Reseñas de usuarios

"Guy" (Matthew Jaeger) is sitting on a park bench contemplating Plato when he is approached by the rather uncouth builder "Doug" (Robert Mammana) who has heard that this is a place to go for some easy sex. Initially, the former is uninterested but a conversation sets things in motion that starts the ball rolling on a relationship that goes on to challenge both men's perceptions of what is gay, straight, and of what love actually means. I rather liked this even though it is scripted to within an inch of it's life - "do you realise how dead that food is?". The gloomily lit photography looks, much of the time, as though the entire thing has been shot on one camera and edited together using sellotape and lots of good will and it has a stolid presentation that takes some getting used to. All of that said, however, once it builds up an head of steam there is an obvious, quite natural and basic, dynamic between "Guy" and "Doug" and it does work well in this theatre-style multi-set one stage environment. The two performances - particularly Jaeger's - are sensitive, occasionally funny and the dialogue looks at attraction and stereotype but in a slightly observational, and therefore less static fashion. The ending is slightly predictable - despite efforts to tempt a stray cat with vegetarian tuna, but proves testament to the triumph of love over almost all human-made rules and constricts and spins a theory about "Sleeping Beauty" that you're unlikely to have encountered before.

This movie may have its issues (the dialogue can be somewhat painful at times, as can the direction) but there are two big saving graces in this film that make it worth a watch: Matthew Jaeger and Robert Mammana. Both actors fit into their roles wonderfully and their chemistry feels very genuine; simple, natural, and therefore, it is easy to invest in their characters' main conflict - that is, the idea of love that transcends socially constructed sexual definitions.

The art direction is also fairly interesting - rather than the standard, the film is shot in a direct stage-to-film aesthetic - one set, dramatic lighting, and the simplicity works in it's favour, though it can seem heavy-handed at times.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Something different, with two amazing performances that will stay with you.

.........ending. And you know what? We deserve it!

Having seen years of gay film productions (particularly romances) on video tape, Laser and DVD, for me most have been crap (any disagreement?). BUT....this one can take a proud and high position in the Top-12 of gay dramas. Excellent writing/conversion to screen, great staging.......they're in here. Still and all, it's Matthew Jaeger (Guy / Guido) and Robert Mammana (Doug) who breathe life into this work and into Us as we watch. Captivated and drawn into their simple lives, we see them become Us---you and me. That's right, who out here wouldn't want a man of openness, raw needs, funniness......wouldn't "physically" want such a man as Doug? Would anyone of us turn down a Guy's perceptiveness, depth of feeling, and indefinable ability to draw us out of ourselves?

So in the end, this whole thing (this "Just Say Love") has fallen to and been carried on the shoulders of these two amazing actors---actors who didn't just learn lines....but who lived their parts. In tribute to them, I feel compelled to say I can think of no past performers in gay filmdom who could have done better. Can you?

PS--Oh...and if Guy wasn't "disappointed".....how could we be?

(( I awarded "Brokeback" a 9/10. This work is close in satisfaction given ))

I tired very quickly of Guy's helplessness and whining and began to focus on that horrific lump on the left side of his face, which I think needs a biopsy.

This was originally a play. The movie is a filmed version. The writing and acting are first rate. Very emotional journey for the two protagonists one of whom is openly gay, while the other is supposedly straight. They meet in a park and decide to hook up for some quick sex. They keep meeting, and the gay guy falls hard for the straight guy. I was pleased with the ending. So many gay themed dramas feel the need to kill one or more of their characters. It was a pleasant change to watch a life affirming story.

The film is about two guys meeting up for a quicky, ending up in a sort-of no-strings-attached situation (with all the derived clichés). The one guy is a wannabe-witty-but-omg-whiner who endures an emotionally abusive relationship, while the other one, supposedly straight, enjoys a good ... service once in a while. Two thirds of the movie turn around the gay guy swallowing down indirect insults (for everyone who has even a little self-respect) just to meet again with the "hero" he's hopelessly fallen for, while in the last few minutes everything gets miraculously resolved in a Disney-like happy ending (which couldn't be further from any realistic outcome possible). The whole takes play on a minimalistic theater stage (something that might have worked for Dogville but pathetically fails here, since there is no real plot substance to substitute for the stage props missing). Characters do not really evolve, conflicts are not analyzed and resolved but unexpectedly disappear, while cinematography is on purpose absent (I do not consider changing the filming angle cinematography). Matthew Jaeger and Robert Mammana do a decent job trying to act, but the script is so shallow, that they have nothing to work with.

The film is supposed to be an adaptation of a stage play by David J. Mauriello (although googling for the original play didn't result in any information whatsoever). The story might have been enough for a ten-minute short film at best (in which case the development and the catharsis are left as homework to the viewers), but nothing longer. If the author wantonly recites Plato, he should first know (and apply) Aristotele's definition of Greek tragedy (theater 101).

Last-minute addition: Reading my review again, I realized that I may be overreacting (in fact much more than usually in my critiques), but watching it made me angry. I decided not to soften my tone because I don't want others to also waste their time (or if they do, to at least be aware of the risk they're taking). The most important reason for my anger, however, is the subtle insinuation throughout the movie, that enduring an emotional abuse may magically pay off in the end.

The uncluttered staging of this work allowed the viewer to concentrate on the performers and what was being said. The impact was visceral, and yet the subject matter of the dialogue intellectually stimulating. Performances by Jaeger and Mammana were outstanding. The emotional intensity just below the surface was gripping. Someone finally expressed what I have felt in my life.

Scenes like waiting at the corner were so expressive....no need for words! I've been there.

For a love story, this movie is oddly formal, stylized and cold. It is a lot like kabuki, the highly formal, highly stylized classical Japanese dance/drama. It is the most tightly scripted and choreographed movie I have ever seen: not one word, not one gesture by either character is spontaneous. It feels more like very expertly executed computer animation than like two human men falling in love.

I think the basic problem is the Platonic philosophy that dominates and runs insistently through the whole play. That philosophy - that the body is only a shallow, essentially meaningless reflection of spiritual reality - is itself so cold and so formal that it practically demands a treatment like this.

That is sad. This could have been touching and meaningful, but it ends up being just very well executed technique on the part of everyone involved: the director, actors, set designer, cinematographer, etc. Like kabuki, it is fascinating to watch, but the fascination is purely intellectual, just like Plato. It is a peculiar and unsatisfying way to tell a love story.

I started watching it thinking it was going to be a how to i erase this.

The back and forth of the conversation on the bench, my thought was this guy should get up and run. But it was brilliantly written that i had to keep watching their exchange. Was the guy not quite right? Were they both not quite right?

The acting of both characters was really spot on and believable.

I have had conversations with someone that I was not sure if i should run away. And stayed.

The fantasy part of doug returning was confusing . Did he really or was it a dream?

I watched it until the end.

And did not think how do I get this time back? As with many movies.

Really liked it.

As to my crazy conversation, we became friends. And i think of him often. And hope he is safe, he moved away.