Customer Reviews

Love & Death on Long Island

5 star:		(15)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

This updated "Death in Venice" with humor/satire will not appeal to everyone. After all, it lacks Glenn Close wielding a knife. What it does offer are three striking peformances from John Hurt as an older man obsessed with teen idol Jason Priestley, and Fiona Loewi as the teen idol's girlfriend, who is considerably sharper than she first appears. (There is also a wonderful cameo role by Sheila Hancock as Hurt's housekeeper. Ms. Hancock, for my money, is one of England's best comic actresses and makes too few movies.) Hurt, as an out-of-touch (out-of-this-century?) writer who rejoins the living when he accidentally catches Priestley in a Grade B Teen-Cumming-of-Age-Flick, is perfect, as always. The contrast between the Grade B images of overt, low comedy sexuality, with the "real-life" (as opposed to "reel-life") Hurt in active mode is just one of the many joys this exceptional movie offers. Hurt's futile but brilliant attempts to seduce Mr. Priestley under Ms. Loewi's nose -- a nose that soon smells something off -- is both poignant and hilarious. Definitely one of the best films of the year....

I am surprised that this film has not been better received by the reviewers below, as it is well-made, thought-provoking, atmospheric, and even poignant. It tells the tale of a stodgy old British author (expertly played by William Hurt) who, by accidentally wandering into the wrong movie theater, conceives an odd appreciation for Ronnie Bostock (Jason Priestley), a B-movie star of teen flicks. This rare ability to find raphaelite beauty in low pop culture troubles the author for weeks, until his obsession over Ronnie gets the best of him and he travels to Long Island to try and meet his idol. The film does an excellent job of portraying Long Island in the winter as an eerie, vacant place. When the author at last talks his way into Ronnie's home, the ensuing machinations and emotions are played so perfectly that I watched the film twice in a row to see them again, and the plot kept me interested throughout. (The tone of the climax in the diner is just great. Jason Priestley does a fine job here.) We are left with the sense that impossible longing is both heartbreaking and inevitable within us; human truth onscreen.

I've noticed some wonderfully divergent comments about the film, here. The reason the film is so great is that it truly does offer a multitude of possibilities. For me, this film was about finding beauty in the places where you least expect it. Finding beauty in a teenage sex romp, in men, in Long Island. Giles De'ath's search for beauty (and it's tragic rejection of him) is, I feel, the essence of this film and it is executed with remarkable precision and very good humor.

As my headline says, the lifestyles and places seen throughout the film vary so much that the viewer feels like he's speeding through the universe on a spaceship.

You can enjoy the hilariously dowdy British charwoman played by respected British character actress Sheila Hancock. I laughed for a minute when she gestured toward Giles' new VCR and said, "Those things are more trouble than they're worth."

You visit modern British stores: an appliance store and a video club.

You attend a high-brow lecture in London at which protagonist Giles De'Ath rambles on about an intangible idea he created while enjoying the work of the teen heartthrob.

The film makes a statement about homosexuality that is much more profound than the many films made since the 1980s that have shown men glaring at or kissing each other: "My Beautiful Laundrette," "Boys Life 3," "The Toilers and the Wayfarers," etc.

This movie shows that the love you feel with your eyes and ears is more meaningful than anything that happens below the waist. In the diner scene *toward the end*, but not at the very end, Giles admits to Ronnie that he feels love. Ronnie rejects him. The viewer gets a few scenes after that. They show that Giles' life has been greatly enriched by his non-physical experiences with the heartthrob actor.

Also, watch the film again and listen carefully to the dialogue in that diner scene for yet another notion not expressed so far in the many "amazon.com" reviews of "Love and Death On Long Island." You will note that before Giles admits his love, he pushes on Ronnie the superiority of the European literary theater world to the American teen sex film genre. Ronnie would have allowed Giles to follow him to Los Angeles and assist with his career there. By agreeing to do that Giles could have kept seeing him without physical intimacy. Ronnie's wife would have had to tolerate Giles eventually as long as Giles developed their planned project about the deaf boy wearing a hospital gown.

But no, Giles insists on changing Ronnie's career and attitude toward high-brow vs. low-brow. Giles wants him to start a new career in Europe. We never know if Giles wants to get physical with Ronnie. But we learn that Giles' number one reaction to an appealing young man is to nurture him by indoctrinating him to a world he has missed.

This idea says a lot about the many American gay men of a certain age who work in the mental health profession and the priesthood. They love to dominate and nurture young men even if they don't get physically intimate.

You don't learn that from the many interchangeable films at gay film festivals. Fortunately, "Love and Death On Long Island" didn't play at one. It got marketed as a general-interest film. That's what it is. Rent it as soon as you can.

John Hurt, Sheila Hancock and Jason Priestley are all magnificent. Notice how I'm spelling "Priestley" correctly. Jason, if you're out there, thank you for the risk you took by making this one. You may not have gotten the supporting role in "Jerry Maguire" that you wanted, but you did great with "Love and Death On Long Island." Your name helped sell it. Peace.

