Save Me

There is a whole list of things I liked about this movie. Though it has some flaws, they are far outshone by the good.

The setting of the movie and the approach to the characters is brilliant. Most movies that show non-urban, non-coastal US cities fall into a trap of playing the setting and the characters for laughs, or at least exaggerating the local color for effect (witness Coen Brothers movies, for example). This movie didn't fall into the self-conscious exaggeration, which inevitably keeps the audience at a distance. Instead, it shows most things in a very human level--you're not looking down on, or sideways at, or with an outsider's view of the people or situation. This is the water you're swimming in. You're there to witness what is going on without the self-conscious, ironic and "precious" aspects that many directors are afraid to leave behind. This view of the rural West feels very genuine (and I know because I've lived there before).

The acting by Judith Light and Stephen Lang is phenomenal and that by Chad Allen and Robert Gant is very good. The large cast of supporting actors is largely very good, too. It becomes even more amazing that they pulled this off when the movie makers undoubtedly were working on a shoe-string budget. The performances are better than many big budget movies. The script allows for complex characters and the acting is nuanced.

The production values are similarly good for the small budget: beautiful filming, a good musical score and songs that worked just right for the tone.

There is a sense of space and stillness that allows things to breathe and it's a little bit "Zen" once the movie gets going. I didn't find the first few scenes of the movie fit in particularly well with the rest of the tone, but it was a minor annoyance. Some people may be expecting more of an emotional roller-coaster. The script and the direction were taken in a different direction than "hero-against-conspiring-world." You're meant to identify with different aspects of many characters and not only see things from a single perspective. It's harder to maintain a singular emotional intensity based on this focus. I found it quite effective for what it set out to accomplish (not what some reviewers wished it had accomplished instead).

A minor quibble is that some of the quiet lines were hard to hear and understand (though it could've been bad audio compression artifacts since I watched it on Netflix instant watch so it was not full DVD quality).

You really should see this movie if you care about any of the themes it addresses or you love to watch good acting.

This is NOT a gay romance, or gay love story (even though there is a kiss and some meaningful / longing looks). I never developed a feeling I was seeing true romantic love. However, I was often noting something that purported to be religious love. So, no, you're not going to see any memorably well-done love scenes such as witnessed in the movie, "Shelter" (definitely need more films like that one). Instead, this is a "Message Film".....a tale of persons / organizations who aim to remold who people are----to remake people's innermost selves. BUT.......as a viewer you should remain aware that, in the end, such a goal is not going to be successful. Still, there will be cases / instances of supposedly successful personality change presented in order to convince us otherwise (just know that if personality alterations are brought about, they will be surface ones only).

Through the way this film has been set up, and especially in its ending, it is almost as though we are being expected to just accept that a deep romantic love was / had been taking place. Well, I'm sorry; I didn't sense it happening between characters, Mark and Scott. Lips meeting, dancing with one another, building bird houses together are not enough for me; they are all just surface acts. The two actors filling these roles weren't able to produce that "magic"......that "whatever-it-is" which I was given in the film, "Shelter." In that movie, I knew I had watched love begin and grow. (Interesting then, isn't it, that "Shelter" contains the heterosexual leads and "Save Me" the gay ones). Admittedly, I do recognize that perhaps most of "Save Me" was not written / planned to focus on a "couple" but, rather, was aimed at exposing overzealousness by some in the religious community and their need to "reform" homosexuals. Having said this, I'll now step aside and leave commenting on that aspect of this production to filmgoers far more qualified than I.

As to the performers, a subject on which I'm able to comment: Judith Light is near-phenomenal (you'll never, never, ever relate her to that TV "Ugly Betty" role). Here, before your very eyes, she BECOMES the message of this film. No one else can touch her. We can see Chad Allen trying, as we watch him with her in their one-on-one scenes. Sitting together in a truck at one point, we can almost see his efforts to absorb and keep up with what Light is putting out there----a special ability of hers that not all actors possess. Yet, in his own way, Allen does acquit himself quite well in this film. Then.....there's Robert Gant: I've followed much of Bobby's performing, from his 2002 "Providence" (TV) performance, on up to today. My best impression / description of his acting style is that it's a "tentative" one; he's tentative, subdued. It's like you're always waiting for him to break out----but he almost never takes you to that point. In the end, that's frustrating for an audience. And yet.......few actors project "sincerity" in a character any better than Gant does. In one last point about another longtime thesp, Stephen Lang comes across very admirably.......and when you're able to do that when playing against Light's extraordinary performance, you really are accomplishing something.

To say that this is not a good film, I cannot do. But I expected more.........I hoped for more. (This will not make it to my "Addictive" DVD shelves).

****

"Save Me" starts with a drug and sex addicted, care-free man named Mark. After a suicide attempt and being released from the hospital, his elder brother pays a Christian Rehabilitation House for two months of his stay. This is no "ordinary" rehabilitation house. It's a rehabilitation for men. GAY men. Mark is gay and is placed into this "Genesis"house ran by Gayle and her husband Ted. The goal of "Genesis" is to "cure" Mark, and the fellow house members consisting of several other men who've each been there different amount of times, of this "affliction" society likes to call "Homosexuality", in hopes that Mark and the others can learn to lead the "right" path and follow in the footsteps of Christ. This is where it all begins.

One thing I truly like about this movie is that it is NOT afraid to cross the boundaries of Religion and one of the biggest taboos in society. Stereotype Christians constantly seem to be at war here with society about what gets you into hell and what gets you into heaven, and that if you do not live by God's Word, (The Bible) that you will be damned for all Eternity. This movie isn't afraid to cross that line and say, "You know what?! This isn't correct." And, "What if...?". It's not afraid to question the rules, the rules that were always MEANT to be followed with no questions asked. This movie DOES ASK those questions, resulting in an amazing final outcome.

I myself as a Christian gay male have been asking myself these questions for YEARS, not ever getting a straight answer. I was either shunned, called a hypocrite, or immediately hit in the face with Bible quotes I was already well aware of; pointless. If you have an open mind, or are/have been in a similar situation, or just want to see a DAMNED good movie, then this one is definitely worth sitting down and watching.

"when i have doubts i know it's just god testing my faith"

Gayle said that in the middle of the movie. I found this totally unbelievable.

I may not be Christian but i absolutely don't understand that kind of thinking if you have doubts about your life, you think about why you're having them doubts don't come out of nowhere,and you rethink your purposes, why you follow the guideline you're following, what made you think like this in the first place and how you're feeling about it now. Doing something just because you've always done so is just stupid it prevents you from becoming someone better and really learn who you are. In this case Gayle just help them with her philosophy when then are in need of something like that and I feel they simply never question it again, it helped them so it has to be the only perfect way for everyone.

am i the only one here?

This story touches on a very sensitive subject that some film makers in the past have tried to put a story to.(and usually failed) A shout out to the cast and director for having the courage to portray such a story without villianizing or stereotyping either side of the spectrum. It really shows the need to open communication lines for two drastically different people to find some common ground and be able to love each other as human beings. Judith Light was phenomenal in her role as Gayle, a deeply religious woman who, with her husband, runs a church and privately funded house to help men fix their "sexual broken-ness", driven by her own inner termoil and personal experience. Layered with great performances by Chad Hall and Robert Gant contributes to a very eye-opening and touching film.