Ein romantisches Drama des Erwachsenwerdens, das 1972 auf der Grundlage realer Ereignisse spielt.Ein romantisches Drama des Erwachsenwerdens, das 1972 auf der Grundlage realer Ereignisse spielt.Ein romantisches Drama des Erwachsenwerdens, das 1972 auf der Grundlage realer Ereignisse spielt.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
Samuel A. Levine
- Peter
- (as Sam Levine)
Matthew Walker
- Police Officer
- (as Mathew Layne Walker)
Ray Hammack
- Peter's Father
- (as Clyde Hammack)
Andrea Vaughn
- Agnes
- (as A Vaughn)
Deborah Kovarski
- Joe's Mother
- (as Deborah Kovarsky)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
This movie had so much going for it, I guess, if you saw it in a theatre. But the DVD is a challenge. The sound quality is so poor, even with my stereo surround equipment, that total scenes are inaudible, just mumbling. The blackouts between scenes are too long, making you feel that the movie has stopped. Then occasionally, you get to see a complete scene, well-lighted, and audible and you discover that the acting is quite good and the script is more than passable. It's unfair to rate this film by the lack of quality in the transfer from screen to DVD video. It's a mess...and it shouldn't be! Wait for another Gay Film Festival and hopefully someone will revive it. But if you're seeing it for the first time at home...forget it and rent "Latter Days", "The Man I Love", or "The Trip" instead.
I happened across this movie at the video store. I'd never heard of it and thought I'd give a shot. Turned out to be a good story about a guy getting a lot more out of his first semester in college than he anticipated. He's a nice guy that doesn't seem to have much direction and gets into a relationship thats great (from my point of view), but he really doesn't know what he's getting into. That's pretty much his character in a nutshell. His attitude in the opening scene is pretty much what you see throughout his experiences (and you'll want to see his experiences). I really liked this movie as I found it refreshingly different. It's set in the sixties during the war, but you really don't get the feel for that, so much, with the exception of some of the music and a story or two being told by other characters in relationship to the war. The cinematography was great. I loved the campus setting and the wooded area in which one of his professors presided.
There's a lot more I want to say, but I don't like telling too much as it destroys the experience for some. But, if you like the independent film feel you'll like this movie. If you like what Hollywood cranks out all the time then you may not like this movie. It has a small, but impacting, feel.
This film reminded me a little of, "Dreamers", with less fun and more intimacy between certain characters.
There's a lot more I want to say, but I don't like telling too much as it destroys the experience for some. But, if you like the independent film feel you'll like this movie. If you like what Hollywood cranks out all the time then you may not like this movie. It has a small, but impacting, feel.
This film reminded me a little of, "Dreamers", with less fun and more intimacy between certain characters.
I saw the world premiere of 'Eden's Curve' at the London L&G Film Festival on 6 April & was hooked. The film has a lush distinctive visual style all its own which stays in the memory long after you walk out of the movie theatre. Apparently based on real-life events in a backwoods Virginia University in the early 70s, it succeeds in conveying the spirit & look of the time with exactitude (think a grainier more sepia-tinted version of "The Ice Storm"), Ang Lee meets Jim Jarmusch.
Framed around a bisexual menage-a-trois & a young man's coming-of-age, the film is actually "about" much wider themes of identity, commitment & the limits of romanticism. Sam Levine is excellent as the lead character, a blank page waiting to be written on. Viewed from Europe though, the "real" subject of the film is the Virginia landscape, how the enormity & relative emptiness of America provoke a conflict between 'pioneer' independence & bourgeois conformity unimaginable on this side of the pond.
This is a film about mood & longing, more than about narrative or even characterisation. That means it deserves a wider audience & a good US distribution deal. It would be a tragedy if work of this quality doesn't get seen beyond the "gay film festival circuit", valuable though that is. Go See!
Framed around a bisexual menage-a-trois & a young man's coming-of-age, the film is actually "about" much wider themes of identity, commitment & the limits of romanticism. Sam Levine is excellent as the lead character, a blank page waiting to be written on. Viewed from Europe though, the "real" subject of the film is the Virginia landscape, how the enormity & relative emptiness of America provoke a conflict between 'pioneer' independence & bourgeois conformity unimaginable on this side of the pond.
This is a film about mood & longing, more than about narrative or even characterisation. That means it deserves a wider audience & a good US distribution deal. It would be a tragedy if work of this quality doesn't get seen beyond the "gay film festival circuit", valuable though that is. Go See!
I really liked this movie and gave it a score of 8 on a scale of 1 to 10. The film was a very believable story involves a young gay man coming of age in college in 1972 in either North Carolina or Virginia . Most of the characters were very good looking and enjoyable to watch. The the nude and sex scenes where shoot in a very tasteful manner, while showing the viewer the lust, sexual experimentation, and passion of their young sexy bodies. I really liked the cinematic style of shooting that was used in the movie. The events in the movie are very true to live for gay people I would recommend this film to to anyone who likes films dealing with gay life issues.
