Change Your Image
mythopoeic
Reviews
I Want to Get Married (2011)
Worst LGBTQ movie I've ever seen
Without a doubt, this is the worst LGBTQ movie I've ever seen, which is a shame because it really had some premise at the time it was released. Matthew Montgomery was cast as the lead, and at the time he was starring as as the gay male lead in a lot of movies. He wasn't ever undeniably "great" but he was decent and I actually enjoyed a lot of his movies. In this role, however, William Clift directs his performance abysmally. He doesn't come across as cute, or endearing, or even likeable; he's socially inept to the point of autism, unable to communicate with others either vocally or physically outside of his professional arena (which makes no sense), and his face twitches and contorts more often than a hamster's nose.
All of this being said, there were three bright spots (unfortunately, even they weren't enough to raise the bar on this used litter box). They were: 1) Peter Stickles (been crushing on this man for almost 15 years now) but who is sorely underused; 2) Emrhys Cooper, who is also so striking to look at that it makes it embarassing to overlook his completely underdeveloped character; and 3) Dylan Vox, who uses his unflappable sense of self-deprecating humor (his scene was the only true laugh this movie brought out of me) in a very funny, albeit completely over-the-top scene between he and Montgomery.
I think this is long enough so I'm not even going to get too in-depth about the inane subplot with Montgomery's parents, who are so profoundly inept that they should be confined to a facility providing Lvl III Elderly Care. Nor will I speak to the GOP-level of caricature of the only non-white characters throughout this movie.
It's not merely that this movie is dated (which it is, despite only being 7 years old) but more importantly that it's THAT BAD. Tremendously, horribly, cringe-inducingly bad. I try to have patience with some of the LGBTQ movies that paved the way for the more modern approach but even I can't bring myself to find a reason that this movie should ever be viewed again. BY ANYONE.
The Art of Being Straight (2008)
Has not aged well
In light of the recent developments in Hollywood, I think a lot of people will find this movie quite offensive. The character of Paul is the protagonist's professional superior yet invites him to his home and engages in absolutely unprofessional and sexually harassing behavior in order to seduce him. Irrelevant to how this is meant to set up the rest of the plot, I think that this will be more than sufficient to some of today's audience to completely tune out. Personally, while I found Paul to be a disgusting predator what ultimately turned me off about rhia movie were the rest of the unsympathetic characterizations, tepid conflict development, and unengaging subplots. I try to have a bit of patience with LGBTQ themed movies but unfortunately I cannot recommend this one in good conscience.
Neverland (2003)
grand experiment that falls flat
I agree with the other commentary on this movie. This movie is interesting in that it takes an otherwise "children's story" and sets in a hyper-reality, very much adult, setting. This allows the more adult aspects of the story to be explored. Adult issues such as drug abuse, sexual "norm" deviance, and avoidance of responsibility take center stage in this update.
While a grand experiment, this movie ultimately failed for me on several levels:
The cast of characters is far too large to allow for meaningful character development for ANY of the characters. The most prominent victims of this flaw are the lost boys. There are too many of them, and as such their decision to follow Wendy and leave Neverland seems more of a plot device than a real decision on their part, as is Peter's ultimate decision to return to Neverland alone.
The Darling kids' decision to leave their home in the first place home was another problematic issue for me. Sure, they try to explain it during Wendy's "story" to the Lost Boys in Tiger Lily's dressing room, but as is the case with literary writing, showing is always better than telling. And the short sequence with the parents in the beginning is not enough to show me the kids' rationale. Wendy telling it to me just didn't cut it.
And then there's the acting. Oh, the acting. "Bad acting" is being kind. It's a shame that an experiment of this caliber couldn't gain major funding and established actors, because the premise is fabulous. I find it very interesting that through most of the movie, the acting is horrendous from each member of the cast; however, the actors playing Wendy and Peter show their real chops during the last scene they play together. They both moved me incredibly during this final scene, and the fact that they were able to do so clearly demonstrates to me that the problem (at least for these two) was not the acting, it was the writing and direction. Both actors seem promising during this final scene, languishing in otherwise poor material. This movie felt like the writer began with the final scene and worked backward.
Overall, I love the premise. I related to Wendy's concern for the drug-addled man-boy refusing to grow up because, yeah, I've dated him, and she completely conveyed the frustration in trying to break through the haze and reach him intellectually. The DVD is watchable, although grainy in parts and particularly blurred during the pirate dungeon scene. Watchable once.
Freddy vs. Jason (2003)
Inventive, although revisionist
Final battle aside, I found this movie to mostly be an interesting merger between the two movie franchises. Granted, I went into the movie with pretty low expectations, so I wasn't terribly disappointed.
Given, the main female protagonist is NO Nancy by any stretch of the imagination.
*spoiler*
She spends far too many scenes with "a single tear" running down her cheek (COME ON!!!) to be effective as the Empowered Woman who ultimately delivers the final line (Welcome to my world...) as she chops off Freddy's head.
OH, and as to revisonism, since when can Freddy speak through living voices (the stoner in the hall) and kill awake people (the friend who cries "help me" through the window). UGH. I did love the caterpillar reference to "Alice in Wonderland" though.
*end spoiler*
Ironically, I found the final battle to be the least interesting part of the movie. Up to that point, I was at least interested in the ways the two franchises were being merged.
The gore was cheesy (a la Tarantino's "Kill Bill Vol. 1") but it worked. The boys all had too much body hair to be believably high school age. And the entire final battle scene was hokey and anticlimactic.
Overall, the movie lacks suspense for those of us "desensitized" by the original franchises and ultimately falls apart during the final act.
Strangely, despite all these complaints, I didn't think it was that terrible for what it was. I'm glad I didn't pay to see it in theaters. Then again...I didn't think that "Jason X" was that terrible, and I was glad I didn't pay to see that in theaters either. This one wasn't as bad as "Freddy's Dead," now THAT was terrible.
Overall, don't expect too much from this movie and you'll be fine. And absolutely do NOT expect this movie to re-ignite the genre.