Poster Boy

POSTER BOY is a film with a lot of potential: the story premise is solid (though a bit tired), the cast of both young and experienced actors is quite fine, and there are some worthwhile statements about our political system, about tolerance and acceptance and family, and about being true to yourself. Despite all of these aspects that should have made a fine little film the whole thing bogs down with some of the worst editing and camera work on record. That, and the writers' (Lecia Rosenthal and Ryan Shiraki) need to place platitudes into normal conversation is most distracting. Zak Tucker as director just didn't seem to have control of this piece.

The story itself is rather simple. Through the gimmick of a confession to a reporter we meet handsome young Henry Kray (the talented Matt Newton), gay since early teens but electing to keep his private life a secret, who is the son of Senator Jack Kray (Michael Lerner) and his lovely but docile wife Eunice (the fine Karen Allen). It seems that six months prior to the time we are invited into the conversation Henry met Anthony (hunky Jack Noseworthy) whose roommate is HIV positive Izzie (Valerie Geffner). Henry and Anthony have a one-night stand the day before Jack Kray is to give a speech for re-election at Henry's college. The Senator accidentally hits Izzie with his car and Eunice insists Izzie stay with them in their suite where the two women bond. Meanwhile Henry's night with Anthony makes him late for the speech, but a talk to Henry from Jack before the speech telling him what to say (Jack is the best father, loves family values, etc) sticks in Henry's throat and soon after he obeys his father's wishes for the speech introduction, Henry turns to his table partner Anthony and the two kiss openly as the Senator is addressing the crowd - all caught by the media of course.

How this moment of honesty alters the lives of everyone around is the crux of the ending. Not a bad tale, but the camera work is so patchy and disconcertingly disconnected that it defies the viewer to keep the storyline straight. But if the viewer can keep up visually, the performances by the cast are well worth attention. There is some very fine talent on the screen of this B movie! Grady Harp

A technical quibble first: my hearing is less than perfect, and Poster Boy has a lot of mumbled dialogue with no subtitles on the DVD. New films without subtitles are just inexcusable in my opinion--what is someone who is deaf supposed to do? Just not watch that film?

The best aspect of the film is the acting. The core cast are all fantastic. What didn't work so well for me was the cinematography, editing and the general low budget approach. The cinematography is mostly (or maybe all) hand-held, with a lot of shaky cam shots and a lot of blurriness. The film is loaded with overexposed shots and a dominance of white. While that may have been so for metaphorical reasons, it's not the most pleasant thing to watch aesthetically if it's relentless--and that's also not the best way to get the metaphorical aspects across. The editing is frequently frenetic. In combination with the locations, sets and general lack of music, Poster Boy has the feel of a 100-thousand dollar art house drama made by a director who is way too obsessed with The Blair Witch Project.

Fortunately, the story is better than that would suggest, although it's not perfect. This would have been far more on-target and controversial 15 years ago (given our present knowledge and overall lack of reaction to the sexuality of some political offspring), but it's still engaging enough, especially given the performances, and at any rate, it deals with important issues that are still far from resolved in our culture.

Most reviews for this movie are quite negative, and I guess I am in the minority when I say this - but this movie was fantastic!!! It is not your traditional gay movie, actually it doesn't really have much of a gay focus which might annoy some people. It's more a coming of age story and is relate-able to everyone, no matter what your sexual orientation is. At first the plot of this movie might seem to move along too slowly, but that is simply to establish the characters and setting of the movie which is something that has to be done to fully appreciate this movie. When you look back on the movie, you do realize how everything fits in together perfectly, now that you know everything, although it might seem a little bit muddled halfway through the movie.

Some other users have commented on the movie not being multi dimensional, but I think that the way that the characters reacted are pretty realistic, and most people (generally) are multi dimensional but may only show one side of their selves for one reason or another, and don't forget that this movie is focused from the point of view of Henry Kray. It also has many plot twists, and though it has be commented upon that it is too predictable, I thought nothing of the sort. The characters are oddly unpredictable, and are like multi layered onions, many people might just look it and observe that is it just another gay movie, but it is not, it is so much more than that.

So, the hand cam got on my nerves rather quickly.

Spent the first part of the movie trying to figure out what kind of film I was watching. The film is obviously set up to be a "worlds collide" situation. Perhaps I was expecting that those 2 worlds, or their separateness, would have been better defined from the beginning.

The whole project comes off like an amateur attempt judging by the lack of polish. The lighting is crap. The camera work is distracting. The casting is good. The dialogue is effective but the plot jumped around too much for me to follow. Makes me feel like I have A.D.D.

The technical flaws kept me out of the film and I was left with an overpowering sense of watching a film rather than experiencing it.

I just saw this at the Outfar Film Festival in Phoenix, and I have to say I was disappointed. The plot had the making of a really engrossing story: The handsome college-age son of a Southern Right-wing Senator is a closeted gay, and is "outed" in an attempt to destroy the re-election of his father. Depending on how the story was scripted, I anticipated feeling sympathy for the son, anger toward those who invade his private life for political gain. Or, the could have scripted so that one feels the "closet-case" got what he deserved. Unfortunately, the way the film was scripted and filmed destroyed any chance of achieving an engrossing story or feeling anything for the characters involved.

The story is told in the form of a rather obnoxious reporter interviewing Henry, the senator's son. As he describes the events leading up to his outing, we fade in & out of the scenes. This format has been used successfully several times in the past. It doesn't work this time. By the end of the film I felt as thought I'd watched a bad documentary, just witnessing the events, feeling nothing for the people involved. The other problem is the main characters seem almost schizophrenic in their personalities. One moment Henry is throwing the suit & tie clad Young Republican into the pool; the next moment he's bonding with him and hiring him a hooker when he learns he's still a virgin. We first meet Anthony as an "out there" Act Up! activist; we next see him a sensitive best friend of an AIDS-stricken woman. Next he's telling her that he also had sex with her boyfriend that gave her AIDS; we next see him caring about Henry, whom he had vowed to "out".

By the time Henry is outed, I was looking at my watch and waiting for the ending credits. Too bad. Good plot done wrong in about every detail. Better luck next time.