Station to Station

Everybody in this entire film are full of drama and not able to act it out. The dialogue is plodding. They must have fired the editors to keep the budget low, because there is so much dead space you could collapse a black hole in it. I love gay friendly films, but this is viewer unfriendly. If I wanted to see something sad and depressing, I would just look in the mirror. I watched "High School Musical" today, and it was insipid and silly. Still, it was leagues beyond this tragic, self-absorbed, snooze fest. If you want to paint a sad picture of gay porn websites, you could probably do a documentary that would be better, and more worth watching.

I never write reviews on films, but I felt this was necessary to warn everyone. What a horrible, waste of time movie that was excruciatingly unbearable to the end, in hopes that something good would happen. The bad acting, the bad Soundtrack and stupid story line needs to be announced to future victims of this movie. I can't believe it was even accepted for Production and then, suggested by Amazon prime. I would be embarrassed to show a film of this low caliber. This waste of my time will definitely make me think to check reviews before wasting another two hours of my time. I hope this review will save others from this excruciatingly horrible film.

I am not sure what I expected going into the movie (I was asked to be a test audience member two months ago) but it wasn't what I thought, in all really good ways. It's really hard to describe this movie without either giving too much away or giving people the wrong impression, so I think I'll just say it's a really well-done drama about a young man who has a lot of growing up to do, and a bit of a chip on his shoulder, who runs to Las Vegas rather than face his issues at home, only to find and create new issues there.

The film kind of follows him for 6-9 months as he interacts with friends/lovers/colleagues/family, and while he learn a lot about them, the audience learns a lot about him (and wonders if he's actually learning, too). In that way, the film is a lot like Richard Linklater's Beyond trilogy, and I think some reviewers have said that. But I think the other comparison they make, to Paul Thomas Anderson, is better.

Mostly because of the way the film makes all the psychological drama really watchable instead of depressing or boring. The two hours mostly flies by and it does a neat trick because by the end, you realize you had no idea where the movie was going, pretty much at any time, let alone somewhere so powerfully dramatic. I think that made it really satisfying to me. I am glad I didn't assume the end in the first half because the setup was for something else.

I think there will be lots of comparisons to Boogie Nights, but I think that's mostly due to surface similarities. Boogie Nights was bigger, more salcious for show, and wrapped up in a really predictable and old-fashioned way. This does a bunch of stuff I wasn't expecting and treats its characters as unique, not tropes and that's a movie lovers dream, in a way.

In a different review, for a different film, I said you could just watch the acting only and still be ertained, because all the leads were so good. That is 100% true here. The casting on this film, especially for all the main characters or the ones with big moments is incredible. I wouldn't be surprised if any of these new faces break out, but I hope if they do, they don't lose the raw parts of their performances in this film.

I don't usually give 10s, so I gave the film a 9, mostly because it's amazing they made this to this level of quality, on both a limited budget and during the pandemic. Without those challenges, it's obvious this would have been a 10, and that's a pretty big compliment from me. But maybe the more useful compliment is that I spent money to buy a ticket to see it again at a festival tonight when I already got to see it for free!

This is what happens when there is no editing. A film that is about twice as long as it should be with the longest scenes shot with the worst of the cast (Jordan Getty and Cate Luna). I haven't seen such awful over-acting in a long time. I actually had to fast-forward through most of their extended scenes. If Jordan pursed his lips or cocked his jaw one more time, or Cate over-gestured her way through one more scene, I would have shut it off. Was there no director on set to tell them to chill out, or try to act a bit more natural? They were just too unbelievable and because they were in far too much of the movie, it ruined the decent job the rest of the cast did. Other than that, thanks for Eggers crotch shot.

Set against the backdrop of Las Vegas, the film follows a young man named Major Tom Ryan (that's his legal name; it's explained in the film) as he navigates a complex time of self-discovery. The movie is deliberate and very compelling, and told through a series of extended conversations, full of genuine philosophical insights, that Tom has with various people he meets - ironically - through his association with the malevolently charismatic owner of a Vegas adult entertainment enterprise named Jordan.

Tom is a kid from Long Island on the run from his very real, but decidedly first-world problems, and through these conversations, he learns a lot about how the real world looks, gains perspective, and moves a little closer to being a fully realized adult. And, yes, in the meantime, he gets caught up in a lot of fun hijinks, faces some (often literally) naked truths, and has some interesting, and frankly entertaining, sexual encounters (all of which, believe it or not, are 100% story and character relevant).

There's a pretty intense series of tragic events in the last part of the film, and that's good because it feels necessary to bring the stories full circle, get Tom (and a couple of other characters) across the finish line, and I think that works well to balance out the tone of the film, making even its most indulgent and hedonistic elements justified building blocks in the film's narrative. The best part, though, is that all of these events are rooted in the psychological issues and concerns of the characters, not their alternative orientations or work in adult entertainment. The film is very modern and non-judgmental in this way, which I really appreciated. The folks who'd be messed up in any profession or situation are messed up here, and the folks who are decent and good are the same.

Notably, the film balances emotional depth with physical appeal. The diverse male characters are portrayed in ways that will absolutely cater to scopophilic pleasures (the female and gay male gaze), with instances of nudity and physicality that are not only justified within the narrative but necessary to telling the story, with its moral insights and ethical messages. This approach integrates a physical representation within the larger narrative, ensuring that characters are seen as complete individuals, even when they aren't wearing very much.

I want to mention, too, that the emphasis on emotional depth challenges traditional narratives and portrayals of men in films, offering a more nuanced and introspective view. The film succeeds in providing empathy and understanding for its characters.

I'm giving the film a 9, not a 10, because there are a few elements that could have made this film revelatory and near-perfect, but I agree with an online critic who noted the few weaknesses in this film probably result (either directly and directly) from the film's limited budget and the fact that it was shot during the COVID quarantiine. The film's American-auteur style, reminiscent early Linklater, Burns, or Anderson may not align with all viewer preferences, but it's a film worth seeing and I highly recommend it! And if long conversational scenes aren't your thing, the youthful hijinks, plentiful flesh (the eye-popping frontal nude scene from the star is probably best known, but it's just the start) and diverse hook-ups just might be. This balance means "Station to Station" has a little something for everyone, from those who like to analyze movies to those who just want to ogle them.

In conclusion, "Station to Station" is a significant step forward in the evolution of the female and gay male gaze in cinema. Its thoughtful integration of physical appeal with emotional depth and narrative complexity offers a more inclusive and empathetic cinematic experience. Whether one appreciates its literary qualities or focuses on the visually-driven scenes, the film stands as a meaningful contribution to diverse perspectives in film.