Reseñas de usuarios

I saw this film by accident on the TV one day.

It really started me thinking, in this day of gene mapping and in-utero genetic testing becoming safer. What would happen if they did find a gene that predisposes a person to homosexuality?

Would parents get tested and what would they do about it?

This will always be a controversial issue but there are many factors at play not the least, religion, society acceptance, family pressure, and cultural influences.

How do you go if you are anti abortion but also anti gay? Okay I know in reality that someone who was anti abortion would probably not have the test but this is the kind of issues that get raised.

Today in many countries/religions homosexuality is not accepted and they are persecuted. Would you if you lived in that area want your child to go through all of that?

It would be a dilemma. I thought the film handled the issue quite well.

There was a lot of conflict as you would expect. There was the son who asked his mother that if she had known would she have had an abortion. The feeling I got was that despite the fact she said she accepted him she didn't really and would of preferred a son who was not homosexual, he was then questioning her acceptance of him, also that of his sister.

I think I would of left the ending hanging to make people make their own minds up but understand this was a daytime TV movie and so had to have a feel good ending.

A suburban Jewish family with a married daughter and a gay son (Jennifer Beals and Brendan Fraser, respectively) have their ups and downs until the film poses the question: What would you do if you knew your child would almost certainly be gay? Though most enlightened people would say DUH!! What's the difference?, this story takes the premise and goes with it.

THE TWILIGHT OF THE GOLDS is a made-for-Showtime film, and not of theatrical quality. This is unfortunate, as it would have made an excellent theatrical release. The cast is good, but performances are a bit scattered. Somehow, Faye Dunaway doesn't hit me as the Jewish Mother type. But Brendan Fraser can do no wrong. If I wasn't already gay, I would turn gay for him! It was originally a play--- it would play beautifully on stage. Still, the film is worth seeing.

This bold, worrying dramatic comedy embarks upon the concern of a thus far fictional form of genetic testing that would ascertain the sexual orientation, among other things of course, of an unborn child. When Suzanne Gold-Stein, played by the beautiful Jennifer Beals, is told by her disconcerted husband that their son is destined to be gay, she contemplates aborting the fetus, much to the pent-up rage and panic of her gay brother, a normally happy-go- lucky creative whose sexual orientation has never been completely accepted and certainly never embraced by the Gold family.

The story gallantly hits on the nature and wrongful persecution of homosexuals. Early in the story, one can hardly believe how dramatic the Gold family's reaction is when the genetic discovery is made, how they can hardly say the word "gay," something one of their own flesh and blood naturally is. It's a very scary story, one that threatens humanity with itself, knowingly projecting a nightmarish perception of what may come when we truly make a technological breakthrough that actually benefits civilization, telling a fortunate story of a mere handful of characters who learn true acceptance, and not all of them do, for it just might be hopeless to end the neverending, inexplicable prejudice that plagues our progression and co-existence.

When a pastor, for instance, claims that if everyone were gay, there would be no society, he must also reflect upon the idea that if everyone were a pastor, there would be no society due to the vow of chastity. In fact, if everyone had in common any sort of orientation, there would be no society because everyone would be essentially the same. That is what is so scary about the film's suggested prediction of genetic testing for pregnancy. If people can successfully and knowingly avoid having gay, biracial, handicapped, autistic, or any other sort of a parent's less than preferable idea of a baby, society will slowly disappear.

To deny not only the rights and acceptance of homosexuals, but to also deny them existence, is to deny those of the countless gay and bi people of notoriety who've contributed so much to culture: social reformer Jane Addams, Billie Joe Armstrong of Green Day, writers Edward Albee, James Baldwin, Alan Ball, Djuna Barnes, Alan Bennett, William S. Burroughs, Samuel Butler, Truman Capote, Noel Coward, Hart Crane, Quentin Crisp, Michael Cunningham, E.M. Forster, Michel Foucault, Nigel Hawthorne, Walt Whitman, Tennessee Williams, painters Francis Bacon, Jean-Michael Basquiat, filmmakers Pedro Almodóvar, Alejandro Amenábar, Kenneth Anger, Marcel Carné, Jean Cocteau, George Cukor, Sergei Eisenstein, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Todd Haynes, James Ivory, Gus Van Sant, costume designer Edith Head, singers Melissa Etheridge, Billie Holiday, actors Mario Cantone, Rupert Everett, Harvey Fierstein, Stephen Fry, Nathan Lane, Charles Laughton, Anthony Rapp, composers Samuel Barber, Leonard Bernstein, Benjamin Britten, Aaron Copland, Francis Poulenc, Stephen Sondheim, Tchaikovsky, actresses Ellen DeGeneres, Portia de Rossi, Cherry Jones, Jodie Foster, Mayor of West Hollywood John Duran, et cetera. The more we "straight" people socialize with, give birth to, and acknowledge the historically positive effect of homosexuals, there will be more of a face given to the gay, bisexual, and lesbian community. We will see that they are of the same nature, fears, and hardships as the rest of us. The movie's hypothesis scares me that that face could be taken away.

