Poster Boy

The drama POSTER BOY begins with such a solid premise, the screenplay could have practically written itself. Perhaps it would have been better if it had. Though certainly well acted by some of the cast and directed by first-timer Zak Tucker with a degree of skill, the film is bogged down by its script; written by Lecia Rosenthal and Ryan Shiraki, it is laden with preachy platitudes and simple-minded stereotypes. You can sense that the writers weren't satisfied with just hoping to pen a good story, they wanted to make it an "important" film, which is all well and good, unless you sacrifice the drama for the dogma.

Matt Newton plays Henry Kray, the college boy son of Jack Kray, an outspoken conservative senator facing a re-election vote. The son is gay and very much in the closet -- though apparently quite sexually active; while the father is a "family values" candidate with a history of particularly harsh and homophobic stands on various issues. The clueless Jack bullies Henry into being active in his re-election campaign as a way of reaching out to younger voters.

This is a great start; especially if you add in a plot twist wherein Henry unknowingly has a one-night stand with Anthony, a gay rights activist who has a particularly strong dislike for Senator Jack, his politics and his political party. Henry finds himself caught between a father who wishes to exploit his son's youthful and apparently straight-arrow image and a lover who hopes to out him in a cheap attempt at embarrassing the father. This is a nice set up for a potentially complex drama, maybe even an intriguing thriller.

Making an admirable effort to establish an Altmanesque feel to the film, director Tucker finds his attempts at realism at odds with the script that seems contrived and phony as the screenwriters fumble the material in infuriatingly inept ways. For one thing, as played with a perpetual snarl by Michael Lerner, Sen. Jack Kray isn't just a conservative, the story goes out of its way to make sure we know that he is (and by extension, all conservatives are) controlling and hypocritical and poor at parenting to boot. He isn't just a conservative, he is "the Nazi of North Carolina" whose campaign seemingly is financed by the tobacco industry. Gay issues aside, it is not surprising that Henry has great animosity toward his dad. And that is the problem: The film quells part of its strongest source of drama from scene one by obliterating even the slightest suggestion of there being a genuine loving bond between father and son. Indeed, the entire film is told via flashbacks as Henry spills his guts to a reporter in what seems to be a spiteful attempt to get back at his father.

The film would be much more powerful had Henry been torn between two loves; one, his familial love of his father, and the other, his sexual attraction to his lover. The film would be so much more compelling (and believable) if Senator Kray were to be basically a good man with extreme beliefs or if Henry were to be a true believer in his father's politics, who had to face how it conflicts with the reality of his own sexuality. Or what if Sen. Kray were a liberal whose politically correct rhetoric masks a homophobic mind? And though Anthony and his fellow activists aren't shown in a particularly flattering light either, the story overly stacks the deck to the left by making Senator Kray an oh-so obvious right-wing villain in a tired attempt to make clear the film's already obvious left-leaning bias. The result is weak propaganda and even weaker drama.

Worse, all the cheap political shots detract from the film's strongest relationship, between Newton's Henry and Jack Noseworthy's Anthony. Both actors give fine performances, helped considerably by the fact they are given the most realistic characters to play. Newton captures the anxiety of Henry, a guy who just wants to live his life out of the public eye, but finds the comfort that comes from living in the closet comes at a high price. Noseworthy makes credible a character who can't quite separate his sexuality from his politics, which, ironically, is the problem with the film itself. The film's most potent message would have been in exploring this love story rather than in focusing on all the yammering political noise that surrounds these two men.

Most reviews for this movie are quite negative, and I guess I am in the minority when I say this - but this movie was fantastic!!! It is not your traditional gay movie, actually it doesn't really have much of a gay focus which might annoy some people. It's more a coming of age story and is relate-able to everyone, no matter what your sexual orientation is. At first the plot of this movie might seem to move along too slowly, but that is simply to establish the characters and setting of the movie which is something that has to be done to fully appreciate this movie. When you look back on the movie, you do realize how everything fits in together perfectly, now that you know everything, although it might seem a little bit muddled halfway through the movie.

Some other users have commented on the movie not being multi dimensional, but I think that the way that the characters reacted are pretty realistic, and most people (generally) are multi dimensional but may only show one side of their selves for one reason or another, and don't forget that this movie is focused from the point of view of Henry Kray. It also has many plot twists, and though it has be commented upon that it is too predictable, I thought nothing of the sort. The characters are oddly unpredictable, and are like multi layered onions, many people might just look it and observe that is it just another gay movie, but it is not, it is so much more than that.

