Brian brought the movie Latter Days over for us to watch tonight. I enjoyed the movie, Ian thought it a little too formulaic, and that the acting/writing was a bit rough (both criticisms I would agree with). I’m a bit of a romantic, two boys fall in love and struggle with their homosexuality and it still pulls my heart strings despite it being done before. One of them was Mormon and went through quite a lot, I’m glad they brought up once again the religious hypocrisy in homophobia.
Does it hurt us to see the same issues recur in gay indie cinema? I don’t think so. New audiences continue to see these films, and even if they break through to one person, it’s worth it. Plus, the two main actors were VERY attractive 
Art, in my definition, evokes emotion in either the creator and/or the one who experiences it. In many mediums such as literature and cinema, this requires the reader/viewer to identify with characters. When the acting isn’t the greatest you’ve seen and the writing is somewhat trite, it’s more difficult, but still, at least to me, the emotions evoked by the piece grab me and accomplish their goal. Is it time now, with such a recent glut of gay and indie cinema, that we raise the bar on what we expect? Yes, in a sense, but we should still appreciate lesser efforts that nonetheless touch the heart.
The movie was a bit “simple” in terms of plot and delivery, but the writing was very complex. I’m not sure if you noticed, but the very beginning we are introduced to the theme of dots=lights=souls=people=dots. The circular theme was repeated about 30 minutes prior to the climax and then at the end at the dinner table. Given the acting wasn’t so good (ie, the crying scene of Lila on the bench, and the crying scene when Mrs. Davis slaps Aaron in the kitchen.) The second theme of serendipty versus predestination was very obvious as well. That one was great.
I think why this movie “works” but not to everyone, is that not everyone had the kind of upbringing where being gay is a sin worse than murder, unforgivable, and one’s family turns their back on you. A lot of us did and still suffer from that today in some form. This movie resonates on that level for those folks.
I agree with Ian too, it was pretty formulaic, but like a stereotype or genre, they are there because they are true… just not in every case.
That in itself is the point that the character of Lila was trying to make I think. Variety is not only necessary, it is often preferred: “Your church doesn’t allow drinking or homosexuals. Then I’m definitely not joining. I can’t imagine Heaven without both.” Well said.
BTW, the dinner Ian made was excellent. The Barefoot Contessa would be proud. Oh yeah, the cocktails were great too - even if I do say so myself.
October 4, 2004 @ 12:54 pmOne of the best movies I have ever seen. Portrays so perfectly the power of love to change people and the idea of sacrifice, as well as exposing some stereotypes of our society. I can hardly think of a better movie to this one.
March 13, 2006 @ 8:20 am