If only this incredible story had been supplied with a stronger sense of production value. It feels like a TV movie. It isn't given any atmosphere or visceral power, which would have done wonders for it. The cast is great, most memorably Brendan Fraser, although Faye Dunaway is miscast. She does not seem at home in her role as Fraser's mother. It seems more of an Anne Bancroft role, for instance. The constant use of David Bowie's Under Pressure on the soundtrack seems exchangeable with so many other pop songs, the camera-work is simple point-and-shoot lack of precision and if certain things like that were given more attention, this could have been a really great film.

I've seen so many negative comments about this film, and I have none...I thought the acting, subject matter and direction was straightforward and thought provoking. The film's matter-of-fact tone about the possibility of determining orientation force the viewer to deal with the issues presented here, making the discussion intense. Performances all good here, and we're reminded of the acting power of both Brendan Fraser and Jennifer Beals, who thoroughly impressed me here, not to mention the film's biggest surprise, Garry Marshall, who turns in a really solid performance as their father. Seek this out and enjoy an intelligent, well done film.

I have avoided watching this movie (or seeing the play upon which it is based) because I expected that it would be sort of low-quality and very "preachy." But, somehow I ended up with a VHS copy and fortunately in working my way through my VHS shelf, I got to it and threw it in the VCR for a look.

To my surprise, the film is actually pretty good. The number of strong actors in the cast helps a lot. I expected the storyline to feel mechanical but (although it is not wildly original and doesn't veer too far from where you'd expect) it actually is a step or two better than the the normal family-in-crisis-TV-movie. The actions and reactions of the characters feel reasonably realistic and not simply designed to create drama or lay out a series of points of view. And the author seems to assume that his audience has some intelligence, making his points without having any characters stand in front of a camera and "speechify." There are a couple of sort of annoying gay clichés that I would have loved to edit out, but nothing too wildly stupid.

And, of course, the underlying questions raised in the film about the coming problem of genetic engineering are both interesting and scary (and are related to any number of human characteristics beyond sexual orientation.) All-in-all, not a movie to set the world on fire, but a pretty solid and reasonably engaging piece of entertainment.

This film is quite a departure from some of the fluff films that

Brendan Fraser has been in. He turns in a fine performance as the gay brother whose sister and brother-in-law must decide whether or not to abort a child who will most likely be gay. The film examines the temptation to avoid the complications of having a gay child, as well as the repercussions of even considering such a choice

The movie was a wonderful portrayal of the difficult choices facing women who undergo genetic testing on unborn children. It shows the anguish that too much knowledge can bring, as well as the callous outlook society has on certain types of physical or emotional differences. In this case, homosexuality. The views expressed in this movie are horrifying, and unfortunately, all too common. It's awful in its realness, the foundation for movies like 'Gattaca'. Really makes you wonder. I suggest this movie strongly. It should have gotten bigger publicity, especially with debates raging about genetic testing lately.

I am actually embarrassed for the playwright who sold out in order to make this story "acceptable" for television. Not every story has a happy ending...kind of like life.

This film was touching. It will make people question their beliefs and raises a lot of moral questions. The casting was very well choosen. Bredan Fraser does a wonderful job of playing a gay man torn over his families dilemma of having another gay child. It is a far stretch from his boy next door image.It shows his ability to portray a wide variety of characters. His sister, played by Jennifer Beals, is pregnant with a child that may possibly be gay. Her and her husband find out, through genetic testing, that their unborn child may grow up to be gay. Her family tries to help her decide if she should keep the child. Since David ( Fraser) is gay he causes his family to deal with the issue in a way they are not prepared to do. His family does not want to make this child suffer as David has. It will make you question yourself as to if there are somethings better off not to know. For instance is genetic testing for such things right and what would you do in that situation? I think this movie is worth watching.

I saw the play during out of town tryouts. Although I thought it needed some serious editing, I generally liked it. Raphael Sbarge (not Jason Gould) was a marvelous leading man and Jennifer Grey was a revelation. I have never seen a worse screen adaptation of a very good play in my life. The casting is astonishing. Grey believably traversed the gamut of human emotion from joy to consuming regret. Even award winners like Dunaway and Fraser fall short. Really, really short. No one here gets out alive. I was expecting the worst and I wasn't disappointed. Playwright/Screenwriter Tolins should have known better.