Scott in Virginia
Scott in Virginia
Okay, let's start with that this is a time piece of the 70s. Let's add this is a true story, God forbid, and taking place in rural Virginia. That's three strikes against this movie in my book.
Director and cinematographer Anne Misawa tells a tale so depressing that it really got me quite angry at the conclusion. There was no compassion, no thoughtful revelation and certainly no credit to human forgiveness. Instead of bringing some enlightenment to the tale, Miss Misawa decides to slap the viewer in the face and certainly increase homosexual distaste and violence. Thanks, Anne, for taking us back to the witch burning era. I'm sorry, even "The Crucible" had it's credibility and understanding. Check out "Latter Days" for this day and age gay stories of revelation.
Jamie Hall is credited as Assistant Director. Did he/she have any vote as to the process? The photography was sometimes impossible to follow. Mostly shot in fuzzy out of focus texture. What was this purpose? Except to make it hard to follow.
This is 2003 folks, not the 1800s. Certainly filming should have more quality than this. I hated the cinematography. Jerry Meadors and Hart Monroe can take the writing credits. Even though they make a point of saying at the end of the picture that it's based on true events, what is the purpose? Usually when you bring a story of such tragedy to the public, you should make a point. I saw no point with this. Only to depress us to the point of frustration. If this is a tribute to those depicted in the story, these writers must have either hated the tale or wanted to capitalize on the shock value. They didn't succeed in either case.
Now to the cast: Fortunately the choice of the casting was quite good. Sam Levine as Peter, Julio Pervillan as Ian and Bryan Carroll as Billy all brought believability and humaness to their roles. You felt they were trying to make the emotional focus honest and caring, even without the writers help. Trevor Lissauer as Joe, the heel, and Amber Taylor as Bess, his cohort, were well cast as the selfish hurtful friends that were bent on destroying any sensitivity that stood in their way.
I don't recommend this movie. In my thinking, it is taking the gay world back decades. It certainly is not making choices for our young teens and college students in coming out and being who they are. Instead it slaps the entire movement in the face. I ask the director and writers, if they dislike homosexuality that much. Don't see this. If you do, understand, the purpose of this type of film, even with good acting, is to bring despair to those struggling with their problems.
Director and cinematographer Anne Misawa tells a tale so depressing that it really got me quite angry at the conclusion. There was no compassion, no thoughtful revelation and certainly no credit to human forgiveness. Instead of bringing some enlightenment to the tale, Miss Misawa decides to slap the viewer in the face and certainly increase homosexual distaste and violence. Thanks, Anne, for taking us back to the witch burning era. I'm sorry, even "The Crucible" had it's credibility and understanding. Check out "Latter Days" for this day and age gay stories of revelation.
Jamie Hall is credited as Assistant Director. Did he/she have any vote as to the process? The photography was sometimes impossible to follow. Mostly shot in fuzzy out of focus texture. What was this purpose? Except to make it hard to follow.
This is 2003 folks, not the 1800s. Certainly filming should have more quality than this. I hated the cinematography. Jerry Meadors and Hart Monroe can take the writing credits. Even though they make a point of saying at the end of the picture that it's based on true events, what is the purpose? Usually when you bring a story of such tragedy to the public, you should make a point. I saw no point with this. Only to depress us to the point of frustration. If this is a tribute to those depicted in the story, these writers must have either hated the tale or wanted to capitalize on the shock value. They didn't succeed in either case.
Now to the cast: Fortunately the choice of the casting was quite good. Sam Levine as Peter, Julio Pervillan as Ian and Bryan Carroll as Billy all brought believability and humaness to their roles. You felt they were trying to make the emotional focus honest and caring, even without the writers help. Trevor Lissauer as Joe, the heel, and Amber Taylor as Bess, his cohort, were well cast as the selfish hurtful friends that were bent on destroying any sensitivity that stood in their way.
I don't recommend this movie. In my thinking, it is taking the gay world back decades. It certainly is not making choices for our young teens and college students in coming out and being who they are. Instead it slaps the entire movement in the face. I ask the director and writers, if they dislike homosexuality that much. Don't see this. If you do, understand, the purpose of this type of film, even with good acting, is to bring despair to those struggling with their problems.
Wusstest du schon
- SoundtracksAwakening
Music and Lyrics by Tony Schueller
Performed by Tony Schueller
Recorded in Taos, New Mexico
Copyright 2003
All rights reserved.
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is Eden's Curve?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 33 Min.(93 min)
- Farbe
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen