I Am Michael

I really thought I would love I AM MICHAEL. The subject matter is not one that has been sensibly explored from an authentic and non- bias perspective before. I was apprehensive about James Franco's participation. While Franco is a brilliant actor, his ongoing public gay-baiting and exploitation of the gay community have reduced him to a mere instagram underwear model. however, his inclusion was salvaged when I saw the enigmatic and vastly talented Zachary Quinto was involved. Quinto is both deeply respected as an actor and doesn't have to provoke a response by portraying himself as eye- candy or demanding people question his sexuality for unnecessary attention, he is an actor, and he is masterful.

Both were great in I Am Michael. Not shockingly at all. But we can presume Quinto did it because it was an incredibly important story... and Franco did the film to continue dangling himself in front of gay men. It could have been an Oscar winner, but who can take James Franco seriously anymore in subjects that require sensitivity and respect for LGBT people in general?

The film also suffered from a devastatingly bad script. The construct was there; the dialog was broken and unnatural. It came across as quite immature and, even worse, amateur.

Director Justin Kelly failed to make the heavy content move at an acceptable pace and I found myself wanting desperately to fast forward 20 minutes, which I did, and realized I didn't miss anything except Franco wandering around open fields in slow motion... or city streets... or a park, angst ridden and boring. Really, really boring. Any impact the film could have is absolutely lost because of the ridiculously slug-like pacing and poorly constructed exchanges.

Frankly, the film felt more like a student film. A student desperate to make an important film and be taken seriously. It didn't really work. For that, there is no excuse with a powerhouse producer like Gus Van Zandt; seasoned actors Quinto and Emma Roberts and even a blink-and-you-miss-it cameo by Daryl Hannah. The responsibility here falls squarely on the shoulder of Director Justin Kelly- because he co-wrote the disastrous screenplay as well.

I can't even recommend you see this, which sort of breaks my heart because of everything I wanted it to be, but it falls short on every single level and becomes a long winded, painfully self important and unnecessary film. In the right hands, it could have been a very relevant film. Alas, it was not.

I scored this three stars for the inclusion of an amazing Tori Amos song, which coupled with a better film, could have been massively poignant.

I stumbled onto this, having never heard of Michael Glatze. As an atheist and gay man, I was intrigued to learn about this story (and kind of embarrassed to have known nothing about him already).

The performances, especially James Franco's, were excellent. He was utterly believable in expressing Glatze's changes over the course of the film - ironically enough, as mesmerizing to watch as he was in "Milk".

Yeah, parts of the film kind of drag. But the script and the acting are well done. Many of the actors do a great job conveying emotions and characters' motivations just as well non-verbally as through the dialogue. Being a gay man and an atheist I still fundamentally, profoundly disagree with Glatze's views....but this movie helped me understand him better.

People are sheep. They really are. Why can't a person be gay and spiritual? Why? So many gay people have been wrongfully led to believe that god hates them and by hypocrites! Hypocrites that don't live by the Bible themselves. All the hate people endured over one vague line in the Bible.

Most gay people live typical lives. They hurt no one. They don't live in the urban mainstream of partying and promiscuity.

Why are people led to believe they must choose between being a religious monk and a wild so called gay lifestyle? Reality is in between.

Be an individual. Choose what will make YOU happy and don't speak for anyone else.

Audiences are first introduced to Michael Glatze (James Franco) as he chastises a young gay teenager and declares moral individuals choose heterosexuality and God. However, this was not always the case with Mr. Glatze. Rewind the story a decade and we find Michael living happily in San Francisco with his partner Bennett (Zachary Quinto) as he works as the Managing Editor of XY Magazine, a popular gay lifestyle publication. Glatze encouraged gay communities to identify with their sexuality, but after a medical scare revolving around his potential heart condition, Glatze begins his journey exploring Christianity and abandoning his former beliefs and lifestyle. Franco beautifully portrays an obviously confused individual questioning his own mortality and willing to risk everything he's built his life around. Quinto offers the supporting shoulder as he is forced to move forward into an uncertain future with the love of his life. Director Justin Kelly effectively leads audiences though the life of a confused individual who abandons one life for another while outsiders both ridicule and praise his challenging choice. -Jimmy Martin

I approached this move with curiosity, I knew the story wouldn't please me, but the unpleasantness and the challenging of it, ( would it defy my beliefs or ideas?, would it reveal me something new, unknown? or would I just learn something, whatever...?) plus the main actors, so gay friendly, and therefore unlikely to act in a biased, bad or religious preaching movie, drove me to watch it.

I expected the sad story of a gay activist abducted by religious beliefs..... and that's what it is: a gay man in which the fear for his own death and the afterlife, the search for a sort rock of stability and reconciliation with a dodgy conception, a misrepresentation, of the idea god, leads him to buy all the christian made up merchandise about it.

I like the even, unbiased approach, showing the conversion in an objective and balanced manner but I find it too plane, sometimes boring, I miss a deeper approach to the psychology of that process, and a bit more challenge of the christian ideas and faulty reasoning that wreak havoc in Glatze's mind by the other characters in the movie.

The answer to the questions I started with is a cold NO.

My view on M. Glatze personal conversion story: I understand the fear of death and the longing for and afterlife, but and adult, empiric, scientific and properly reasoning and educated mind should know and be aware of a few things:

1.- Nobody knows anything about god. God has never spoken to any human being no matter how many of those men claimed so, because they could never prove it. If god wanted to communicate with us he/she/it certainly would have many blunt ways to do so: showing in the sky like Woody allen's mom, or in any other direct manner. So, until it can be proven, beyond doubt, in a scientific way, his existence can NOT be asserted. 2.- The Bible is NOT god's word, but man's word speculating about God's nature and plans with the huge ignorance of the times it was written. this is so obvious that is almost shameful having to say it.

3.- The idea of salvation and the promise of the afterlife is an old trick of all religions to impose fear and gather power and money from people. Selling salvation is a lucrative business, especially since they sell a good or service they don't have to pay spend any money in, and for which they can no be held accountable if is not delivered. Amazon delivery policies and regulations are way more advanced and fair than this.

I seriously recommend

• the videos and books of Richard Dawkins, like God delusion,
• and the experience of Daniel Everett, a missionary that lost faith to Amazonian tribe Piraha.