8 reviews
The town of Julia SC is approaching the 40th anniversary of the assassination of its leading civil rights figure, just as it is contemplating tearing down GOSPEL HILL -- its historic black district -- for a golf course. Can the many characters of this drama find redemption in racial reconciliation, or will it ignore its history for the price of a few jobs from a rapacious developer?
This fascinating drama, which works harder than any recent movie I have seen at capturing the rhythms of the current-day small-town South, deserved a bigger audience than it is getting on DVD and cable. However, the movie does not entirely succeed, simply because it is trying to depict a fairly complicated community in two hours, and to get its mission done, it reaches far too often for handy clichés. (You know the ones -- outside corporations are by definition super-evil, every white man is at least a little bit racist, and there is a rich cabal outside the main action of the drama who really control everything.) The most successful dramas in recent years dealing with smaller communities (Twin Peaks, Friday Night Lights) have been TV shows which have more time to develop characters and a sense of community. This movie, which has too many major characters to develop, has the right idea in its pacing, and its allowance in all but one of its main characters some shades of gray. But it can't quite get to a believable conclusion of redemption, because the movie running time was not there. Considering the elephantitis of so many content free films these days, it is a shame the movie makers did not have the budget or the runtime to put more meat on its fascinating subplots.
This guy needs another chance at his subject. Because he understands the South, and the way that southern towns are so often haunted by their past. Hopefully, he'll get a miniseries on cable to demonstrate it.
This fascinating drama, which works harder than any recent movie I have seen at capturing the rhythms of the current-day small-town South, deserved a bigger audience than it is getting on DVD and cable. However, the movie does not entirely succeed, simply because it is trying to depict a fairly complicated community in two hours, and to get its mission done, it reaches far too often for handy clichés. (You know the ones -- outside corporations are by definition super-evil, every white man is at least a little bit racist, and there is a rich cabal outside the main action of the drama who really control everything.) The most successful dramas in recent years dealing with smaller communities (Twin Peaks, Friday Night Lights) have been TV shows which have more time to develop characters and a sense of community. This movie, which has too many major characters to develop, has the right idea in its pacing, and its allowance in all but one of its main characters some shades of gray. But it can't quite get to a believable conclusion of redemption, because the movie running time was not there. Considering the elephantitis of so many content free films these days, it is a shame the movie makers did not have the budget or the runtime to put more meat on its fascinating subplots.
This guy needs another chance at his subject. Because he understands the South, and the way that southern towns are so often haunted by their past. Hopefully, he'll get a miniseries on cable to demonstrate it.
- alonzoiii-1
- Dec 26, 2010
- Permalink
When I noticed an unknown drama, deep within the TV listings of Sky Movies, Gospel Hill cropped up - further investigation showed a sterling array of well known actors: Danny Glover, Angela Bassett, Samuel L Jackson and Julia Styles. What film lover would NOT want to check this one out?
Radio Times gave it a low rating and almost no review, IMDb's score barely scraped above 5/10. What was wrong with this movie?
On viewing, it is a quiet, solid and undramatic movie. Many could describe it as boring; it runs more akin to a decent, rather worthy TV movie, touching on issues involving a small town community in the Deep South. The issues are quietly relevant and handled suitably. The acting, by all concerned is sterling but none excel and none take their roles above those of ordinary people, which is probably a good thing but that could be why it might be seen as lacklustre and underwhelming. I thought that Julia Styles, who I've not always enjoyed, as the young schoolteacher particularly poignant and believable.
Apparently, it was shot in just 19 days on a shoestring budget, by debut director Giancarlo Esposito. The laid-back bluesy soundtrack was both fitting and enjoyable.
I agree with the other reviewer about the ending. It may have been a movie that had complex topics that couldn't be resolved, but this was just shut-off. Like a novel that had its last chapter missing. This is probably why I'm only awarding 6/10 instead 7/10.
Why it seems to be only available as a region 1, effectively barring UK & European buyers is a puzzle. It certainly won't be in anyone's top 10, or necessarily remembered even but its cast list and the fact that it's OK, bordering on good, makes it even more curious. Having said that, I wouldn't be one who'd buy the DVD, most probably.
Radio Times gave it a low rating and almost no review, IMDb's score barely scraped above 5/10. What was wrong with this movie?