I just saw this at the Outfar Film Festival in Phoenix, and I have to say I was disappointed. The plot had the making of a really engrossing story: The handsome college-age son of a Southern Right-wing Senator is a closeted gay, and is "outed" in an attempt to destroy the re-election of his father. Depending on how the story was scripted, I anticipated feeling sympathy for the son, anger toward those who invade his private life for political gain. Or, the could have scripted so that one feels the "closet-case" got what he deserved. Unfortunately, the way the film was scripted and filmed destroyed any chance of achieving an engrossing story or feeling anything for the characters involved.

The story is told in the form of a rather obnoxious reporter interviewing Henry, the senator's son. As he describes the events leading up to his outing, we fade in & out of the scenes. This format has been used successfully several times in the past. It doesn't work this time. By the end of the film I felt as thought I'd watched a bad documentary, just witnessing the events, feeling nothing for the people involved. The other problem is the main characters seem almost schizophrenic in their personalities. One moment Henry is throwing the suit & tie clad Young Republican into the pool; the next moment he's bonding with him and hiring him a hooker when he learns he's still a virgin. We first meet Anthony as an "out there" Act Up! activist; we next see him a sensitive best friend of an AIDS-stricken woman. Next he's telling her that he also had sex with her boyfriend that gave her AIDS; we next see him caring about Henry, whom he had vowed to "out".

By the time Henry is outed, I was looking at my watch and waiting for the ending credits. Too bad. Good plot done wrong in about every detail. Better luck next time.

This is on of the darkest gay-themed films released in America I have seen. Most reviews have not been favorable, so I'll do my best to tell you what I liked, and what I didn't like. This is not a bad film, a 1 or 2 star rating seems quite unfair, but reviews are subjective. It doesn't hold a candle to other gay films I have enjoyed, but the subject is very different.

Why I Gave It 7 Stars: It was a solid 6, leaning towards 8 in the beginning, and towards the end, so I compromised. A solid B- film you might say.

The Story: It centers around Henry (played by Matt Newton). Henry is the son of a ultra conservative Senator from the south. Think of "The Birdcage", minus anything to laugh at. Henry is also gay. The film, told in "flashback style" as Henry tells his story to a reporter unfolds over the course of 6 months. Basically, Henry comes out, and family chaos follows. But not for long, as we're almost to the end of the film.

What I Liked: Personally, I liked the edge. This was almost more of a docu-drama, albeit a fictitious one, which could easily be based on truth. The actors were good to very good, the overall production was good as well.

What I Did Not Like: I was nearly half-way through the film, starting to get concerned where it was going, before all the character/story sub-plots were connected. The second half of the movie was strongest.

The Rest of the Characters: Besides our lead, Henry, we also focus on his stereo-typical bigot Republican Father/Senator, and his "senator's wife" Mother. And to the mix, a straight girl Izzi, and her gay male friend Anthony, whose relationship was unusual at best. Anthony and Henry meet under some unusual circumstances at a college party.

The Ending: I never give away specifics, but let's just say it's not a "Brady Bunch" wrap-up. If the ending was all tidied up for viewers, I would have knocked this down to a 5 or 6. Everything about the film was somewhat gritty, dark, "off". It's not the type of film that usually comes out of the USA. We usually have to watch films like this with sub-titles, so kudos to Here! films and those involved for producing the film.

Final Thoughts: This is not a laugh-out-loud sex romp. No, not at all. It's a good story trying to make a point about politics, sexuality and family values. It does all of those well.

Unrelated Chatter: Jack Noseworthy, the actor who played Anthony also starred in "The Brady Bunch Movie" and in his early years, "Cats" in the theater. Matt Newton (Henry) has appeared on the "Gilmore Girls" and "Judging Amy".

A technical quibble first: my hearing is less than perfect, and Poster Boy has a lot of mumbled dialogue with no subtitles on the DVD. New films without subtitles are just inexcusable in my opinion--what is someone who is deaf supposed to do? Just not watch that film?

The best aspect of the film is the acting. The core cast are all fantastic. What didn't work so well for me was the cinematography, editing and the general low budget approach. The cinematography is mostly (or maybe all) hand-held, with a lot of shaky cam shots and a lot of blurriness. The film is loaded with overexposed shots and a dominance of white. While that may have been so for metaphorical reasons, it's not the most pleasant thing to watch aesthetically if it's relentless--and that's also not the best way to get the metaphorical aspects across. The editing is frequently frenetic. In combination with the locations, sets and general lack of music, Poster Boy has the feel of a 100-thousand dollar art house drama made by a director who is way too obsessed with The Blair Witch Project.

Fortunately, the story is better than that would suggest, although it's not perfect. This would have been far more on-target and controversial 15 years ago (given our present knowledge and overall lack of reaction to the sexuality of some political offspring), but it's still engaging enough, especially given the performances, and at any rate, it deals with important issues that are still far from resolved in our culture.