I Am Michael

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

Michael is a young man that thinks a lot. We first meet him when he is working for a campaigning, gay magazine and he is with Ben whom he seems to love and has committed to. Then Michael's mother dies and he starts to think about his whole existence and what happens after death.

This leads him on a spiritual path where he realises that he no longer identifies as 'gay'. Now that is all well and dandy but this film really takes its time. Michael is shown as a troubled man who seems to engender a lot of care, sympathy and warmth from those around him and this is despite him being as inspiring as a used shopping list.

His continual whinging about his inner turmoil with God and his old beliefs wear very thin very fast. I kept thinking the plot might make a welcomed detour but alas and alack nay. It really was an absolute bind to get through and that is even with a very good cast, some excellent performances, high production values and good cinematography. It is based on a short story and that may be where the problem is in that there is just simply not enough 'plot' here to make a full length feature.

The other major trip for me is that you have to care about the characters in order to be engaged and gain empathy and I stopped caring for Michael around half way through. The supporting cast are often more deserving and as such this just did not work for me at all.

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.

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.

I truly can't figure out why James Franco and Zac Quinton, of all people, wanted to make this movie. A big problem for me is the writing, which is clunky, and the choppy structure. I never felt emotionally engaged enough to develop any empathy or understanding. Michael remains a mystery, a tragedy, and a bit of a monster to me.