Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaAfter what is supposed to be a no-strings hook up, two men discuss their dreams, what ideal happiness might be like, and maybe a future together.After what is supposed to be a no-strings hook up, two men discuss their dreams, what ideal happiness might be like, and maybe a future together.After what is supposed to be a no-strings hook up, two men discuss their dreams, what ideal happiness might be like, and maybe a future together.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
Avaliações em destaque
This movie may have its issues (the dialogue can be somewhat painful at times, as can the direction) but there are two big saving graces in this film that make it worth a watch: Matthew Jaeger and Robert Mammana. Both actors fit into their roles wonderfully and their chemistry feels very genuine; simple, natural, and therefore, it is easy to invest in their characters' main conflict - that is, the idea of love that transcends socially constructed sexual definitions.
The art direction is also fairly interesting - rather than the standard, the film is shot in a direct stage-to-film aesthetic - one set, dramatic lighting, and the simplicity works in it's favour, though it can seem heavy-handed at times.
Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Something different, with two amazing performances that will stay with you.
The art direction is also fairly interesting - rather than the standard, the film is shot in a direct stage-to-film aesthetic - one set, dramatic lighting, and the simplicity works in it's favour, though it can seem heavy-handed at times.
Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Something different, with two amazing performances that will stay with you.
For a love story, this movie is oddly formal, stylized and cold. It is a lot like kabuki, the highly formal, highly stylized classical Japanese dance/drama. It is the most tightly scripted and choreographed movie I have ever seen: not one word, not one gesture by either character is spontaneous. It feels more like very expertly executed computer animation than like two human men falling in love.
I think the basic problem is the Platonic philosophy that dominates and runs insistently through the whole play. That philosophy - that the body is only a shallow, essentially meaningless reflection of spiritual reality - is itself so cold and so formal that it practically demands a treatment like this.
That is sad. This could have been touching and meaningful, but it ends up being just very well executed technique on the part of everyone involved: the director, actors, set designer, cinematographer, etc. Like kabuki, it is fascinating to watch, but the fascination is purely intellectual, just like Plato. It is a peculiar and unsatisfying way to tell a love story.
I think the basic problem is the Platonic philosophy that dominates and runs insistently through the whole play. That philosophy - that the body is only a shallow, essentially meaningless reflection of spiritual reality - is itself so cold and so formal that it practically demands a treatment like this.
That is sad. This could have been touching and meaningful, but it ends up being just very well executed technique on the part of everyone involved: the director, actors, set designer, cinematographer, etc. Like kabuki, it is fascinating to watch, but the fascination is purely intellectual, just like Plato. It is a peculiar and unsatisfying way to tell a love story.
"Guy" (Matthew Jaeger) is sitting on a park bench contemplating Plato when he is approached by the rather uncouth builder "Doug" (Robert Mammana) who has heard that this is a place to go for some easy sex. Initially, the former is uninterested but a conversation sets things in motion that starts the ball rolling on a relationship that goes on to challenge both men's perceptions of what is gay, straight, and of what love actually means. I rather liked this even though it is scripted to within an inch of it's life - "do you realise how dead that food is?". The gloomily lit photography looks, much of the time, as though the entire thing has been shot on one camera and edited together using sellotape and lots of good will and it has a stolid presentation that takes some getting used to. All of that said, however, once it builds up an head of steam there is an obvious, quite natural and basic, dynamic between "Guy" and "Doug" and it does work well in this theatre-style multi-set one stage environment. The two performances - particularly Jaeger's - are sensitive, occasionally funny and the dialogue looks at attraction and stereotype but in a slightly observational, and therefore less static fashion. The ending is slightly predictable - despite efforts to tempt a stray cat with vegetarian tuna, but proves testament to the triumph of love over almost all human-made rules and constricts and spins a theory about "Sleeping Beauty" that you're unlikely to have encountered before.
I tired very quickly of Guy's helplessness and whining and began to focus on that horrific lump on the left side of his face, which I think needs a biopsy.
I started watching it thinking it was going to be a how to i erase this.
The back and forth of the conversation on the bench, my thought was this guy should get up and run. But it was brilliantly written that i had to keep watching their exchange. Was the guy not quite right? Were they both not quite right?
The acting of both characters was really spot on and believable.
I have had conversations with someone that I was not sure if i should run away. And stayed.
The fantasy part of doug returning was confusing . Did he really or was it a dream?
I watched it until the end.
And did not think how do I get this time back? As with many movies.
Really liked it.
As to my crazy conversation, we became friends. And i think of him often. And hope he is safe, he moved away.
The back and forth of the conversation on the bench, my thought was this guy should get up and run. But it was brilliantly written that i had to keep watching their exchange. Was the guy not quite right? Were they both not quite right?
The acting of both characters was really spot on and believable.
I have had conversations with someone that I was not sure if i should run away. And stayed.
The fantasy part of doug returning was confusing . Did he really or was it a dream?
I watched it until the end.
And did not think how do I get this time back? As with many movies.
Really liked it.
As to my crazy conversation, we became friends. And i think of him often. And hope he is safe, he moved away.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesTodas as entradas contêm spoilers
- Cenas durante ou pós-créditosThank you to the late F. Gary Newton and to Players Ring, the wonderful theater he founded in Portsmouth, NH Your daring mission to produce original works for the stage has allowed writers who might otherwise never be heard to come before the public with their ideals and dreams. One of those dreams came to life in July 2005 when you produced the world premiere of JUST SAY LOVE.
- Trilhas sonorasYour Eyes Tell The Truth
Written and Performed by
Robert Beal III (as Robert E. Beal III)
and
Jarrett Osborn
Recorded, Mixed
and Mastered at
BB3 Audio
Newfields, NH USA
© (p) 2008 BMI
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Centrais de atendimento oficiais
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Только скажи... люблю
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 3.944
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 1.257
- 28 de mar. de 2010
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 3.944
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 15 min(75 min)
- Cor
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente