Avaliações de usuários

I am 94 years old, born in 1923. In 1938, at the age of 15, I entered a major Ivy League university, graduating in 1941, something of a record at that time. On December 11, 1941, at 18 years of age, I joined the U.S. Navy because I was angry about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Because of my talent, education, personal ambition, and considerable political pull, I received a commission in the U.S. Navy, being assigned to Naval Intelligence. World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and thereafter saw me retire at the rank of Naval Captain. Through it all, twice I was shot up pretty good, and twice I was told by doctors -- in effect -- that I was a hard man to kill, followed of course by what we would now call PTSD and very bad memories, but not to forget those endlessly repeated very bad dreams experienced to this day.

The good news is that you seldom find a senior career intelligence officer and combat ship captain in retirement who is poor. The skills, experience, knowledge and insights acquired, and priceless personal contacts thereby garnered frequently transfer favorably to the world of business.

Which brings me to "Before the Fall" (2016), written and directed by Byrum Geisler.

Ah yes, my marriage. Strip away the time frame, the civilian dress, the historical peculiarities, and especially the lack of reference to war, to killing, and to the absence of marshal mayhem generally and the eventually righted miscarriage of UCMJ justice that I personally engineered out of a sense of simple justice and out of my passionate, my absolute consuming interest in the object of my desire, you will find the accurate beginning of the latticework of my life-long love affair, who unhappily died before I did.

The clown responsible for the UCMJ miscarriage of justice was eventually keelhauled by the Navy in a fashion similar to the tender mercies of the Virginia state bar as described in "Before the Fall". To my complete satisfaction.

I salute Mr. Geisler and his crew and staff for their subtle and sophisticated rendering of a slice of life drawn, in my opinion, and especially in my experience from real life, gay or straight.

Or gay AND straight, because from this movie, both apply.

Parenthetically, the cinematography is excellent.

I give this fine movie an IMDb rating of 7.0.

In case you were wondering how the title related to Pride and Prejudice, "Before the fall" is from Proverbs in the Bible. That should have been obvious to me, but I had to look it up. I knew the proverb, and I knew Pride and Prejudice, but I didn't make the connection.

That's because this reinterpretation has turned Jane Austen's characters upside down. D'Arcy and Bingley are poor, not rich, and (characters equivalent to) the Bennett sisters are concerned about marrying beneath their status rather than above.

That's clever, and one of the few reinterpretations of Pride & Prejudice that's not a poor imitation, it's completely different. Pride & Prejudice is a social satire, and a comedy of manners. This film, on the other hand, isn't funny. There is a little comic relief, but it's feeble and the film would have been better without it.

By no means is the dialog scintillating, and some plot devices are pretty weak (though probably no less contrived than Austen's). I personally was annoyed by the maudlin piano soundtrack in scenes where it was not only unnecessary, it was distracting.

There are additional flaws that one could complain about, but overall I found myself able to overlook them. There is a lot to admire here, and it easily drew me in. I'd say give it a chance, especially if you are a fan of Jane Austen.

First time I found out that people had already made a gay themed Pride and Prejudice I was instantly hooked. The whole P&P gay thing was my idea for a novel that I'm working on (in my head), although hadn't had the time to start on it.

I've always been a Pride and Prejudice fan. It's the first book in the Austenverse that I've read as a kid. I've fallen in love with the characters especially with the main lead Lizzie Bennet. Mr. Darcy, of course, will always be my fictional boyfriend. I have always identified myself with Elizabeth ever since I've read the novel and watched the 1995 and 2005 version, including the rom-com version, Bridget Jones' Diary.

Okay... so about this movie; I am both impressed and disappointed. Let me start off first by saying the "good" stuff about the film. The cinematography is visually stunning. The nature scenes are breathtaking and gorgeous to look at, it felt like you could almost feel and smell the breezy wind right through you, giving that vibe to the audience is an achievement. The storyline's good although it lacked the certain qualities of Austen's novel such as the social satire and wit that made the novel a universal hit. But I'm aware the director (Geisner) is not going for that direction, instead, he's focusing more on the romantic tension between Darcy and Lizzie and what could happen if they were transformed in the 21st Century as a same-sex couple. Darcy is as brooding as ever, in here he is depicted as a closeted gay man struggling to come in terms with his own identity, which is EXACTLY what he would look like if he were reinterpreted as a queer man.

