What's new

*** Gay-Friendly DVDs, version 4.0 (1 Viewer)

Gerard Priori

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jan 14, 1999
Messages
107
Well, I, too, was able to see the US QUEER AS FOLK screener from Showtime. It was horrible. It left me feeling very angry. In the original version, we're presented with a group of friends whose actions may not always be clearly motivated, but they always seemed recognizably human. I was able to see bits of myself in each of the characters (Vince, Nathan, Stuart, Philip, Alexander--all of them), which always made their behavior, however different from my own, at least recognizable on a purely human level. I feel no such connection with the characters in the US version. I have no idea why any of these people are friends. They're all neurotic messes, who all end up being pretty unlikable for various reasons. Furthermore, any time a character makes a step forward in becoming something other than a shallow, self-absorbed twit, the show always seems to indicate that that is the wrong and undesirable choice (making the character seem more dysfunctional than they already were) and always has the character come back around to being selfish, sad, and oblivious. In the world of American QAF, there is nothing joyful, playful, fabulous, or fun about being gay.
The show is a soap opera in the absolute worst sense of the word. All of the characters are better looking than most of the audience, yet we're to believe that these are "average" looking people--totally moronic and demeaning. While the characters look better than we do, they certainly act much worse, allowing the predominantly straight audience that the show is surely counting on to be successful in the ratings to feel morally superior to anyone on screen--no matter how screwed up their own lives may be. Every character seems to be an idiot who constantly makes all of the wrong choices. Even the most dimwitted member of the audience is bound to be more successful in his own life and make choices for himself that are at least comprehensible.
In the UK version, Vince and Stuart have a very dynamic relationship that unfolds constantly and consistently. We see the love that each has for the other. By the end of the first series, we're left with a look at a very unconventional, yet very intimate long-term relationship that works perfectly for both parties involved. It doesn't resemble the cliché of two lovers walking hand in hand off into the sunset, but it is satisfying and makes sense within the story that we were told. The relationship between Michael and Brian in the US version makes no sense at all. Stuart was a self-admitted twat, but Brian is a completely unsympathetic ass. And the actors cast in the two roles don't help make the relationship gel either. They have no chemistry together and the fact that the two have been best friends for the last fifteen years before we meet them is totally unconvincing.
Moreover, the show crawls along at a snails pace, taking twice as much time as the UK version to cover the same amount of plot (and the UK version has much more depth, thanks largely to the concise writing and wonderful performances). It's very inefficient storytelling. It plays somewhat like acting students at a writers' workshop. Scenes that were quick and light in the original are much more belabored here. The pilot episode alone is two-hours and ten-minutes, but it feels much longer.
I'm still feeling angry and bitter about this crap! I can only imagine what the other sixteen or so hours of the series has in store. I'm sure it isn't pretty.
I just love the original version. It dealt frankly with controversial issues such as drug use and under-age sex in the gay club scene. The show was criticized by many for pretty much leaving "non-scene" queers out of the picture and portraying drug use and cruising in a potentially flattering light that caused embarrassment on behalf of those with more "middle-class" or mainstream values, who would love to have seen themselves represented in the piece. While the stories and images in the UK version of QAF were in no way representative of the depth and breadth of any gay community in any town or city, what it did accomplish was an honest and believable portrayal of the characters' lives on which it focused. The US version is so much less spread out over a much longer period of time.
The original version had me begging for more. The end of each episode kept me glued to my seat in anticipation of the next episode. I was compelled to watch the whole thing in one sitting. I've now seen the first six episodes of the American remake, which means that it will be months before I get to see a new episode. Quite frankly, I can wait.
-Jerry
 

Anthony Pernice

Auditioning
Joined
Dec 9, 1999
Messages
2
Not being gay I don't have a particular interest in "gay films" but its always good to see a movie where that sort of crap is treated like its normal. Because it is. I always hate it when in a movie or on a tv show there is the "token flamboyantly gay guy." How about some reality? If you have not seen "Boondock Saints" (available only @Blockbuster or through Indican Pictures mailorder) I suggest you do. To get straight to the point of this thread, Willem DaFoe plays a gay FBI agent on the trail of a pair of brothers killing mafia men in the name of God. Its good stuff- a great film where they don't make an issue of the fact that the character is gay. He isn't flamboyant and annoying, he does not call anyone "sister," he's just a regular guy doing his job- and very well, I might add.
That's just my two cents. If you check out the film and enjoy it, great. If not, well, whatever keeps your Cheerios afloat.
Cheers :)
 

