Customer Reviews

The Art of Being Straight [ NON-USA FORMAT, PAL, Reg.0 Import - Australia ]

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I usually run from gay-themed films written, directed, and acted in by the same person. Jesse Rosen has proven the exception. With unusually high production values for a small-budget film, Rosen tells the story of a young man in transition. The actors in the major and minor roles (but especially Rosen, Pete Scherer, and Rachel Castillo) deliver wonderfully believable, sensitive, and subtle performances. There are no moral or didactic lessons here, and, like life itself, little resolution . . . just a beautifully told short story. Jesse Rosen as a writer, director, and/or actor will be someone whose work I will follow.

Having read some of the customer reviews I was eager to watch this movie, especially after having seen the numerous awards given to the film at gay festivals throughout the world. I must in all honesty say I am unsure as to why any such award would have been given in the first place, as the movie was far from convincing. If anything it was a tired reflection of what could have been excellent. in a single word, it was 'dull'.

The main actor Jesse Rosen was okay (and this is perhaps the best word to describe his acting), although I found his portrayal of inner conflict to be furtherest from the truth. Anyone who has suffered the trauma of an internal war, torn between sexual ambiguity and societal normality, would know that this is far more intense than that shown in this portrayal. The idea of such conflict however would resonate with many, in that a relatively good looking young man, with a sincere and proven confidence in his ability to attract and conquer the opposite sex, is suddenly thrown into intense conflict as a result of a new sexual awakening and attraction to a man. This man is his boss, who despite the intentions of the writer (whom I suspect intended the boss to be good-looking, sexually confident and almost predatory in his sexual ability to attract others), was in my opinion quite hopeless. Had the scenario played itself out in the world (where most of us reside), his boss would have been the subject of a sexual harassment suit quicker than the taking of an instant photograph. He was almost lecherous, and far from the seduction it was intended to be.

Quite frankly a young man in Josh's predicament would never have been seduced in this way by such a man. In fact the metropolitan police would still be looking for him today, as his escape from this dimension would have been remarkable. Several sound barriers would have been broken, and persons in the next county would have been mesmerized by the speed of his departure. In short, although Tim Curry (in the movie 'Clue') would say 'too late', this was bad casting with a remarkably weak script.

Whilst not horrible, it was certainly not the raving success some have labelled it. If you have some money to spend, there are far better choices out there. Like a tooth extraction, or a trip to the zoo.

Jon is a 23 year old who moves from the East Coast to Los Angeles, leaving behind a girlfriend and hoping to start a career in photography. He moves in with his younger brother and his college friends, and proceeds to impress them as the "ladies' man" the proud brother claimed. Jon accepts an entry-level job at an ad agency. To Jon's own surprise, he is not completely taken aback when his boss makes a pass at him, and that first experience makes him consider that he might actually be gay.

A parallel plot concerns Jon's college pal Maddie, working at a job she hates in a gallery, and in a relationship she is unsure about with another woman. When an interesting young man moves in next door, Maddie wonders what a relationship with him would be like, which further creates a riff between the two women.

Whenever I see one name as the writer/director/star, my initial reaction is "Uh, oh!" ... since that is rarely a wise move. Jesse Rosen (who plays Jon as a young man whose self respect is based primarily on others' opinions of him) actually does a fairly good job with this admittedly-simplistic storyline, especially considering the limited budget he had to work with and a largely inexperienced cast ... but I do feel a more experienced director or screenwriter could have made this a much more credible and useful film. As it stands, it illustrates some confusing dilemmas about sexuality and coming out, points out how modern lingo (his young roommates use "gay" as a synonym for lame, and trash-talk each other as such) can hurt someone dealing with such issues, but really doesn't come up with anything new, pretty much just ending the film without closure. Despite its shortcomings, it is a commendable effort, easy to watch, and the open-ended conclusion might spur some discussions among viewers. I give it four stars out of five.

The Art Of Being Straight was obviously a low-budget independent movie, but was done well in my opinion. There is a consistent tone throughout the movie. It was not meant to be high drama or melodramatic to begin with, and I think a number of other reviewers here have missed this point, hoping it would be something matching their own expectations. And contrary to others' remarks, I found everyone's acting to be quite credible and real. Jesse Rosen set out to tell a particular story in a thoughtful and an evenly unfolding way, and it works.

Actually this is a two stories way: from being gay to being straight (Maddie, the lesbian who is in love with another girl but who is enticed by a male neighbor) and from being straight to being gay (Jon, the college frat boy who is bi-curious and has a relationship with an older man). In the end who was gay/lesbian (not straight) will confirm the chosen sexuality, and who was curious will remain curious.

If I'm to be true, I don't think Paul is the right choice for a bi-curious to decide to be gay; Paul is a don juan, always searching for fresh meat; true, after debausching the young and innocent (or at least innocent of all gay things) Jon, Paul will re-think to his priority and will realize that he is past forty and still alone.

Jon instead, I think is still in a searching phase; true he tries the non straight path, but it's not that he is not interested in the straight one, he still likes girls, but he likes also men; his indecision is not only in sex, but also in life. Basically Jon is insecure and not yet all developed in an adult man.

The Art of Being Straight is an ok movie. It's pleasant and a good way to pass an evening. To be honest I don't have a clue what it was about but I know I watched the whole thing. Gone With the Wind it's not.

I watched two gay-theme movies last week. One of them was "29-th and gay" and this one. What a difference! I am gonna follow in my opinion people who disliked this film. I cannot find a single reason why "The art of..." got any award. The story is presented without any charm, you have the feeling that you are watching an amateur enterprise.
The people (well, to be called an actor you should play at least a bit) in the movie were talking and talking, but the dialogues didn't move the action. Hmmm, right, how can you move sth that doesn't exist.
The whole thing seems to be made of separate parts, which were glued together by the director.
If you have to spend your money on something, better think twice before you buy this one.

Bad acting, worse dialoge, horrendous direction - where do I begin? This is a movie that asks "Am I Gay?" and pretty much does nothing else. It feels like it was written and shot by 14 year olds, both emotionally and professionally. I guess if I was gay and trying to decide who I was....nah, this would still be amateur hour.