how things really are.

i didn't connect so much with any of the characters, but i really did enjoy the story.

reply

I agree. however i do not agree with what people say about Clifford. i do not think he was a predator at all. He saw the attraction Brady had for him and he too was intrigued, and eventually he developed real feelings for him.

the acting was not the best. but to me, it made the scenes they had together a bit more genuine

I laugh in the face of danger....then I hide until it goes away."
-Xander Harris

reply

My only beef was the creepy gay pastor. WTF was up with that?

reply

That pastor was just totally weird, totally slimy! The couple of times he touched Brady my skin crawled.

reply

I just realised the pastor is played by the writer and director of the movie.

reply

That explains alot.

This is probably the worst movie I've seen in a LOOOONG time. Horrible acting, horrible writing, horrible directing. Was there an editor on this movie? And how many wistful looks out over the ocean and camera shots of wind blowns fields of flowers can one movie have?

Just plain awful on all fronts.




Clifford was cute, though. And the man was PACKING!! :)

reply

I hope someone will make continue to this
movie , bring brady and clifford together

reply

I just watched it last night and agree with you on all counts. Deadly dull, slow, the acting of the two leads was okay, but the mothers and the minister were just horrible. Badly written and set at a snail's pace. 78 minutes felt like a three hour epic. I think that the movie meant well, but just didn't work on all counts.

reply

After reading the comments on this film I have a couple of observations. For myself, I grew up going to a Presbyterian church weekly as the son of a Sunday school teacher and grandson of a deacon in an ethnic Methodist church in the Midwest. Later on I came out and moved to Manhattan, plunging into the life there.

This film seems to me to be written for the Christian boys out there growing up between the coasts to help them deal with gay feelings in an overwhelming Christian environment. For those in the major cities on the coasts it would seem to drag quite a bit, almost as though the subject could be dealt with in a 30 minute short rather than feature length. Yet it deals with issues in a none threatening way at a pace conflicted Christian boys could process the messages that being gay and Christian is OK. Consequently I could see that two different groups would rate this film very differently. Boys that would recognize themselves or friends might rate this film significantly higher than those who grew up in major cities in a more secular environment.

reply