Mark-W

Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 6, 1999
Messages
3,297
Real Name
Mark
Bob-
Thanks for the titles coming to DVD:
The last two would be one I will buy.
Gerarld-
I will be looking at QAF with your review in mind.
I will be subscribing to Showtime the Friday before.
Thanks, Anthony
for the "heads up" on the Defoe film.
Mark
 

Alan Light

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Aug 3, 2000
Messages
130
Thanks for telling us your opinion about Showtime's Queer As Folk. I'd only read glowing accounts from people who have seen the episodes so far. I have a feeling those of us who worship the original will indeed have a difficult time adjusting to this new version. I probably won't be able to watch it objectively, but I'm still hoping to enjoy it on a lesser level. Now you have me worried, Gerard!
On another matter, yesterday I received the DVD of GREEN PLAID SHIRT. What a disappointment in every way. It's an extremely amateur production. Lots of leaden scenes with long staring and deadly silences. Picture quality is poor (my on screen display shows the bit rate to be a little over 3 - the lowest I've seen on a DVD. Usually it's above 7). Looks like VHS, sounds even worse. The dialogue is so muffled throughout that it sounds like everyone is holding their hands over their mouths, and in many scenes inappropriate Muzak is inserted over talking scenes, making it even more difficult to understand what is being said.
Definitely one to skip!
 

Gerard Priori

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jan 14, 1999
Messages
107
Alan & Mark,
I certainly hope you manage to enjoy the series more than I (I'd hate to see you guys react to it so negatively and so strongly. It isn't worth the energy). I don't know if I would be as offended by it if I hadn't loved the original, but I think the writing and the performances are lackluster enough to have dampened my enthusiasm considerably.
The reviewer who showed the screener tapes to me also hated the US version and warned me ahead of time. I didn't pay much attention to his reservations. I thought he was probably being too picky; just looking to find fault with the program. After I saw the program for myself, we discussed the specifics of what we thought. We pretty much both felt the same way about the show and its many faults.
It was pointed out to us that one of the writers of the series is Jonathan Tolins, who wrote TWILIGHT OF THE GOLDS. I've not seen the program myself, but from what I've heard it is bad in much the same ways that QAF US is bad.
The US version of QAF has scenes and character exchanges that are completely unnecessary. In the UK original, we see that Hazel, Vince's mom, is perhaps more "scene" than her son is. The same is true of our US equivalents--Debbie, Michael's mom, works in a diner in the gay club district and wears an assortment of rainbow symbols and PFLAG buttons, etc. She hangs out in the gay bars, just like Hazel did in the original. All of this being true, then why is it necessary for Debbie to tell her son that she "approves of his lifestyle?" Why mention it when we've already seen it? It isn't at all necessary and merely drags the level of the show down to that of an after school special debating the rightness or wrongness of homosexuality and who approves and who doesn't. And to make matters worse, they have this conversation more than once in the series' first six episodes!
And as to the homoerotic content of the US version compared to the original: In some sense the US version goes a bit further than the original, but never goes further than anything that I would consider "R"-rated (I'm unsure whether the screener was submitted to the MPAA. When Showtime was contacted and asked, the marketing people didn't know and there is a disclaimer at the beginning of the screener tape stating that what's presented is not the final version). Sure the guys kiss a lot and there's much male nudity from behind. There's also a big dick contest hosted at the club Babylon (nothing is shown but it is a suggestive scene). But whereas the sex scenes in the original were playful and erotic--watching Nathan's first experience with rimming was marvelously communicated to the audience in the original (it didn't play like a collection of images merely added for shock value), the US version seems to me to be almost crude in its display of sex. (And for the record, I'm never one to complain about nudity or graphic depictions of sex.) There's something missing from these scenes--an element of fun or joy maybe (and Hal Sparks likening his love scenes with another man to kissing a dog--as he has been quoted as saying--don't help any).
I can't wait until you guys have seen it, so you can share your views.
-Jerry
 

Jeff Kleist

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 4, 1999
Messages
11,266
You know what I'm going to miss most? The accents. The Brit accents are part of what made the series so fresh and fun for me. They set the atmosphere, and it just gelled well. I don't expect to like the US version as much as the original, just love it differently. Oh well, maybe I'm just a fool :)
Jeff Kleist
 

Mark-W

Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 6, 1999
Messages
3,297
Real Name
Mark
Jeff-
I have to agree with you. Foreign accents in general
add to "beauty" of men IMHO.
Jeremy Northam without that accent is still worthy of
a few romantic dreams, but the accent on top of those
lips and and the glint in his eyes makes the whole package
just more obsession-worthy.
Same for French guys.
Ah well.
Mark
 

Alan Light

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Aug 3, 2000
Messages
130
Thanks again for your take on Showtime's Queer As Folk production, Gerard.
I forwarded your comments to an acquaintance of mine who has also seen the first six episodes. He replied, basically, yes, nothing will have the impact of the original, but the American version is not terrible. "It's good. Sometimes, it's very good," he wrote back. He says that Jonathan Tolins did not write the first three episodes, they were written by Ron Cowen and Dan Lipman.
He concluded "I strongly believe that everyone who hasn't seen the British original will be as bowled over by the American one as we were by the British."
It sounds like those of us who HAVE seen, and adore, the original will have to brace ourselves for the changes.
We will all know starting December 3rd!
 

Mark-W

Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 6, 1999
Messages
3,297
Real Name
Mark
Thanks for the information on Green Plaid Shirt.
I was afraid it was going to be kinda' lame.
Netflix has it Out of Stock on my queue, and I
still may rent it if I am feeling masochistic.
Anyway, here is more of my ratings for
gay-friendly DVDs that I own.
This list will be L to P
(And I forgot one "I" listing.)
Interview With The Vampire *****
Anne Rice, well-known best-gal pal of many a gay
writer, and now the mother of an openly gay author,
Anne infused the novel with enough homoerocticism
that gay-friendly director Neil Jordan, and gay
film producer, David Geffen couldn't help but end
up with a film where Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, and
Antonio Banderas spend most of their time courting
eachother. All that talk of "one happy family" with
two dads and a daughter, and that near kiss between
Antonio and Brad is just so...heated!
Like It Is ****
The grittily-realistic "love story" between a
boxer and a band promoter. Another of those Brit
films that is more endearing for being a Brit film.
(I would surly hate a US version.)
Lilies *****
For a low-budget film, it sure is lovely! Heavy
on the "artsy-farsty," but ya' know, it really
works here in the play-within-a-play storyline.
Love and Death on Long Island ****
Could be renamed
"Young Studs and The Old Queens That Love Them,"
but Jason Priestly and John Hurt really flesh out
these men in this unrequited love story.
Ma Vie En Rose ****
Great film, but the subject matter just didn't
connect with me. I were totally objective, I would
give it 5 stars, but I just don't ever watch it.
Men Men Men **
This Italian film could be renamed,
"Old, Mal-Adjusted, Bitter, Gay Men, and The
Youths They Abuse."
While on some level this film is worthy of praise,
I just hated it.
Midnight In The Garden of Good And Evil ****
Clint Eastwood directed this Savanna society story
with hustler Jude Law getting killed by his lover
Kevin Spacey. Vodoo and John Cuzack, with the
help of real-life drag queen The Lady Chablis,
track the story.
Murial's Wedding *****
While this film has not actual gay content, I think
it is the story of an "ugly duckling" girl who
moves to the big city and reinvents herself, that
made the gay audiences see themselves on the screen.
(It also helped that she becomes involved up with a hunky
Olympic swimmer.) Besides, how many st8's do you
know who love ABBA?
My Best Friend's Wedding *****
Too bad the film didn't have Julia jealous
over Rupert's male amore, but everyone agrees
that this film stars Rupert, with Julia the
supporting cast. Now all het girls want a gay
best friend!
Opposite of Sex *****
How do you make a film with a voice-over, and have
it not fall into cliche? I don't know, but
this film really works! BRILLIANT!!!
Parting Glances ****
The first "gay romance" film I ever saw that I liked.
This film was also marks the birth of the company
that would become known as Miramax. (Check out the
book Spike, Mike, Slacker, and Dykes for info.)
Steven Buschemi is great is this one.
Philadelphia ****
Made for the hets, but still not a bad film.
Okay, Johnathan Demme, we forgive you.
The Pillow Book *****
Hot, sexy, and visually interesting, Ewan MacGregor
spends as much time totally naked in this film
as he does with clothes on. He is the bi-sexual
lover of the female protagonist and the male
publisher she seeks revenge upon.
Playing By Heart *****
If you don't like sappy romances, this film
is not for you. Jay Mohr plays a dying gay man,
whose first love will be revealed by the time the
film ends. Also, Dennis Quaid has a great scene
with a drag queen.
A film about couples in various states
of coupledom, this ensemble piece is one of my favs.
Angolina Jolie, Gena Rowlands, Sean Connery,
Ryan Philippe, Madeline Stowe, and host of other A-list actors fill out the cast.
Priest ****
Great film, but if your Catholic, this film
is probably not a rewatcher. If you like
the bonds of faith, frendship, and lust looked
at with a lovingly realistic eye,
this film should seen at least once.
And that's it for tonight!
Mark
 