As for my bad impressions, sad to say there are more bad moments than good but at least tolerable to bear with. My biggest complaint is the camerawork, it's often shaky here and there. Some angles were great, some angles were okay, some angles were just plain hard to look at. It looks as if it was done by a teenager with minimal knowledge about the basics of filmmaking. The dialogue was okay, but I expected more from it, it is after all an Austen adaptation so I expected it to have more depth and quality in the usage of their words. The two gay men, which are obviously the film's version of Lydia and Kitty, made me flinch in disgust; they're stereotypical and annoying (I get that their original counterparts really are annoying but I did not expect this kind of exasperation), I don't know if the writer of the screenplay intended them to be the comedic relief but it seemed they're just there to mess up the lives of everyone around them, they're like Jar Jar Binks twins in human flesh. Lastly, my second biggest complaint is the main lead, Ben Bennet. I don't see any hint of Lizzie in his character other than the "pride" and "prejudice" part which is obviously the most vital part of the story. He lacks charm, humour, liveliness, and (most importantly) sarcasm. My insult to his character: he resembles more of a Bella Swan than a vivacious woman with a pair of fine eyes.

If this wasn't a Pride and Prejudice film, I would've said more nasty stuff about it, my Austen spirit led to forgive it as a whole. I'm used to watching great films and I've seen far better LGBT themed movies than this, but set aside all the flaws and imperfections, I think it's a good film (if not a great one), it is imperative proof that beloved classics like Pride and Prejudice could be "queerified" if done with justice and regard to the original source.

This film is based on Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, and it borrows quite a bit from its source, but it is very much its own story. The differences are enough to allow it to be judged on its own. The gorgeous Virginia and Great Smoky mountain scenery only enhance the beauty of the film. The characters are believable in their flawed reality. There is comic relief at times, even campy silliness with a couple characters, but they really don't detract from the poignant plot progression. These people feel very real, perhaps even like people we know. Yes, all of them; the main characters, the friends, the girlfriends. Most of us know people like this, might want to step into the story and have a stern talk with them (or more). The slow pace may put off some viewers who would be impatient for the story to move along, for the characters to just "get over themselves." Let them be. They will work it all out the best way they can.

Before the Fall is bad in every way. Terrible screenplay, terrible direction, terrible acting. Even the potentially beautiful Appalachian Mountains setting (which state it's supposed to be is debatable, but the mountains are not) is ruined by the overwhelming STUPIDITY of everything else. I mean, what lawyer conducts a confidential interview, discussing a third person in a way that would qualify as slander anywhere on earth, in the public hallway of his office, directly in front of the waiting room door, for anybody who may be waiting there to hear?

The whole movie is like that: stupid people saying and doing unvaryingly stupid things in the most unrealistic, unbelievable way possible. And there's an extremely annoying, cloying synthesizer-piano muzak soundtrack, the same dull, soporific notes played over and over, oozing its sappy way through every scene, constantly underlining the unrelenting stupidity of everything we see and hear.

I HATE this movie! The guy who plays Lee is gorgeous -- and I mean breathtaking -- but, just like the mountains, his beauty is buried in the mudslide of stupidity that swallows everything in its path.

Pride and Prejudice is Jane Austen's best work by far, one of the finest and most deeply satisfying novels ever written. It's so good that it has survived many bad adaptations, including this one. But writer-director Byrum Geisler (whoever he is) really shouldn't have told anybody what he was trying to do, because his failure is so monumental that he SHOULD be too embarrassed now to show his face anywhere. There is no HINT of Pride and Prejudice, or any of its marvelous characters, STILL alive 200 years after she created them -- not the tiniest spark of Austen's genius -- anywhere in this stupid movie.

I don't know why ,with care and love, somebody can fall in love , classic but very touching 😭 happy ending ,I like it.

It helps to have read Pride and Prejudice, but that isn't necessary. The film stands on its own.

Where it stands fairly well is in its direction and editing. The film is crisp and goes where it needs to without a lot of fuss. Cinematography shows off the scenery quite well.

