Denied

A very well scripted film, wonderfully acted, depicting two young men struggling with their feeling towards each other, in the midst of heterosexual surroundings.

Unfortunately, the sound mix is so bad that the dialogs are impossible to follow - and they are essential to understanding what is going on.

I found a work-around on my computer: using an equalizer on the audio, I neutralised the low and medium frequencies and enhanced the medium-high frequencies: this made the dialogs followable. Quite amazing that the producers omitted this quality check!

I disregard the low light quality criticism. True, many scenes are filmed with scarcely a light from a light bulb, but for me, that enhances the atmosphere, although I would not have minded some more subtle shading at times.

All in all, if you can fix the sound, very worth while watching.

I pulled this one off the shelf at the video store without any idea what to expect out of it. The filming and particularly the sound seem amateur - don't look for special effects, or even for particularly revealing camera-work, and there are a few scenes where the dialogue is difficult to make out.

But what this movie is, is honest. Unlike in Hollywood, life doesn't have a script and doesn't always work out to "happily ever after", and the film has an uncertain, occasionally almost disjointed sense to it that reflects that. The lead actors, playing Troy and Merrick, acknowledge it as well; even Troy, who from the beginning seems to know more or less what he wants, doesn't know how to get it, and so is just as uncertain as his friend. The acting is understated and very believable, all the way to the end.

"Latter Days" has some similar themes, and would probably be enjoyed by those who like this movie, but like its setting in L.A. itself, "Latter Days" is at times a little bit larger than life. "Denied" has a down-to-earth, earnest feel to it that for the most part overcomes its technical shortcomings.

This movie wanted to be better than it is. College dropouts Troy and Merrick share an apartment in a dead-end town. They appear to sleep together sometimes, but their own mental issues plus a psychotic former girlfriend sabotage their chances at a relationship. Narrative question: do they end up together?

The plot is well done. The story is familiar (or at least believable) enough that the dramatic tension works. Character development was decent. Some of the dialog falls flat, mostly due to the poor lighting and over-aggressive Foley editing. The leads are quite attractive, but the sex scenes are only in the PG13 range.

Cinematography is weak. Consistently under-lit throughout. The voice track is nearly inaudible at several key points. A couple of awkward edits too. Overall, would have been an entirely competent movie in the hands of a more experienced director.

This movie has going for it what very few 'gay movies' have; the characters and the plot are realistic. The principle actors were very good in their roles. The only real problem was getting the acting down on film. Lots of the scenes are pretty dark, and sometimes it's hard to hear exactly what's being said. But, these are problems that lots of low-budget films, and, again, the story makes up for it.

Some people I know say that the long shots of one character during a scene, or the periods of silence between the actors make them uncomfortable, but that's why i like the movie. It's very realistic. People don't talk like they do in Kevin Smith films. Sometimes you just sit with your boyfriend and don't know what to say for a while.

Again, Acting-Good, Story-Good, Cinematography-Medium. If nothing else, see it because Matt Austin, who plays Merrick here, is the Green Ranger in the current Power Rangers Show. Small World.

I was rooting for this movie, even as my every hope was smashed the whole way through: all the elements of a truly engaging, affecting, sophisticated picture are here, but they are botched beyond belief. Maybe somebody could give director David Scott a bigger budget and a staff and they could try it again from scratch.

The basic premise of the movie--requited but unacknowledged love--will ring true with a lot of queer folk: "You make love to me all the time. Why can't we just be boyfriends?" (That may have been one of the lines, actually, but the sound on this movie is so very dreadful I suspect I caught less than a third of the dialog.) There's no reason this film shouldn't resonate with anyone who's been in the position to rue their beloved's denial of acceptable, respectable, publicly avowed togetherness. And I suppose it does, with those more forgiving of its many distracting flaws. Am I unrealistic in expecting a certain basic level of competence from a movie?

The young actors are not without talent; or, at any rate, they are much better at what they do than the director, who frames extremely long static shots (such as that of Troy and Merrick discussing their issues in the living room) with no visual relief, no character movement, and no particular tension-building purpose. Not to mention the astonishing percentage of frames in the movie that feature Troy's obliquely downcast, unchanging stare-into-the-abyss! (Perhaps we should be thankful that Scott did not devote equal time to capturing the abyss staring back into Troy.) One is reminded of The Brown Bunny, which was built of 8 sentences, a blow job, and 80 minutes of Vincent Gallo alone and looking like he's just eaten a fistful of bear scat.

Our writer-director allows his protagonist the dignity of doing the only responsible thing by the end of the movie: growing up and getting over Merrick. He even permits a cloudy, ambiguous split between them, in which the lingering affection is just as obvious as the need for separation. All this could turn a film golden, win awards, and jerk tears like nobody's business--if only there were the tiniest shard of coherent film technique backing it up.