DaViD Boulet

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 24, 1999
Messages
8,826
Hey Mark,
boy...you really did us the favor with these great titles and film descriptions! I have confidence in your judgements as we share the same view of the films that I've seen as well.
Listen, would you mind adding some "media" content on some of those reviews? Are they all available on DVD? R1? widescreen/OAR? 16x9 etc...
Thanks for the great list of titles. many "to buy" added to the list!!
-dave
 

Mark-W

Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 6, 1999
Messages
3,297
Real Name
Mark
Hey DaVid-
Thanks for the vote of confidence.
All the films listed are on DVD, R1.
Without going over having the titles on hand
here at work, here is what I can tell you about
the specs.
The following are Open Matte and not 16x9 enhanced:
Lilies
Broadway Damage
Best of Boys in Love
Boys Briefs
Boys Life
Boys Life 2
Men Men Men
Parting Glances
Bedrooms & Hallways
The Pillow Book (really reformatted; not Open matte,
but not pan-and-scan either)
The following, from recollection,
are widescreen but NOT 16x9 enhanced:

Get Real
Like It Is
Playing By Heart
Murial's Wedding
Everything else is (from recollection)
widescreen and anamorphic.
Mark
 

Alan Light

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Aug 3, 2000
Messages
130
My partner and I just finished watching the premiere episode of Showtime's Queer As Folk, and then the second episode. I got them in the mail today from a friend who is a TV critic at a major national magazine.
The premiere episode is a few minutes short of 90 minutes, and the second episode is roughly 45 minutes long. I thought the would be letterbox format, but they are full frame.
And now, the rating. I'm impressed. Very impressed. It is not the original Brit version and can never be as brilliant but I must say it is damn good.
I rate this Showtime version an A - with the caveat that the original is a triple A-plus.
Showtime's version has been Americanized, no doubt about it. There are scenes where the characters are talking to each other but they are really talking to us, the audience, to let us know in no uncertain terms what is going on. That is a change from the Brit version where Russell T Davies had the courage not to explain everything to the audience but let us figure it out.
Many scenes are familiar, in fact almost identical. One slight drawback is that the signature dialogue lines have been watered down somewhat. The original lines had more punch, and for the life of me I can't understand why they changed them. For example, when the "Stuart" character picks up the 2 guys on the dance floor, the "Vince" character (now named Michael) looks on. In the original he's asked what "Stuart" says to get the guys, and "Vince's" line goes something like "If we knew that...if we knew the magic words...but he says them for all of us." In the Showtime version these great lines have been replaced with "We'll never know." This is the sort of dialogue change that is made throughout the series.
But this is just a quibble. This show will have an incredible impact upon those who have never seen the original, and those of us who have seen and adore the original will have know the difference it is still a magnificent production.
 

Mark-W

Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 6, 1999
Messages
3,297
Real Name
Mark
A couple of things I need to add to my previous info:
1) Playing By Heart, while very
gay-friendly, doesn't have a "gay romance" in it.
Still, I totally melted when watching it.
Other stars in it are Gillian Anderson and John Stewart
(from The Daily Show on Comedy Central).
I hate to sound like a cliche,
but I watched this film with my mother,
and at the end we both cried
because we loved this film so much.
(It might have helped that the gay son in
Playing By Heart is named Mark.)
2) I remember some one else stating this in
an eariler incarnation of this thread,
or part of this info (I think):
Kiss Me Guido is coming to DVD
from Paramount as a SPECIAL EDITION on January 9th.
Per image-entertainment.com it will have the following:
widescreen,
16x9 enhanced,
director's audio commentary
theatrical trailer.
Very good news from "bare-bones Paramount!"
I liked KMG enough to rent it,
but with the addition of 16x9 enhancement
and audio commentary,
I will buy it to show Paramount they did
the right thing with this title.
Also, has anyone noticed that Showtime seems to
be upping their "gay content"?
They are also premiering some made for Showtim movie
with Vin Reins (sp?), the tough black guy who was in Mission: Impossible 1, as a drag queen.
I will be subscribing in a matter of days, but the
biggest bummer is that DUNE is also premiering on
the SCI-FI channel at the same time as QAF, and
it stars hunky Matt Kesslar as Feyd
(if you want to see him kiss another guy,
rent Greg Araki's romantic comedy
SPLENDOR on DVD
(it is a straight film, but he is "dared" to kiss
his girlfriend's other boy friend, Jonathan Saech(sp?))
and it doesn't bother him one bit!)
Finally, maybe I am a sap, and the film does have
flaws, but I like Twilight of The Gold's.
It did state the obvious a few times, but it also
had Brendan Frasier and Jennifer Beals.
So if one of the writers from that film is working
on QAF, I don't consider that a bad thing.
Mark
 