Where it fails is twofold: one, the script -- and, thus, characterizations -- and, two, the chemistry between the leads. The film indulges in embarrassing cliches, such as the two gay best friends who are ostensibly meant to be taken ironically, I suppose; but they come off as a couple of losers. Cringeworthy, even. The women don't fare very well, especially Darcy's girlfriend. Their acting is fine; it's just that the women -- and some of the men -- appear to be in a different movie. The girlfriend is a homophobic shrew....which gives rise to a related problem, that of open homophobia clearly expressed. While it's certainly understandable that these attitudes exist, why this film, ostensibly about a slow-brewing romance, indulges homophobia to the extent it does is problematic. We've all heard these things before; and rather than make us dislike more the characters who are homophobic, you are aghast that the script is so in-your-face about this. Less of this would have been better.

The two leads are fine; yet in so far as they are physically quite different so too is there zero chemistry. Bennett is all sincerity and feelings while Darcy is all brooding and impenetrable. They are oil and water and it just does not work. The ending -- and this is a sort of spoiler but not really, as the ending is clearly what you think it will be, especially if you know the novel -- where they kiss has to be the most unromantic moment I've ever witnessed in a film.

Huge plot hole: a neighbour believes she sees Darcy hit his girlfriend -- he doesn't -- and hears him threaten to harm her. No one challenges this, not even the police officer, by saying "Where were you when you heard the threat?" She was in her own house next door and all the windows were closed; even if she had been outside she couldn't have heard a thing. This is just sloppy.

One final point: the music / soundtrack. It's like you're in a shopping mall. I get that scoring a film costs money. But the producer could have avoided this simply by using less music but of better quality.

After my first viewing of this film I was struck by two things; 1) the poignant and restrained performance by Chase Connors, and 2) how weak the overall quality of the film was; overwritten screenplay, choppy editing, unimaginative scene blocking, and a serious lack of chemistry between the two male leads, most of which was not their fault of the actors. The screenplay had so many subplots that were unsupportive of the main storyline that, as it pertained to developing the arc of their story, these two guys just got left in the back seat of the car. We're shown their story. We're, at least I, just not given enough of them to buy it.

Then I rewatched it and picked up on some really good aspects of the film that were overshadowed by its weaknesses the first time. The cinematography; no, not the easy layups of the Virginia landscapes in Fall. That's the easy stuff. Instead I was more drawn to some of the angles and mixtures of straight on shots with blocked shots within the same scene. It's really well done throughout. As well, the film has a beautiful, and simple, musical score. It is just enough to propel the story; and just as importantly, fill in when the story is becomes unfocused.

Chase Conner's performance stands out but other supporting members are excellent too. Carol Marie Rinn, as the unlikeable girlfriend of Lee Darcy (Chase Conner), finds angles and levels of a fairly simple character, enough to keep you wondering just how much, or whether, you'll end up disliking her. Ethan Sharrett as Ben Bennet gives a wonderfully endearing performance with complexity. His facial expressions reveal myriad competing thoughts as they ricochet through his characters mind. For me, though more than equal to the challenge, he was miscast.

However, the strongest aspect of this film is the performance by Chase Conner. I would love to see him in a better version of this film doing this role just as he does it here. With very little dialogue he embodied the conflict and brokenness of Lee Darcy. He knows how to be on the periphery of a scene, and without saying a word, reveal more of his character to the viewer. And the dialogue he does have - I can't imagine it delivered any better. He's an enormously gifted actor with that rarest of acting skills; the ability to pull away from the camera which pulls you, the viewer, further into the story and closer to his character. Why is he not in more films? I would love to see what he does with other material.

It is a truth universally acknowledged that a beloved classic need only be lightly adapted to remain delightfully engaging in all its iterations.

As a true Austen aficionado, I was downright giddy to discover "Before the Fall," a reimagined gay version of my beloved "Pride and Prejudice." Spoilers? Please, we all know the drill!

This adaptation is set in a quaint, picturesque Virginia town, and believe me, the screenwriter churns out more than a few eyebrow-raisers. Mr. Darcy? Meet working-class, closeted, and alcohol-numbing Darcy - ah yes, how original! Our dear Lizzy Bennet has morphed into an arrogant, wealthy, and oh-so-connected attorney named Ben Bennett. Expectations twisted already? Hold on tight because Mr. Bingley is now a charming, nature-loving straight guy who scrapes by on $12k a year and lives in a rustic cabin that screams, "Rent: At least half my annual salary."

Jane Bennet plays as Ben's straight gal pal, purely platonic of course - because sibling dynamics are so passé. Mr. Wickham makes an intriguing leap to criminal defense attorney, tossing some extra legal drama into the mix. And Darcy's married? Yep, to a woman whose name isn't worth your mental hard drive space, but she basically channels Lady Catherine's not-so-subtle homophobia, helping - predictably - to rekindle the flames between Darcy and Bennett. Bravo!

Initially, I felt like I wanted to toss my quill into the river over these character switches. But as I contemplated writing my own version, it dawned on me that this convoluted setup might actually hold more interest than expected.

"I declare after all there is no enjoyment like acting!" - or maybe not. The performances here are serviceable at best - they certainly won't be winning any Oscars, but hey, they make it through the scenes.

The plot? At times, it parallels a reality show reunion: forced connections amidst drastically different socioeconomic backdrops, but let's forgive that for the sake of melodrama.

On a brighter note - the cinematography is a visual delight, and those Virginia landscapes? Just gorgeously inviting.

In sum, if you're seeking to pass the time with something intriguingly different yet satisfyingly familiar, "Before the Fall" isn't a terrible pick. It's a quirky concept that I neither adore nor despise but find amusing enough to warrant a lazy, rainy afternoon viewing.

'Before The Fall' manages to pack a handfl of genuinely beautiful scenes into its 1 hr 32 min running time. It also manages to fill the rest of the scenes with a lot of uninspired writing, clumsy directing, and some regretably bad acting.

Before I continue, I would like to single out three of the lead actors as having been quite good.

Chase Connor as the deeply troubled and brooding Darcy is very good. There is something about this character (in keeping with the original novel) that demands he be as handsome as he is conflicted, and Mr Conner does not disappoint. He is (as another reviewer has rightly noted) "breathtaking" to look at. While he does get in a fair bit of brooding, it is not the only note that he strikes. We see him smile (a couple times) with his new-found friend Bingley (played equally well by the devastatingly handsome Jason Mac), we see him pensive and in pain, seemingly on the verge of tears. We see him struggle and want to open up, grasping at hope. He makes us see it, this hope, like a distant glimmer that he spies but cannot reach. He is a man with many demons, and Conner captures it well.

Ethan Sharrett contributes a well-balanced performance on the whole. There are some beautiful moments when he ceases to "act" and just inhabits the character of Bennett so completely that we are transported, we are there with him, in his pain and his embarassment and his regret. But at other times, perhaps due to the sodden script or the uneven directing, his acting seems to flounder, he loses both likeability and believability.

This brings us to the script: it is in bad need of a re-write. I understand that Mr Geisling (who wrote the script and directed the film) was trying to break new ground with this effort, but I think it is clear that the script suffers from his narrow perspective.

We are not supposed to despise any of the character's from Jane Austen's novel, so I am confused about why Mr Geisling would choose to make Bennett so thoroughly unlikeable through much of the film. Yes, he is supposed to be classist and snobby (Geisling switches the character's roles, making Darcy from the working class and Bennett from the upper class) and flawed and short-sighted. But we are always supposed to retain the idea that his superior attitude is not his true self, that he is mostly a victim of his upbringing. Once he is faced with seeing his ugly self in the proverbial mirror, he will not like what he sees and he'll quietly set about changing. Mr Bennett's evolution comes about too quickly for me right at the end of the film.

Bennett's gay friends are downright insufferable with their catty obsession with men that they want to pursue.

Cathy (Darcy's girlfriend) is a ... well, she's so many bad words that I cannot write them here. Suffice it to say that the first rhymes with "hunt" and the second with "ditch". How or why Darcy is with her is truly a mystery. Her bigotry and vitriol seem overdone. There is no nuance in her character, either in the script or in the actor's portrayal.

Yes, such terrible people exist in the world, but such an unrelenting lack of sympathetic qualities sours a film.

I recently watched the Irish film 'The Stag' (also titled 'The Bachelor Weekend') which featured the character known as The Machine. He is the slightly psychopathic and very inappropriate soon-to-be brother-in-law of the groom, and he has managed to wedge himself into a bachelor weekend (an ersatz stag experience) much to the chagrin of the groom, the best man, and their three mates. But as initially brash, uncouth, and yes, even slightly psycho as he is, he actually turns out to be a good listener and a staunch ally and teaches these men a few lessons about what it means to be a loyal friend.

Jane Austen for the ages: BEFORE THE FALL

Filmmaker Byrum Geisler, interviewed after the film's showing at the 2016 Virginia Film Festival, noted that he was inspired to portray all of Pride and Prejudice "backwards," and indeed he does. The most remarkable difference between the two works would be the change in focus from feminism to sexuality. While staying true to Austen's general storyline, the alterations in characterization and relationships make Geisler's film fresh and innovative.

In this most creative millennial version, Darcy is a poor "real" man who seems confused vis-à-vis his sexuality, and unable to admit his gayness —although pairing him up with a woman whose character simultaneously embodies both Lady Catherine and Caroline Bingley, two of Jane Austen's most hated characters, is enough to send any man looking for alternative love interests. Bingley too is a man who lives close to the earth, and is not particularly well off: a startling depiction of the man who, in Austen's Pride & Prejudice, was sought after by many for his incredible affluence. In another socioeconomic class reversal, the Bennetts in Before the Fall are relatively prosperous, and the older Bennett brother counsels his sister Jane against pairing her future with a man of such uncertain prospects as Bingley.

Although there are major changes to Jane Austen's original plot of Pride & Prejudice in Geisler's film adaptation, Before the Fall can still be considered an accurate rendition because it maintains distinguishing elements of Austen's writing. One of the most distinctive parts of an Austen novel is the surprising number of walks the characters take in the gardens. These walks mimic the slow pace of life in England's high society and demonstrate the changing social relationships as different couples pair up and walk off by themselves. Geisler reminds us of these walks when he updates a walk in the garden to a hike in rural Virginia. The cinematography in this film is beautiful, as the mountains of Virginia provide a stunning backdrop for the various hikes the characters go upon. Just as Mr. Bingley and Jane Bennett's relationship develops on walks throughout Pride & Prejudice, Chuck Bingley and Jane Gardiner have their most romantic scene on a hike.

Additionally, this film places a large emphasis on the influence of one's family on an individual, for better or for worse. Darcy is emotionally damaged and in denial of his sexuality as the result of the relationship with his estranged father, who was shown in a flashback walking into a truck stop restroom. Similarly, Jane is fiercely loyal to her brother, and willing to end her relationship with Bingley per his advice. The Wickham-like lawyer of questionable morality, whom Ben Bennett dates briefly, is incapable of abandoning his wife and children despite being gay. All of these ways the characters ardently take into account their family's values and wishes are reminiscent of Pride & Prejudice, which includes many scenes depicting the entire Bennett family in a single room and characters blindly following the advice of relatives instead of their own hearts.

In general, fans of the novel find themselves awash in a sea of contradictory characters and situations, a chimeric scope which seems to turn the novel, its characters, and its situations inside out. This works to create a new experience of the familiar work.

What perhaps does not work so well is its didacticism. Social commentary, unlike in Jane Austen's more subtle voice, is nothing if not overt, as Kittner and Lyle lecture Cathy about her own not-so-subtle biases against gay romances. The lectures seem out of place in a fictional work.

Before the Fall comments on how gayness is the same kind of social taboo as marrying someone from a different class in nineteenth century England, but it also comments on the perception of more feminine gay men, who face a stronger prejudice and cannot hide their sexuality.

Given the plethora of adaptations of Austen's most popular novel, Geisler and his crew are to be commended for the attempt to adapt in a new direction. And in large part, they succeed. Before the Fall is unique amongst the crowded world of Pride and Prejudice film and theatre versions in featuring gay protagonists and an impoverished though hot Darcy. My students who watched a pre-release version of the film found the heterosexual Bingley even hotter. Perhaps this film presages a new world of films featuring hot gay and straight characters together, in a world more seamless than the one we now inhabit.

by Andrea Press

I am a gay man and love gay themed movies, therefore I watched this title. The film location is beautiful! I loved to see the fall colors and old southern style houses with impressive decor. Unfortunately his movie did not impress me any further.

The acting was very stiff and ad-libbed, it even made me laugh during some "serious" scenes. The third person perspective was too obvious and therefore I did not feel included in the story and the characters their feelings. The story was very predictable and an other same old, same old gay doesn't want to admit he is gay and the openly gay guy is in love with him.

I can tell they put a lot of time and effort in this movie and therefore it is such a shame it did not really work out in the end.

The story idea was great but my oh my....... the screenplay must have been written by a first time writer, the actors seemed vapid as if they were sleep walking most of the time, and the editors were obviously pushing to lengthen the film. And the conclusion was foregone. So, grab a blanket, get comfortable because you will probably snooze during most of the time.

I squirmed through most of this movie as the characters, the dialog, the setups, the photography were all just cliche after cliche. I don't think there was one novel approach to or insight into anything or anyone in this movie. To take P&P---which is anything but cliches---and rework it into a hackneyed gay flick like this, just makes me very sad.

Prior to signing up to watch this film I read the reviews about how this film is like a reverse "Pride and Prejudice". I don't particularly like comparing films because once you start doing that you begin to create expectations of how the film should be. Im pleased to report that this film stands tall on its own for is beautiful cinematography, music scenery and choice of actors. The actors, even though a bit stiff for my personal taste, are beautiful to look at and very engaged. I figured maybe the director wanted them to play it in their respective roles of an go getter attorney and a straight lace blue collar worker with his demons to resolve more conservative and reserved a choice I can respect as Im writing this review. I must go back to the beautiful cinematography because it is one of the main outstanding components in this film. The relationship between the characters at the end leaves you feeling hopeful. I do wish the final scene could have been extended a bit more to see where things would go from there. The direction is flawless. It pushes the story organically without making it feel forced. I wish there was a DVD for this film, for I would add it to my DVD collection. A great film in need of more exposure. It's a visual treat. I kept thinking Hallmark movie as I watched it. If you do find this film as you stroll the halls of amazon, do not hesitate to watch this film, its a MUST SEE.

The mention of Pride and Prejudice attracted me, it's my favorite movie. This movie is based on that movie. And believe me when I say it was bad in every way possible. The production, camera work, acting, chemistry, scenario .... everything was all over the place and I couldn't continue watching.

It's a really big disappointment, I was really excited. Hope in the future someone would adopt "pride and prejudice" to make a gay movie and nail it.

I can't describe how disappointed I am.

It's scenery is stunning, but the casting and production values are lacking. The stereotypical gays guys are badly groomed for town leaders. It's also cliche in too many moments.

Honestly, mediocre gay themed films are a dime a dozen. So I had low expectations for this small indie. But, surprise of surprises, I was pulled into this film and invested in the characters. First of all its quite beautifully shot with gorgeous locations capturing the charm of small town Virginia. The two main actors are nicely portrayed with refreshing subtlety and actually have good chemistry. I've never seen Chase Connor before but he has a natural charisma. The side characters are also enjoyable especially the two gay friends. Unfortunately, the writing of the homophobic girlfriend is much too broad and stereotyped. Overall, a nice diverting gay film. I barely noticed the Pride and Prejudice references.

The camera angle is bad, the sound is still mixed with noise and echo, it is impossible to know day and night throughout the movie. The content is bad, the script and dialogue are messy, incoherent, less depth than other films of the same year even compared to the movies of the 90s, the acting is not good, not natural. 1 star because the cast is beautiful, 1 star because of the money the film crew spent to make this "masterpiece".

I sorry to say those words, it is just my opinion.

Solid with a somber, low-key tone. It begins slowly, but draws you in due to the fine performances and lush photography. Very good, and definitely worth a look.

I recommend this film, with a minimal budget it gives the perception of a much bigger production. The director carefully introduced tactfull, thoughtfull and sensitive details in the story. He definitely stamped his soul in this movie. He wants to remind us again and again about the splendor and secrets of Blue Ridge Mountains.

Locations were superb, the script is simple but interesting enough. I feel the movie was well ensembled too. There is room from improvement specially in the acting cathegory. Some actors fully embodied the role while others were less effective. Overall , I applaud this work. Bravo!

Not kidding I thought it was an amazing film with really good acting, great direction with the storyline and characters that you could really feel for, it will remain one of my favorite films moving forward!