Angora Ranch

Okay, admittedly the acting, pace and dialog are not up to par with some high budget movie. That's part of the charm of "indie" films, isn't it?

Putting aside the merits of the the physical attractiveness of some of the actors, the story is good on. Not only is this positive about overcoming fears/anxieties/hangups about age differences; it emphasizes the good and bad aspects of the family responsibilities and relationships and tensions between parents and children. These are realities, just as the awkwardness of some dialog and acting reflect what actually happens between and among people, whatever their sexual identity.

ANGORA RANCH is not a great film but it's at least a passably good one and worth watching. I felt better after seeing it than when I watched EATING OUT.

Watch it only if awful gay movies make you giggle. In an awful way, that is. Not in any cultish or artsy sense of the terms "awful gay movies" and "giggle". Just good old fashioned All American (gay) awful. Did i say it's awful? It's awful. Someone should create a special prize for the best turn-off gay movie and not only give it to this one, but name it after it too. Invite your old, lonely, bad looking uncle for a cup of tea and a game of chess instead. Trust me. He won't like it either. And the young actor in the movie don't seem to like it much himself. He's doing his best to pretend that love is what he feels, but then you should see the man he falls in love with to better understand what a poor, poor casting can do to a cinematic love story.

I wanted to like this but it was simply NOT worth the watching time. I've seen thousands of gay movies over the years and while this one is far from the worst. I generally rate all the films I see on IMDb and I checked. This one did make the bottom 50. It's really too bad because there are the elements of a good story here, and that's part of the reason that this one's so bad. It keeps you hanging on (like Charlie Brown hoping that maybe next time Lucy's not gonna move the ball) the dialogue is often cringe-worthy and you actually would feel bad for the actors but its pretty clear that their abilities are part of the problems as well.

One thing that should have clued me in earlier... the director is also the writer and is also the main character. All of those jobs require skill and many truly skillful individuals can handle one or two of those roles but it's the rarest of things to find a film where all three roles are handle by the same person and handled well.

First off, it seems that Tim Jones, the executive producer and a actor in this film, passed away in August of 2006. May he rest in peace, and thank you for having made the film. Critiques are fine, but I also want to point out that, regardless of constructive criticism, that these people made the film at ALL puts them a far sight ahead of most people. Congrats and cudos to the entire cast & crew!

That said...

This has some good potentials, but suffered from pace issues in several places. Pregnant pauses that should have been picked out by a decent editor made the film drag. The audience would certainly have preferred a shorter film that moved at more brisk a pace. Some of the dialogue is trite, some of it awkward, and too often the blocking looks as though it was made for stage. The best scenes are between the two leads when they forget to act and just have conversation, while they're getting to know each other.

The filmmaker intended to have fun with it, and it does demonstrate a somewhat surreal whimsical feeling, but we could have had more constant reminders, whether via some mechanism, lense coloring, or something to remind us not to expect reality. Then the departures might not have been so taxing.

Did I enjoy the DVD? Yes, despite the flaws (and myself) I did. But I wouldn't wittingly have parted with $27 for a copy, except to support the work.

It's a good first draft. I'd have re-edited, re-shot some scenes... but that would mean remaking the film altogether in this case. The expenses were obviously minimal by Hollywood standards. With some fine-tuning and rewrites, maybe some more outside help, this could have been a much better movie.

I applaud the effort. It's good to see gay independent filmmakers not falling back on cheap sex sells. Now to lose the clichés.

To The Writer/Director: Paul, there ARE some homo men who don't have gay mannerisms. They may even be a substantial portion of the population. They're just inherently unseen. It might have been nice to show this as well, and set another example of tolerance in the process, as you did by this remarkable town you've created. Get ahold of me before you start your next production. I'd be glad to pitch in!

The comments of a number of other reviewers on this site on ANGORA RANCH are worth noting for the issues they raise with some accuracy while missing the greater point of this film which achieves a surprising amount of credibility and satisfaction if you're willing to go with it despite obvious technical shortcomings.

Yes, the fact that it is set in a small town in the state which these days sends the more outrageous bigots to Congress (and presidential primaries) than any other, yet which is unexpectedly accepting of the "exotics" (read gays) in its midst might be presumed to be a fantasy, yet in my experience it DOES happen (and the smaller the town the more likely).

Similarly, the appeal of a thin, fit, handsome older man for another man young enough to be his son would ALSO likely be presumed to be a fantasy to those of limited experience, but the best marriage I know of (although admittedly between two straight people) was a second marriage of 30+ years duration where the bride was younger than her husband's youngest daughter. I've been with my own partner of 33 years (husband of 3) for all these years despite his being 7 years younger than I (we're BOTH woefully out of shape). He still claims I was standing in the way of the man he was really cruising that first night, but he did make the first move.

These presumed fantasies reflect the real world better than many children composing other reviews might suppose and the writing in this film sets these and other issues (the handling of the possible onset of Alzheimer's in a parent or the revelation of a distant parent's own personal secrets) with surprising sophistication and even grace.

As has been noted elsewhere, this film is an early (first?) effort of a group of Texas film makers with a modicum of talent, a high degree of ambition and a remarkable amount of drive. It was shot and marketed digitally on a literal shoestring with a budget smaller than many first rate urban film schools might be able to provide. The budget and lack of experience does show, but if one goes into viewing it understanding that, it may even add to the surprise of the film's ultimate emotional success.

The level of acting from the available cast (the writer/director Paul Bright as the owner of the titular ranch, and his partner/screen father Tim Jones, excepted - they are good by any standard) is not going to be breaking down agent doors for most of those involved, but it should be acknowledged that the actual lead of the film, Thomas Romano as the young advertising agent, gives a performance of considerable more polish than several eventual stars in their first professional outings (does the line "Yonder lies de house of me fadder" ring any bells?).

By the standards of a film intended for merely Festival release and then "straight to video," my "Four Stars" may even be on the conservative side. ANGORA RANCH is not a polished professional release, but it is a decent story remarkably well told under the circumstances and worth checking out if there's nothing more pressing on your schedule. I'd even like to see more from Mr. Bright.