Alan Light

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Aug 3, 2000
Messages
130
I shared the advance screening tape I got with about a dozen friends and here are some of their reactions.
From: LIN
I liked the American QAF, though so far not as much as the British. It's
interesting to see how they're trying to pad the original a bit with bigger
parts for the supporting characters, though what a shame that they seem to
have already killed one off. While I was watching, I thought it great that
they didn't seem to be indulging the evil cocaine killer subplot and figured
that they didn't need to, since there was no need to bring him back at the
end so Vince/Michael could "save" Stuart/The Other Guy from his clutches.
Then he appeared, though in a much more innocent package. It kind of pisses
me off that they chose to kill the character they did, since he didn't seem
to have a counterpart in the British version (unless you figure that he was
the embodiment of Vince's insecurities, which Michael doesn't quite seem to
share).
Don't like the American Stuart. No charisma. Hal Sparks is surprisingly
good, though I could do without the voiceover. The kid playing Justin is
great, and I like his character so much more than Nathan. It seemed that
Nathan was growing up to become a junior Stuart, wherease Justin very much
seems to be his own man. I hope that he retains some of his innocence and
insight and doesn't turn into a manipulative slut.
I like the bigger role for the lesbian couple and can't imagine that they'll
do the whole sham marriage subplot. Still wish there was a domesticated gay
male presence here, especially when Michael is complaining in voiceover
about how gay men can't commit and settle into anything that resembles
lesbian domestic bliss (I hope we'll see how both sides of his stereotyped
view don't necessarily hold). I found myself thinking, "Well, duh. This show
is part of the problem." I seem to be getting more crusty and conservative
by the day.
Thanks again for sharing. I'll be eager to see how much gets cut before the
show airs. No way the MPAA would give the preview an R.
Lin
----------
From: SCOTT
Ken brought over the Queer as Folk tape last night, I thought it was an
excellent version. It stays true to the original storyline and it is
definitely easier to understand than the British version. I liked all 3 of
the main characters, they're all very attractive, even more so than the
British version. Ken and I both agreed that the actor that plays Justin must
be gay in real life.
We also didn't think that the sex scenes were too extreme, maybe we knew
what was going to happen so it wasn't a shock like it was the first time
around.
All in all we really enjoyed it, thanks for letting us see this preview. I
'm definitely looking forward to seeing more of the series!
Scott
---------
From: JIM
I loved QAF, USA!! Oh man! The " US Nathan" ( my nickname because I had a hard time remembering Justin, though that shouldn't be a problem for future episodes) is so cute!! And, Hal Sparks, what can I say?? Sorry for all the exclaimations. It's just so pleasing! I kinda miss Stuart a bit. I'm sure I'll get used to Brian.
It will be interesting to see how much of the sex scene footage will hit the cutting room floor. It felt like I was watching porno a few times. Don't get me wrong, I loved it!
I'm also very pleased with the way they've stuck to the original storyline. I feared they'd go overboard in Americanizing it but no worries yet.
-------
From: DICK
Hi Alan,
Your friends' comments about QAF remind me how different we interpret things. My reactions to the characters were very different from his, and, it seems, yours.
I did not warm up to the new Justin, and found him monodimensional, in contrast to Nathan, who seemed far more believable to me. Harrison in the role of Justin seems stiff and inflexible (not that there are not people just like him).
I liked Michael and his character, and of course I liked Brian (maybe more than Stuart). What I liked in particular was the obviousness of Brian's love and affection for Michael, while Stuart's for Vince was much more hidden. I find the American version more intriguing, and perhaps more plausible. Stuart didn't seem to struggle much in avoiding affection for Vince, while Brian is naturally affectionate for Michael when the situation merits and not when it doesn't. In a way, I suppose any perspective depends upon what an individual would most want to see.
Dick
-------
From: LARRY
Alan -
Mark passed along the QAF tape that you sent. THANK YOU! A small group of
us got together last night and watched both episodes. I'm impressed with
what Showtime has committed to. I'm looking forward to the series start
next month.
Thanks again!
Larry
-------
From: CHRISTOPHER
You never cease to amaze me!
What an amazing discovery we made last night--coming home and finding your
package at our door. We're already nearly through with the first episode and
are enjoying it completely! Rick likes it more than the Brittish series,
and while I agree that there are some improvements, I'm still a bigger fan
of the original cast. In particular, the Brian character is just not as
deep as Stuart was--perhaps it's the actor, because the dialog seems good,
but he's coming off a little shallow and more petulant than troubled. I'll
withhold judgement for now, though, because I remember having a similar
response to Stuart until the fourth episode or so. I do like seeing more of
the lesbians (that nipple suckling scene will no doubt get some media
attention) and they certainly haven't backed off on the explicit nature of
the sex scenes (and a cheer goes though the community!). I like Hal Sparks
more than I expected, and I look forward to seeing more of Sharon Gless
(though who could replace Hazel??). The proof of its quality, I guess, is
that I want to tune in for more.
Thanks again, Alan! A truly marvelous surprise!
Best,
Christopher
------
From: PAT
Yeah, I really liked the QAF American version. It did match the British
version quite well. But since I've seen the British version, I almost would
have preferred if they did new and different things rather than watching the
same story w/different actors. But I guess once it gets past the first few
hours it will have to be different. I especially wished they wouldn't kill
the guy with the GHB. The guy who gave it to him unlike the British version
was so cute and sweet. I wanted him to become a regular.
I do like the new Nathan. I don't care for Brian as much as Stuart. He
just doens't have the charisma/charm. I definitely like Vince better than
Michael but I think Hal Sparks does a decent job playing the part. Vince
was just so sweet. I do like how they Americanized things. The music, the
gym, the cars, the jobs, ect. it does seem much more American.
Lin kind of went off on it because he said it only shows one facet of gay
life and leaves out lifestyles like ours. Whatever. I still really enjoyed
it and can't wait to watch the rest.
 

