MovieChat Forums > Fair Haven Discussion > In-depth review of the movie! **Spoiler...

In-depth review of the movie! **Spoilers**


This was a hard movie to watch, for a number of reasons, but well worth the time spent. First, I'll summarize the plot, and then I'll offer my thoughts. I'll try to keep my opinion out of the summary, but...given the subject matter, it will be difficult to avoid entirely. For those who might be offended by my thoughts on the religious aspects of the film, I apologize here at the outset. Not for my thoughts on the matter, but for my inability to express them without my anger showing. I will be using quotes to frame words like 'Christianity' and 'therapy' in my review because, while they certainly bear recognizable trappings, there is little Christ-like or therapeutic to be found in the examples we get.

---

At the start of the film, 19 year old James (Michael Grant), a young gay man dreams of pursuing an education in music, is returning home to his family's apple farm (the titular Fair Haven Orchard) after spending several months at an ex-gay camp, which we learn more about through scattered flashbacks. He is met by his father, Rick (Tom Wopat), a gruff and distant authority figure who James clearly fears, who reveals to James that the young man's college plans are basically finished because the father took the boy's college fund and spent it on the failing orchard while his son was getting 'therapy'. When James expresses desire to play piano professionally - a dream he clearly cherishes, and has a chance at, given the quality of the brief performances we see throughout the film - Dad insists that James got to a tech school, and learn to run the orchard after he passes.

Believing himself to have little other recourse, James starts helping around the orchard, and one day is asked to deliver some crates to a buyer. When James arrives at the buyer, he is surprised to discover that the young man accepting deliveries is his former boyfriend Charlie (Josh Green), who is cautiously thrilled to see James and worried about what happened during his time away. James suffers a kind of existential panic, and flees, rushing home to ask - beg - to go to church, where the sermon is, of course, all about 'sin' and 'lust'. As they leave, James is rather quickly set up with the pastors daughter, Suzie (Lily Anne Harrison), a sweet girl with a promise ring and the kind of rosy-cheeked, innocent vigor for Christ that you only read about. Despite his complicated feelings about...well, EVERYTHING...James begins to date Suzie, while also re-igniting his friendship with Charlie and working with his father.

To say more would be to straight up synopsize the entire film, so I'll leave off there and move to the review.

---

First, the technical stuff...

The movie is very well acted, with the actors delving into some really complicated, and dark emotional terrain, and I can't think of one complaint about the talent on display here. The direction is subdued, giving the actors room to explore their characters and motivations. The cinematography helps capture both the wide expanses of Vermont apple country (Is that a thing? I had no idea that was a thing...) and the intense claustrophobia James must feel, trapped in his own head and burdened by the expectations of everyone around him. The soundtrack isn't obtrusive, nor is it filled with pop songs we've all heard a jillion times on the radio this week, which is nice, but does speak to the lower budget of the film. Frankly, having to slog through risible pop music to understand the dialogue of a film is one of my least favorite parts of modern movie-going, so I didn't miss it.

---

Now, the personal thoughts...

The first relationship we are introduced to is between James and his father. Rick's an alcoholic, a condescending, controlling *beep* about...everything, who refuses to allow James any latitude to decide his own course in life. He looks down his nose at 'yuppies' who come looking to buy the orchard, denigrating the concept of not using pesticides as 'not understanding farming', and laughing at them behind their back. His perception of manliness is very clearly toxic, derived from the destruction of his own emotional core, and the fact that James simply CANNOT fit into the narrow mold of manliness Rick has tried to set up for him is something he cannot abide.

So right away, we get a picture of a 'salt-of-the-earth' father who can't stand that his son wants to be an artist instead of a farmer, cannot reconcile how much his son reminds him of the wife he lost, cannot cope with the knowledge that his son is gay, and does everything he can to destroy his only child's hopes, dreams, and humanity because he thinks he knows what's best. Repeatedly throughout the film, the line 'I'm just doing what's best for you!' or some variation is used and it never loses the sting of condescension and lack of compassion that it carries the first time we hear it.

Now, to be clear, I don't believe the father is doing these things maliciously or with deliberately ill intent. He clearly loved his wife...STILL loves her...and so, DOES know what it is to love. He also DOES love his son. unfortunately for them both, he is acting out of ignorance and a belief that the things HE wants for James are better than the things JAMES wants for James. Just like his father did to him. That said, 'good' intent isn't enough to excuse abuse, and his relationship with James IS abusive on an emotional level, and it was wonderful to see Rick do some INTENSE soul searching after discovering that James is not 'fixed' by the 'therapy', and is still in love with Charlie. The scenes of James and Rick late in the film, the confrontation where father and son say terrible, hurtful things to one another and the eventual resolution - or promise of a resolution in time, is one that had me on the verge of tears due to the way it made me think about my relationship with my own dad.