I really liked this film, but I hated most of the people in it. Brendan Fraser and his lover were very likeable, but I found myself wishing the other family members would go bury themselves in a hole. I especially hated the father, what a jerk. It is, however, a movie worth seeing because it is an interesting topic. But as I watched it, I found myself thinking, "Kid MIGHT be gay? Who cares? Does it really matter?!" Stupid homophobic family, I thought they'd be more accepting with David in the family.

I was about to turn the video recorder off after about 10 minutes, but something kept me going, and I'm glad it did.

Feye Dunaway is thoroughly annoying as the Jewish Mama (talk about an unfortunate piece of casting! Sorry, Ms. Dunaway - you've done brilliant work in your life, but you shouldn't have taken this role). Garry Marshall should also stick to producing and directing and not venture in front of a camera. Thanks to the talented Brendan Fraser and Jennifer Beals, I stayed with it, despite the - at times - heavy-handed writing and the over-the-top acting of Ms. Dunaway and Garry Marshall.

The script is a disaster, but at the end of the day, it actually has something very important to say for itself. I have never seen the subject of homophobia dealt with so directly and with such bravado as in this film. It's in your face; you can't escape it...and that's exactly the intent of this film. It asks uncomfortable questions, and gives uncomfortable answers. I just wish that Jonathan Tolins and Seth Bass had given their script to a good script doctor. They were definitely going in the right direction, and deserve praise for the effort - just didn't quite capture it on the page.

Again, Fraser and Beals are brilliant, and there are additional bon bons: Rosie O'Donnell and Jon Tenney also give memorable performances.

Bottom line: an important film that should be seen, although not perfect, but hey, what is?!

Unbelievably insightful movie with a profound look at how science may or may not help us in life's decisions. Absolute must see for all. Leaves you asking as many questions as philosophies you faced. Sometimes knowing all the facts keep us from dealing with life on its own terms.

A couple does all kinds of genetic testing on their unborn child to make sure it has no genetic defects, diseases, etc. What they find out is that the kid is probably gay. This raises a lot of philosophical questions for the couple (the mother especially since her brother David(Brendan Fraser) is gay). The only movie I've seen that depicts both science AND organized religion in a negative light. The movie tackles several issues including how homosexuels are treated in the home and whether or not genetic testing is immoral. For that reason, this movie is definitely worth seeing. BUT Early in the film, when the test results are first revealed, I actually laughed. 'Is that all? Who cares!' were my thoughts. Then, for half the movie, the extremely annoying couple actually considers aborting the child. 'Your so annoying! Who cares?!' But see the movie anyway, it really is worth seeing.

I found this film to be very offensive, because it make the "homosexual" seem to be a "disease" that people should try to stop. No matter what anyone's child is, the mother and father should love them no matter what, even though the happy ending makes everyone think that she's the good one for what she chooses, but still...she's not because of even the thought of having an abortion knowing how the kid will turn out in a few years is bad 'parenting' or whatever you want to call it. I felt that the ending was to unreal, this is the 90s and people hold grudges, if this was a true story I don't think David would have done what he did at the end, EVEN though it was touching and good because everyone wants to see family's together at the end. Call me stupid and wrong, but I think that he really would have not done what he did at the end, knowing that he might not be here on earth if they had this kind of technology back then when he was born. I know that's wrong, but it's true. Faye Dunaway was excellent, as was Brendan Fraser.

All and all, I liked this movie, even though it was kind of pathetic and offensive.

The first and foremost thing to say about this movie is to note that it is a Fantasy! The jury is still out on the old nature/nurture debate about homosexuality, nor are we yet in the era of "designer babies." So after I got over my feelings of being manipulated by this script to consider a non-reality issue (that sneaked up on me too), I settled in to watch and listen to how it was handled.....and I have to admit, my verdict is "pretty well." The movie avoided all the stridency and preachiness which are endemic to politically correct/ disease-of-the week topics. It was painful to see Brendan Fraser's character wince as he witnessed his parent's feelings about his sexuality, but the movie allowed the parents their feelings too, and one even felt that it was courageous of them to be so honest about their own struggle. Everyone fared pretty well (except the daughter's husband, who for some reason was the "fall guy" and took the hit). The real hero in this drama was the boyfriend, who diffused some of the emotion in the family (no walk in the park). The characters were complex and believable, if the overall premise was not. But that's why we say "It's only a movie."