Regarde-moi dans les yeux

This movie is all about the dialogue and the acting, and both are excellent. Very little happens other than two characters talking honestly, intelligently, and naturally with each other, and so the success of the entire film rests on the audience being interested in the conversation, and liking the characters enough to stick with them. I did.

The film kept my attention throughout, and was nicely photographed and edited, without reinventing the wheel or distracting with needless artsy-fartsy imagery. A simple story, simply told.

A note on the Netflix certificate: Netflix displays an 18 certificate with the warning "strong sex". This is patently absurd, since the two or three sex scenes in the film are very tame, showing nothing more than bare male chests and legs, and maybe a brief glimpse of thigh. Clearly it's the fact that the sex scenes involve two men that makes it so "strong" - and in this day and age I find that double standard offensive. If the same scenes had featured a heterosexual couple, they would have been PG or at a push PG13 and described as "mild". Times and attitudes are changing, but clearly not fast enough.

'"Lazy Eye" is terse, polished, understated but deeply felt. "Gay" films usually ask viewers to cut them slack, to allow the makers expressive leeway we don't give other films. Lazy Eye stands up proudly and lays down its cards calmly. It compresses the emotional range of a novel as the very best short stories do: Annie Proulx's "Brokeback Mountain does that; so do stories by De Maupassant, Fitzgerald, Katherine Anne Porter, Philip Roth. It's a small film with big things tightly rolled inside it.

One of the characters in "Lazy Eye," Dean, is a fan of NPR (National Public Radio, the movie's other protagonist, Alex, helpfully spells out for us dolts in the audience). This is used as movie shorthand to give us some insight into Dean as a character. However, writer-director Tim Kirkman doesn't flesh out the character enough to make this trait any more than an empty affectation, akin to leather bound classics being displayed on a bookcase to make someone appear cultured when you know the books have never been cracked. This point is hammered home during one of "Lazy Eye"'s unnecessary flashbacks, in which Dean (Lucas Near-Verbrugghe) realizes "Morning Edition" is about to come on and hurries to switch on the radio, a rapturous expression crossing his face as the program's theme music plays. Even Ira Glass would roll his eyes at this scene.

But there are other moments where the characters seem real. Dean is a Los Angeles-based graphic designer in his late 30s who has amblyopia—lazy eye. At the film's opening he's dismayed to learn he'll need trifocals, the new glasses highlighting that he's not getting any younger. He's enjoying a successful career, yet chafes at being bound to his clients' boring ideas. (I particularly liked his railing against "heads in the sky" movie poster designs.) But what's really eating at him is an e-mail received from Alex (Aaron Costa Ganis), an ex-boyfriend from 15 years ago, when he was a New York art student. "Of course I remember you. You broke my f------ heart," is Dean's first response, which he deletes before hitting "send." Instead, he suggests that Alex, a former Wall Street exec now living in New Orleans, come out to visit him at his vacation cabin in Joshua Tree.

The exes reunite and reconnect—literally—within seconds of greeting each other (this sex now-talk later approach mirrors their hook-up 15 years ago, we later find out). After sex the guys talk about old times, the compromises they each made as they got older, and thoughts on the movie "Harold and Maude," the cult comedy discussed as if it's some impenetrable art film. It looks like they might be on the road to rekindling what they had all those years ago in New York. That is, until one character reveals something about himself that changes how the other character—and the audience—regards him. This wouldn't be a problem if Kirkman used it as a jumping off point to further develop the character and the story, but the revelation is never dealt with to a satisfying degree, with lame excuses and justifications taking the place of any real emotional catharsis. We're asked to forgive a character's duplicity because the movie tells us to, not because the forgiveness was earned.

"Lazy Eye" can't totally be written off. Though Kirkman's writing disappoints, his directing seldom falters. The acting is first rate, with Near-Verbrugghe and Costa Ganis exhibiting an easy chemistry. It's the strength of their performances keeps us watching even when the script weakens. Also, Gabe Mayhan's cinematography is gorgeous.

What's so frustrating about "Lazy Eye" is you can see there's potential for a really good—possibly great—movie here, but it's trapped in the body of a mediocre one. It strives to be a more intelligent take on gay relationships and in many instances it is, but there are many more instances where it's clear the film makers haven't done their homework and are just cribbing from Cliff Notes.

Dean has just been told that his eyesight is deteriorating but that is what happens in 'middle age'. Still a good looking man but suffering the gay years are 1 times 2 sort of thing he starts to have a bit of a mid lifer. So he decides to go off to his little holiday home near Joshua Tree in the Mojave desert.

Then out of the blue his old flame from New York contacts him. This is Alex and he walked out on Dean fifteen years ago. So they go for the rekindle and see what happens route. What happens next is an emotional roller coaster for both men as their honesty acts as a mirror to the other's perceived sins and in return their own.

Now this is a solid piece of film making and for the most part is just the two of them and yet it still works as there is enough chemistry. I saw it billed as a comedy but it is a relationship drama and any mirth that does occur is purely incidental as it is in real life. The acting is all fine as is the direction and everything else with some particularly good cinematography – but with the Mojave to play with you should not go too far wrong. The story may not be to everyone's liking but it does play out in what I consider to be a realistic and interesting way, and so is one that is worth seeing if you enjoy gay cinema (not a porno by the way) for all it brings to our screens.

It is a film who impose a sort of gratitude for the smart work with cliches, for images and for acting. A mature perspective about love, life, the loved one and people defining the middle age traits. Seductive because it is a kind surprising. In same measure, for the status of reasonable questions support, for storytelling and flash backs, for dialogues and, not last, a little, for mice. A film defined by gentle form of honesty, easy portrait of vulnerability and beautiful images of desert. And a movie who you deserve for a long time. Short, just beautiful.