On viewing, it is a quiet, solid and undramatic movie. Many could describe it as boring; it runs more akin to a decent, rather worthy TV movie, touching on issues involving a small town community in the Deep South. The issues are quietly relevant and handled suitably. The acting, by all concerned is sterling but none excel and none take their roles above those of ordinary people, which is probably a good thing but that could be why it might be seen as lacklustre and underwhelming. I thought that Julia Styles, who I've not always enjoyed, as the young schoolteacher particularly poignant and believable.
Apparently, it was shot in just 19 days on a shoestring budget, by debut director Giancarlo Esposito. The laid-back bluesy soundtrack was both fitting and enjoyable.
I agree with the other reviewer about the ending. It may have been a movie that had complex topics that couldn't be resolved, but this was just shut-off. Like a novel that had its last chapter missing. This is probably why I'm only awarding 6/10 instead 7/10.
Why it seems to be only available as a region 1, effectively barring UK & European buyers is a puzzle. It certainly won't be in anyone's top 10, or necessarily remembered even but its cast list and the fact that it's OK, bordering on good, makes it even more curious. Having said that, I wouldn't be one who'd buy the DVD, most probably.
- tim-764-291856
- May 15, 2012
- Permalink
- dbborroughs
- Apr 13, 2009
- Permalink
"Gospel Hill", Giancarlo Esposito's directorial debut, was presented at the 12th Green Mountain Film Festival, after a modest DVD release (which seems to be a popular way to distribute independent films that are still running the festivals circuit without getting the exposure they deserve).
Shot in 19 days with a very limited budget in South Carolina, it's a slow paced story of racial tension and redemption in a small town. Forty years ago, Paul Malcolm (an uncredited Samuel L. Jackson), a black civil rights activist, was murdered, and since then his son John (Danny Glover) has withdrawn from the community. The town's ex-sheriff (Tom Bower), abandoned the investigation on Paul's murder, creating a long term tension between blacks and whites. A golf course development, led by Dr. Palmer (Esposito himself), is about to force the residents of the black neighborhood of Gospel Hill out of their homes, which only makes the racial tension get worse.
As someone who worked with Spike Lee so many times, it's interesting how Esposito's approach to racial relations is completely different from Lee's explosive visual and moral style. Esposito takes his time to introduce the characters, tell the story, being almost contemplative, and seeks redemption for its conclusion. That's not necessarily a bad thing, actually it's refreshing. However, his characters are poorly written, the script is too simplistic, and although Danny Glover and Tom Bower (which slightly resembles Peter Boyle's character in "Monster's Ball") have good moments, the ensemble acting is underwhelming (Angela Bassett, usually a great actress, has had better times, and Esposito, a great actor himself, shows that directing yourself doesn't always work). Listening to him speak about this project leaves no doubt that he had good intentions and a passion for it. Nonetheless, I couldn't help but feeling like I was watching a run of the mill TV movie made thousands of times before. Good intentions alone don't make a good film, but at least he tried to tell a story, which is always something to be praised. Maybe in his next attempt, he will get a better result. 4.5/10.
Shot in 19 days with a very limited budget in South Carolina, it's a slow paced story of racial tension and redemption in a small town. Forty years ago, Paul Malcolm (an uncredited Samuel L. Jackson), a black civil rights activist, was murdered, and since then his son John (Danny Glover) has withdrawn from the community. The town's ex-sheriff (Tom Bower), abandoned the investigation on Paul's murder, creating a long term tension between blacks and whites. A golf course development, led by Dr. Palmer (Esposito himself), is about to force the residents of the black neighborhood of Gospel Hill out of their homes, which only makes the racial tension get worse.
As someone who worked with Spike Lee so many times, it's interesting how Esposito's approach to racial relations is completely different from Lee's explosive visual and moral style. Esposito takes his time to introduce the characters, tell the story, being almost contemplative, and seeks redemption for its conclusion. That's not necessarily a bad thing, actually it's refreshing. However, his characters are poorly written, the script is too simplistic, and although Danny Glover and Tom Bower (which slightly resembles Peter Boyle's character in "Monster's Ball") have good moments, the ensemble acting is underwhelming (Angela Bassett, usually a great actress, has had better times, and Esposito, a great actor himself, shows that directing yourself doesn't always work). Listening to him speak about this project leaves no doubt that he had good intentions and a passion for it. Nonetheless, I couldn't help but feeling like I was watching a run of the mill TV movie made thousands of times before. Good intentions alone don't make a good film, but at least he tried to tell a story, which is always something to be praised. Maybe in his next attempt, he will get a better result. 4.5/10.