Alan Light

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Aug 3, 2000
Messages
130
Here's one more take on the new American version of Queer As Folk from a friend who saw the preview tape I sent him.
From: BRETT
Hey Alan!
What a surprise to get an advance copy! All my friends are totally jealous,
and I still can't believe you sent me it. You always amaze me! I owe you
something really special.
I got the QAF copy today actually, so I just watched it (doing it while I am
typing). You know I am a hardcore fan of the original and the original
cast, so it's hard to not compare the two versions. Especially when it
seems so many of the scenes are trying to stay faithful (or duplicate) what
happened in the Manchester version.
The real similarities -- Vince/Brian's apartment look almost identical.
Much of the production design is near identical (BABYLON in Manchester looks
a lot like BABYLON in Pittsburgh), but the camera work is not as flattering
in the American version (no nice soft focus shots, and no tracking shots
that swoop over people's heads). Whoever photographed the show for BBC4
deserves an award! In America -- it's not quite as well done, but it has
its moments. They do use a lot of that fast/slow edit where characters stay
still and stuff moves around them...nice touch. And the split screen stuff
is neat too.
Some of the music is the same for both series in the advance copy you sent
(maybe they plan on changing that, but I hope they don't). "HOLD THAT
SUCKER DOWN" gets played in the hospital scene, and there are some cover
versions of songs that appeared in the original (close enough that most
people can't tell). I miss the theme song! I miss the original music in
the English show (the orchestral stuff like NATHAN'S THEME). But the songs
are pretty good overall, and I bet the soundtrack album does well. But do
we REALLY need to hear "Let's Hear it for the Boy!" twice in the first two
episodes?
The sex scenes? Almost shot for shot the same in that first Brian and
Justin (Stuart and Nathan)scene. After seeing the English one it's hard to
get shocked over the rimming. But they aren't skimping at all in that
department! In fact the "sex in the club" scene (where Brian gets a blowjob
in the backroom of BABYLON) was pretty graphic! And the locker room scene
with Justin (?) looking at the football boys in the shower. The American
version seems to be more concerned with sex! But I would expect that.
They do beat you over the head with it a little! In the English version
they were careful to make sure that all the sex was necessary to move the
plot along. It was never gratuitous! But already the US version is doing
some nudity just to be shocking -- a lot of male backsides for no reason!
It's probably too early for me to compare characters, but here's my first
take. The Vince character is not as sweet or innocent, he has a wry sense
of humor and is a lot more dry. In the UK version I saw him as sort of
naive, and here he is jaded already. That could work in the long haul, but
it's very different. I think he deviates the most from the original. He's
cute as hell though! I didn't like when he started saying "buttplug" at
the table with the straight people...in the English version it was
"twilight". His take on Vince is a lot less subtle than Craig Kelly. That
seems to be the key to this version -- much less subtle.
The guy playing Brian (Stuart) has some big shoes to fill. Aidan Gillan was
a master of playing cocky and mysterious! But this guy is a lot rougher and
more out there and in your face. He comes off as more of an asshole
(probably the way the character was written), but we will see how he
develops. I'm having a hard time warming up to him. He's not an adonis or
anything! He seems like he's trying too hard to be sexy, and Stuart never
had to try. But this is only the beginning, so maybe he'll fall into his
role easier as the show grows.
Justin, the Nathan character, seems okay. He's cute! Nathan had a luminous
quality, but this kid is more classically pretty (blonde haired all-American
boy next door). And thank God! He has his own car, so no scenes where he
uses the taxi account! But he's got the easiest job in the show ... look
wide-eyed and let things happen to you. It's not his story as much as it
was in the English show -- notice the absence of the extended school scenes.
It seems to be more about Brian and Mikey right now! But check out that
final scene in BABYLON where he steals Brian's tricks! It took Nathan a
whole season to get up to that! This kid sort of already knows he's hotter
than the "old" folks he's hanging out with (I'm shuddering because I am 29
and I just called a couple of 29 year olds "OLD FOLKS"). So that's
definitely different! This kid is a little more self-assured.
[BIG SPOILER AHEAD IF YOU ARE READING THIS AS A FORWARD]
The "Phil" character (Walt) who gets killed with the bad drugs is not around
as long as the other one was. But they played the same music ("ATOMIC" by
BLONDIE when he first sees Clay, the druggie who was never given a name in
the English one). He's not as endearing as the English guy. I wish we got
to know him better before they offed him. He does not get to do much. The
Alexander character is fun! He's not as nelly (who the hell could be?), but
he's funny! It will be nice to see where his character goes (will he end up
on the porch screaming "FLY MY PRETTIES FLY!"?!?!?)
Okay, now how about Hazel? I loved Denise Black in the English series, and
nothing will ever replace her. Sharon Gless seems like she's pushing it a
little (trying hard to be funny), and who designed her clothes and hair?!?
I almost did not recognize her. But she's good at the sad moments. She has
a great sense of the dramatic, so look for some tear-jerker scenes with Vic
(the Bernie character who in this show seems to be dying of AIDS). The new
"Donna" is fun because she has that "I love the gay bar" look on her face.
It's fun to watch her discover this new world.
The lesbians get a lot more to do, and their own sex scene (WHOA!). Much
more going on there than in the original series. I give them a lot of
credit for that! But wow they always have a lot of friends around them.
Remember in the original in the hospital there were maybe 3 or 4 women in
the room -- in America it was like 20!!! What is up with that? I
half-expected to see lesbians on the ceiling!
To be fair -- the show has almost 20 more hours to go! I think once they
hit their own stride it could get a lot better. SEX AND THE CITY was a
slave to the book during the first season, and it got much better once the
girls in that show settled into their characters. The same thing could
happen here! Right now they have to stay true to what Russel Davies and
Nicola Schindler created, but soon that will have to change. Right now it
seems too concerned with copying elements straight from England.
The nice thing is this ... people in America will get into it. Gay men and
straight women will love it! And for all of those people I tried to show
the show to who could never get over "THE ACCENTS" ... they will think it's
great. Nothing is as good as the first time, so all of us who watched the
first one and was amazed will be feeling deja vu for a while. But at least
it's here now! We can all legally watch a show, and compare notes and fight
over the issues -- is Justin too young? Is Brian too slutty? Will Mikie
find true love instead of following Brian around like a puppy? And does any
of this REALLY refelct our lives? I certainly don't do drugs in bathrooms,
or pick up strangers every night but I know plenty who do. And as long as
they show gay people as humans... isn't that their mission?
Like Russel Davies said even if this one is not as good, we always have the
original to watch over and over again. And maybe over time this one will
work itself up into a great show. Right now I think it's good, but not as
good as the first show. But could it ever be? QAF 2 even had to live in
it's own shadow!
Always,
Brett
 

Mark-W

Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 6, 1999
Messages
3,297
Real Name
Mark
There are a few R1 DVDs that I failed to mention
in my previous posts up to "P."
So here are two of them:
Love is the Devil ****
Widescreen (1.66:1) not 16x9 enhanced.
Now I am a sculptor and art historian, so I find
the slightly fictional account of Francis Bacon's
life entralling. Derek Jakobi and hunky Daniel
Craig star.
Here is what another art lover said:
John Maybury provides viewers
with a creative portrayal of the English
painter Francis Bacon.
Bacon was fascinated with violence both in
his paintings and in his personal life.
This is evident from the very first scene
in which Bacon confronts George Dyer,
the inept burglar who has fallen into his studio.
Jacobi's chilling, yet mesmerizing, portrayal
of Bacon is seen as Maybury closes in on Jacobi's
face as he deliciously anticipates being bedded
and dominated by this strange young man.
And while the film's frank portrayal of lust and sexual dominance is clearly evident it also explores
the life of a man who consciously chose
the dark side of life.
The performances of both Jacobi and Daniel Craig,
as Dyer, are outstanding as is the inventive
camera work of Maybury, who mimics the surreal
images of Bacon's paintings.
Jacobi's performance and voice-over narration help to illuminate this disturbing and fascinating man.
Disturbing because he revelled in the violence
and pain that most of us abhor and fascinating
because Bacon was so unabashedly honest in
his approach to life and his work."

Now another poster mentioned that he thought
the blacks on the DVD were weird, but I didn't
see any problems on my crappy little set-up.
It is probably more prominent in better televisions.
Mandragora *
Widescreen (slightly) Not 16x9 enhanced.
Original Czech language with English subtitles.
First of all, one would never mistake this film
for a Bel Ami erotic video.
In fact, it may taint your enjoyment of
those videos, though my attraction
to Bel Ami videos has remained unaltered.
Here is where you will find my inconsistancies:
Why I can handle Love Is The Devil above,
but not the bleakness of this film is a mystery even to me.
The film won rave reviews for its unflinchingly realistic
protrayal of a young Czech who enters Prague's underbelly
of prostitution and pronography. The film even has
several real Prague prostitutes in the cast.
It was just too bleak and ugly for me to stomach.
For those who can handle bleak realism, this film
will probably get five stars.
I should say the writer/director of this film
also made Not Angels But Angels and
Body Without Soul. All deal
with male teen prostitutes in Prague.
(Sounds like the director needs to find another subject.)
More later.
wink.gif

Mark
 

Mark-W

Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 6, 1999
Messages
3,297
Real Name
Mark
Did anyone in here catch Urbania in theaters?
I cannot believe this film flew under my radar.
It stars Matthew Keeslar
(one of my reasons for getting up in the morning)
as the gay lover of the guy
who was the str8 son in The Birdcage.
It has gotten great reviews, but I am
afriad I have missed it here in Portland!
frown.gif

Mark
 

Mark-W

Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 6, 1999
Messages
3,297
Real Name
Mark
Here is a question to any of you who saw
Wild Reeds:
If you have seen FULL SPEED[/i],
which was written and directed by Andre T's protoge,
I hear it also has a gay-flavored storyline.
Some guy is selling the DVD on eBay,
and I might buy it since I have not seen
it available anywhere, and I have a DVD player
that can handle PAL.
Any response?
(And ya, I know that the video quality on
Wild Reeds is not great.)
Mark
 

Mark-W

Supporter
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 6, 1999
Messages
3,297
Real Name
Mark
Someone earlier (I apologise for not knowing your name)
mentioned they thought Green Plaid Shirt
was not a good film.
Well, I let my netflix copy come anyway, and I
have to confirm that it is, indeed, NOT a good film.
The DVD is non-anamorphic widescreen,
with extras including trailers and an audio commentary.
I watched the film,
then watched most of it again with the commentary on.
The director bemoaned the short shooting schedule
and the tiny tiny budget. The film actaully looks
fairly decent, but the sound is HORRIBLE.
Yeah, the director had it tough, not having
the funds or time to do more than 1 take of most
scenes, but that is not what really bothered me.
Frankly, if you don't have time to do reshoots
and are on a tight schedule, and low budget,
do the best with what can be improved with
costing anything extra: REWRITE THE SCRIPT.
The writer/director could've easily held off
making the film another 6 months to a year, and
really make a tighter, better script.
The dialoge is so ho hum ALL the way through.
Does Will & Grace need a big buget to be funny?
It is the writing that sets that show apart.
Another little independant film,
Billy's Hollywood Screen Kiss,
is, while having its own mild shortcomings,
a much better better film, largly because
of better developed characters,
storyline, arc, and dialoge.
It is painful to watch a film that could've been
so good. Green Plaid Shirt had
the makings of a good film. But the script feels like
it was still in the rough draft stage when they
decided it was time to start shooting the film.
(Either that, or, I hate to say it, but maybe
the writer just isn't that good of a writer.)
So, yeah, pass on this one.
Mark
 

Jeff Kleist

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 4, 1999
Messages
11,266
Though not a traditional gay-friendly disc, one can't forget The Awful Truth, with the Sodom-mobile and the Phelps' being harrased :)
Jeff Kleist
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top