John Hurt shines in this obscure 1998 film that should have received more attention than it did.

Hurt plays Giles De'Ath, a dry-as-dust man of letters whose intellectual tomes are as hi-brow as they are apparently boring. Completely out of touch with the modern world, and scorned by the British media (which calls him an "erstwhile fogey, now cult"), he inadvertently stumbles into a movie entitled "Hot Pants College II," a "Porky's" sendoff so inappropriate for Giles that it defies imagination.

Realizing his mistake and about to leave in high dudgeon, Giles suddenly is riveted by the film's star, teen heartthrob Ronnie Bostock, played brilliantly by Jason Priestley. As he views what he considers a beautiful lad, Giles falls as desperately in love as any teeny-bopper ever could, to the point where he actually has to buy a television and a VCR, just so he can view the wretchedly untalented Bostock ouvre (with titles such as "Tex Mex" and "Skidmarks").

Giles' obsession leads him on a desperate trip to Long Island, where his idol lives. Actually maneuvering to meet him, Giles cannot contain his great love--and the inevitable tragedy ensues.

This is a sensitive and highly unusual film. The acting by Hurt and Priestley is understated, completely perfect (especially Priestley as the completely untalented Bostock, who aspires to Shakespearean heights)and truly inspired.

For those who like something off the beaten path, this is definitely a movie to watch for its sheer brilliance.

I had read Gilbert Adair's novel of "Love and Death on Long Island" a few years ago and was so impressed that I not only introduced it to my Book Group but also wrote to the man himself. He agreed that a writer's audience is so far away from the writer that he never hears even the echo of the applause. I was unsure whether this tender love story would transfer to the cinema having seen so many travesties recently of good books brought to the screen. I was wrong to worry as the sensitivity of the director and the two key actors, John Hurt and Jason Preistley brought more than just visual representation to the book they found a way of showing love on the screen between two men that was neither salacious nor mocking. I can not rate this movie too highly - it has the strength of theatre combined with the magic of film. Watch and enjoy

Being in love is a disease, one that provides both ecstacy and frustration. This movie relates well to Mann's work (Death in Venice) in that the protagonist of that work is amazed that such a creature as Tadzio could exist-- this overturns his entire aesthetic structure. He only then watches, as does the Hurt character. This is a fine film about how love--of any kind-- obsesses one without reservation. Priestley played his role well in that we, the audience, didn't have to find him loveable, only Hurt did.

First, if you're looking to laugh your head off, this is NOT the film. This is a good, not great movie, thorougly worthwhile if you like good acting in movies. And John Hurt as Gile De'Ath provides the good acting. The film does have it's funny moments, but it is the screenplay, the words spoken by the actor(s) that make this film intriguing, at least for me. I also saw Gods & Monsters, and though both are good, this move is faster paced (yes, faster paced) and humorous. It's a shame it's been overlooked. Even Priestley proved that teen hearthrobs can appear (and act) in movies that aren't aiming for the pocketbook. I'd definitely recommend this one for those who believe good acting.

John Hurt is simply breathtaking in what is probably the role of his life; Jason Priestly is so surprisingly multi-layered that he nearly deceives you into thinking he has no mind/heart. The deft and melancholy screenplay deals with mature and compelling subject matter in an involving, entertaining way, and though I would have preferred a more realistic ending -- perhaps a bit more tragic for sad Giles - this movie is simply wonderful. You ache for the detached loneliness and insulated character Hurt portrays with genius, and you find his crush both heartbreaking and pitiable. There are glimmers of humor throughout, and the softly sad music swells appropriately; this movie does it all, and does so quietly, with good script and good acting, period. If you liked Gods and Monsters, you will love this movie. I have seen it many times, and each time walk away with something else to ponder.

I strongly urge any school of the performing arts that has not obtained a copy of this movie to rectify this omission as soon as possible simply to show their students one of the great,understated performances of recent years.It comes from John Hurt,playing reclusive somewhat other worldly novelist Giles Death (pronounced Day-ath)a man utterly removed from the times in which he is living One day ,while paying a rare visit to the cinema in search of an E M Forster adatation,he strays into the wrong screen and witnesses a peurile High school gross fest.He is smitten by one of the "actors"a teen idol played ,well and winningly,by Jason Priestley.He begins behaving like any moonstruck fan,clipping pictures from teen magazines and fantasising about his new love.
He travels to Long Island where he meets the star and feeds his ego with tales of his talent and potential.
It is essentailly a character study of a man whose emotions are stirred unexpectedly and how through this he comes to terms with both the world around him and himself.It is a sad but quietly compassionate movie and there is a gentle comedic strain to the awakening of the character to the modern world

See it for Hurt and some fine supporting turns from Sheila Hancock and Elizabeth Quinn, as well as for thatincreasingly rare commodity in today's cinema,emotional complexity allied to an interest in people rathet than pyrotechnics