The World Beyond BetterMost > The Culture Tent
I LOVE YOU PHILLIP MORRIS
Front-Ranger:
He does have a point there. ILYPM is a comedy and sometimes it crosses the line. I particularly didn't like the part where Steven discovers that "being a homosexual is very expensive." It was terribly funny and I had to laugh in spite of myself but couldn't they have said something like "being homosexual in South Florida" or just "living high in South Florida"...I think that would have worked just as well. Also, it was expensive because he was infatuated with his bf and just wanted to wow him with gifts and luxury. There are tons of places where being gay is no more expensive than being straight.
There were also places that were very insightful while being funny as well. I'm thinking about Steven's relationship with his ex-wife. She's a bible-thumper and Steven quickly learns how to assert himself without putting down her values...very well done. I also loved the way Steven's and Phillip's relationship unfolded in the prison environment, the stark contrasts.
Ewan's performance sometimes is overshadowed by Jim's (whose wouldn't be?) but on seeing the movie again I appreciated him more. He was never a cariature of a swishy gay guy. I particularly liked the way he acted when Steven threw him for a loop, as he did so many times. The scene when he realized Steven was not a lawyer after all was particularly good. I could go on and on about this movie, its strengths and flaws, but then I would be trespassing into spoiler territory!
Front-Ranger:
Oh, I'd also like to add that the movie took efforts to explain that Steven growing up to be a con man without values was due to his upbringing in a family of doofuses, growing up in suburban Texas, and his feelings of abandonment as an adopted child. But after they established this the rest of the story overwhelms this and the point gets lost in the shuffle. So it would be easy for doofus audiences to draw the conclusion that Steven became a con man as a result of his gayness and make other silly assumptions. But, not to worry; it will never play in Peoria at the rate things are going, except thru Netflix. :-\
delalluvia:
I understand where Segal is coming from, but he has to remember that the movie is all from Russell's POV. To him being gay is expensive.
And also Segal loses sight of who the movie's main character really is with that statement. It's not Russell the gay man, it's Russell the thief and a conman. His ethics are already in the toilet. I wouldn't want anyone looking to him as some sort of role model on that score.
And Segal loses sight that this is a true story - for the dying lover scene, sorry, that's reality. It's not put on the screen as a stereotype - that was a true and painful and impactful entry in Russell's life.
Segal seems to want reality left out. Guess Russell should apologize to Segal for leading such a stereotypical life?
Jeff Wrangler:
--- Quote from: delalluvia on December 31, 2010, 03:29:57 pm ---And also Segal loses sight of who the movie's main character really is with that statement. It's not Russell the gay man, it's Russell the thief and a conman.
--- End quote ---
I don't believe he does. Twice just in the section of his commentary that I quoted, he refers to Carrey's character as a thief. A "swishy thief," to be sure, but he does refer to the character as a thief.
--- Quote ---And Segal loses sight that this is a true story - for the dying lover scene, sorry, that's reality. It's not put on the screen as a stereotype - that was a true and painful and impactful entry in Russell's life.
--- End quote ---
Good point. He does not address the "true story" aspect of the film, though whether he "lost sight" of it or deliberately did not address it so as not to dilute his criticism, I'm not in a position to say.
Jeff Wrangler:
--- Quote from: Front-Ranger on December 31, 2010, 02:07:05 pm ---I also loved the way Steven's and Phillip's relationship unfolded in the prison environment, the stark contrasts.
--- End quote ---
Actually, Segal addressed that aspect of the film, too. I just chose not to go into it when I wrote last night. He thinks the prison environment aspect of the film comes off as way too positive:
"According to this film, life in prison is pretty good for gay guys, since we can buy most anything we want and fall in love."
As Del might point out, however, this ignores the fact that these guys did actually meet and fall in love in prison.
BTW, Mark Segal notwithstanding, I won't be seeing this film because I can't abide Jim Carrey!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version