The second relationship we focus on is between James and Charlie. Clearly, there were strong feelings between them at one point, given their reactions upon reuniting, and all the time away has done little to diminish those feelings. While things remain edgy and distant at first, when James learns Charlie has been beaten up by some local yokels on the way home from work, James insists on driving Charlie home from then on. It doesn't take long for the complicated feelings between the two young men to rekindle into something passionate. Charlie is quiet, charming, and sensitive, but thankfully, not portrayed as weak or 'fey'. He clearly hasn't gotten over his feelings for James (nor has James gotten over the same feelings he still has for Charlie, though they have become more complicated thanks to the conditioning he received at 'therapy'). When the flames come back, it seems they come back brighter than ever, and knowing that Charlie loves him, unconditionally, gives him the strength to accept himself and confront his father.

The third, and frankly, least substantial, relationship is between James and Suzie. The pressure to conform to certain roles is evident right away in her manner, her dress, and the decor of her bedroom. James feels pressure to 'desire' Suzie, since it's what he's been told that God wants, but simply...does not feel for her in the way that he's been told he should. Suzie, for her part, seems to really like James, though this may be simply due to her having a chance to fulfill the role she's been conditioned to accept, and she doesn't seem to have a clue about his struggle with his sexuality. This leads to a very nasty shock late in the film, when she catches James and Charlie together and reacts poorly, if believably.

Suzie is ultimately a rather tragic character, destined to be hurt in the short run by her sheltered upbringing, and to suffer deeply in the long run if she can't get out of the church to which she is anchored. But then, this is one of the inherent tragedies in this permutation of Christianity...the woman is, at best, secondary to the plot, as all that matters is the man and HIS wants and desires.

The final, and most complex, relationship I want to touch on is James' relationship with Christianity. Throughout the film, we are presented with a brand of the faith that many of us know - and loathe - all too well. You know the type..."Men are the head of the household and must never be questioned. Women are only good for making food, cleaning house, and having babies, and gays are evil and must be eradicated. With 'love'". The kind of 'Christianity' that is obsessed more with sin and judgement than it is with love and compassion.

'Doctor' Gallagher, the man who runs the 'therapy' camp, exemplifies this false teaching, as does Suzie's father, who acts towards James and Suzie's relationship as if he is all but selling off his daughter to be a brood mare. OPENLY. Gallagher is slick, charming, and clearly knows his job, using all the typical tricks: guilt, shame, double-speak, misinterpretations of Scripture, false empathy, brow-beating and threats of hellfire. The man comes across as far more deliberate - and proud - a monster than James' father, who stumbles into monsterhood somewhat unintentionally. He frames heterosexuality as the pursuit of making children to raise in the church to have more children to raise in the church to...and so on. Period. And somehow tries to convince kids that this is a desirable path to walk, whether they want kids - or heterosexuality - at all. Because Jesus. And Sin.

To be blunt, I despised this character - and Suzie's father to a lesser extent - even as I applaud the writer and the actor playing him (Gregory Harrison) for attempting to portray him somewhat even-handedly. The kind of charlatan that he represents is the absolute worst kind of false 'Christian': the sort who twists the Bible into pretzels to support a conclusion he's already reached. The kind who thrives on selling hate and calling it love; telling lies, and calling them truth, all while warping young minds with his twisted version of faith. I've known men like him - I think most of us have, even if we don't always realize it immediately - and to see one so realistically portrayed on screen was both refreshing and horrifying. This is a man who damns souls while trying to save them. A man who destroys love while claiming to preach it. This is the kind of man who causes kids to feel like death is the only way out. This is the kind of man who, if he were a Muslim fundie, would be creating suicide bombers, but because he's a "Christian', we accept it and look the other way and pretend not to see it, no matter the harm he and his teachings causes.

---

So...you've read through ALL of the above, and you want to know, "Should I see this movie?"

I think it really depends on you. If you are a member of one of the denominations of 'Christianity' which believes the things espoused by the camp and church in the film, then you will not like it. But then, you likely didn't finish the review anyway, so...who cares? If you, like me, are someone who has gone through the struggle to balance a religious upbringing and 'deviant' sexuality, has suffered abuse, however unintentional, at the hand of a distant parent, or are just the kind of person who likes a well-crafted, well-acted film about controversial subjects and human nature - one that, blessedly, doesn't end with the main character dying or losing everything or closeted and miserable - then I'd say it's worth the ticket price. And more than one viewing.

reply

I like your review of this movie and agree with most of your thoughts on the movie. The father seemed more lost than the son. Sadly, there are still these therapy places open and still do a good business preying upon people's fears despite the fact they've been proven to not work.

At first when I was watching the flashbacks between of the treatment center, I was wondering if James was just telling Gallagher what he wanted to hear rather than his real feelings. It was interesting to see James sort out the internal turmoil and be his own man by the end.

reply