- Benedict_Cumberbatch
- Mar 29, 2009
- Permalink
For such a low-budget, college-production-looking film with a terribly weak script and untied ends, I'm surprised such big names were recruited to act in it. Perhaps everyone was friends with Giancarlo Esposito and wanted to help him out during his film debut. As noble as that gesture was, it didn't really make it any better.
An interesting premise shows Julia Stiles moving to a small Southern town to start a job as an elementary school teacher. There's a struggle going on between a large corporation trying to buy up land in favor of building a golf course. Folks in town don't want to give up their homes and land that have been in their families for generations, but the local doctor (also Giancarlo Esposito) wants to jump on the opportunity to grease his own pockets. Against him is Angela Bassett, another schoolteacher. Her husband is Danny Glover, one of the most respected men in town because of his legacy; his father was a prominent Civil Rights figure (shown in flashbacks by Samuel L. Jackson) and was murdered by an unknown assailant in the late '60s. The sheriff at the time (Tom Bower) never solved the murder, and it's puzzled everyone for decades.
The plot sounds intriguing, so I don't blame you for wanting to rent it. Danny Glover is such a presence, and when he's on the screen, you can't take your eyes off him. But the rest of the movie, when he's not tugging on your heartstrings, just isn't very good. Predictable dialogue, slow pacing, entire scenes that feel ad lib, but with one good message: no matter how good her intentions, Julia can never understand what it's like to live Danny's life.
An interesting premise shows Julia Stiles moving to a small Southern town to start a job as an elementary school teacher. There's a struggle going on between a large corporation trying to buy up land in favor of building a golf course. Folks in town don't want to give up their homes and land that have been in their families for generations, but the local doctor (also Giancarlo Esposito) wants to jump on the opportunity to grease his own pockets. Against him is Angela Bassett, another schoolteacher. Her husband is Danny Glover, one of the most respected men in town because of his legacy; his father was a prominent Civil Rights figure (shown in flashbacks by Samuel L. Jackson) and was murdered by an unknown assailant in the late '60s. The sheriff at the time (Tom Bower) never solved the murder, and it's puzzled everyone for decades.
The plot sounds intriguing, so I don't blame you for wanting to rent it. Danny Glover is such a presence, and when he's on the screen, you can't take your eyes off him. But the rest of the movie, when he's not tugging on your heartstrings, just isn't very good. Predictable dialogue, slow pacing, entire scenes that feel ad lib, but with one good message: no matter how good her intentions, Julia can never understand what it's like to live Danny's life.
- HotToastyRag
- Mar 22, 2021
- Permalink
Long been a fan of Giancarlo Esposito and it was great to meet and talk with him at the Sedona Film Festival where this film was shown. It is a sweet story full of redemption for many characters, not a shoot em up, car chase movie so maybe it is not enough for many viewers.
It is a very good film and I would highly recommend it to all. The acting is excellent and the direction sharp. It's a great reminder of how some of the more difficult times in this country have contributed to the world we live in today. Of how as humans we control our ability to forgive and forget or not.
My only real criticism is about Julie Stiles character Rosie, I kept waiting for her the truth of her interest in the story to be revealed it just didn't quite work for me.
But all in all I would say it was a great first directorial effort and I look forward to his next project.
It is a very good film and I would highly recommend it to all. The acting is excellent and the direction sharp. It's a great reminder of how some of the more difficult times in this country have contributed to the world we live in today. Of how as humans we control our ability to forgive and forget or not.
My only real criticism is about Julie Stiles character Rosie, I kept waiting for her the truth of her interest in the story to be revealed it just didn't quite work for me.
But all in all I would say it was a great first directorial effort and I look forward to his next project.
I just had the pleasure of seeing this film at the Albuquerque Film Festival and have to say that I was severely impressed. I have not been moved by a film in this way for quite some time. The move this movie made away from the stereotypical negativity that can blanket this genre was a breath of fresh air. When you consider the short period of time taken to shoot this film(19 days)it becomes that much more of a wonder. Being that this is Giancarlo's first project as Director, I greatly look forward to his next. I also had the pleasure of hearing him speak about his vision for this movie at the festival after the viewing and I have to say that his intentions ring clear. I am a better person for having seen it.
- danceability-1
- Dec 17, 2009
- Permalink