Are We Lost Forever

Talented actors and good cinematography do not save the show, due to the poor screenplay. The dialogue is simply not believable; the characters express their emotions as if they had been watching daytime soap operas all their lives.

I never thought a film could equal ' Theo and Hugo ' and ' Sauvage ' but this film perhaps even surpasses both of them. David Fardmar has quite simply made a masterpiece and Bjorn Elgard gave a performance that stunned me with its quiet power. Unlike the above mentioned films the sexuality is slightly less explicit, but all the stronger for it. Enough is shown and is beautiful to watch. No abuse, no violence and always in the context of that most fragile of things, an attempt to attain mutual love. Even in one scene where a young man is just used as a sexual outlet due to frustration and emotional loss was sadly understandable. Basically we trace the story of two lovers who have broken up, and it is a heartbreak that both endure and cannot mend. To say more would be to spoil the film. But I must return to Bjorn Elgard's tenderly inward performance, and his silent tears in one scene cracked me up. Nothing false and nothing overstated, and it takes a lot from within to give life to a character and to make the viewer believe that he is not simply acting, but being the role. I do not diminish in any way the other actors as all gave fine performances, but Elgard's faraway look, lost sometimes even to the point of inner breakdown is perfection itself. There is comedy as well in the film, and it is finely placed in several scenes; once in a restaurant and in another where a divided bed ( literally torn away like an emotional amputation ) made me want to laugh and cry at the same time. And yes viewers men do cry, and I am thankful for it. If I am giving the impression this film is a weepie it is not. It is a sober look at Gay men's relationships and is multi-layered. Above all it is superbly made without a scene that jarred and the camera work was balanced and assured. I like to believe even the perhaps homophobic Ingmar Berman would have envied its power and the heights and depths of what it means to reach for truth and love.

Short, a beautiful film. Not only at the aesthetic level, but for a sort of honest portrait of the break- up of a relation, for the clean story, for the ignore of excesses. For the clarity . And, sure, for the acting. It is easy to criticize it . But its basic, significant virtue is to be a mirror. It reflects basic realities, familiar emotions, well known feelings and not comfortable said words.It propose a wise way to build his character by Bjorn Elgard, making his Adrian realistic, dark, vulnerable, easy recognizable in many fellows of us or, maybe, in ourselves. It propose a complex love story. And it did that in fair, smart and delicate manner. So, a very special film. Not th last, for the magnificent end - the photography is one of the motives for define in this way.

If you have ever been in a relationship that ended sadly, you will be able to empathize very well with the protagonists here. And since the actors portray their characters with such accuracy, you will feel their pain so acutely that you may indeed find it painful to watch. It might even bring you to tears. Yes, it is a downer of a film. The very first scene is the actual break-up point in the relationship, which occurs in their bed, as they discuss what has happened to their relationship and if there is any chance that their problems can be fixed. Even the bed itself becomes a point of contention, a sort of symbol of division.

As each of them returns to the modern gay dating world, we see them go through some very realistic attempts to move on with their lives. We witness a few of their dating encounters: some comic, some desperate, and some just sad. There is a very touching scene where the two of them and their respective new flames attempt to have a civil dinner party.

So, dare we hope for some sort of reconciliation in the end? Watch and see. (And look in the Special Features on the disk to see an alternate ending.)

Yet again, I've been glued to the set watching a film of one hour and forty four minutes. I'm always apprehensive when a film goes over the ninety minute mark as I fear it might just be a sprawling mess. However, here, I didn't glance once at the clock to see how much longer there would be till the end.

When the film started, I was also worried that it was going to be similar to "Weekend" or "Sodom", both films that bored the pants off me. The format looked as if it was going to be the same - two guys discussing their past and their relationship. However, the director and writer had mixed a judicious number of other characters into the pot although it was a film principally about Adrian and Hampus.

The differences between the two leads were marked as were their different ways of dealing with their break up. Adrian, who was afraid of ever losing control, had to deal with it having happened. And with his personality, he was the one who had the greater difficulties in being alone and accepting the fact. Hampus had his hardships too but they were impulsive and emotional, not sustained and obsessive.

The minor characters were ciphers, of course. This was a film about the two former lovers. Nonetheless, their contributions moved the plot along. The one plot device I disliked though was the impossible coincidence of the meeting in the HIV clinic. There were better ways to engineer the story towards a dinner party for the exes and their new fellas.

I understand that on the deluxe DVD there is an alternative ending that can be played. If that ending is what I suspect it might be, then it would be an utter cop out and I'm glad it wasn't used for general release.

The very last shots in the film screamed "Sweden" to me. Even without having seen the film or heard the language, seeing those fields and that lane would have had me saying that this was Sweden or (possibly) Finland. I'd feared that the ending was going to be different but it was perfect and apt.