Michael's Cunningham's book is so moving I was afraid to be deeply disappointed by the movie adaptation. Although 90 min is barely enough to narrate the story in its emotional complexity, the movie is very faithful to the book, probably because the screenplay is from Cunningham himself. The acting is excellent, and the soundtrack featuring Laura Nyro is beautiful, and if some of the book's interest is lost in translation, it still makes a pretty good movie. I find some detractors' arguments pretty amazing, as if all they'd watched was the trailer. To suggest that after Jules & Jim any movie containing a threesome is worthless, that any movie taking place in the 70s-80s is obsolete, that there was too much or not enough sex scenes, or that the AIDS theme is not developed enough, is plain ludicrous. This is not a movie about an era, about homosexuality, or about the AIDS epidemics. This is about (re)creating a place out of time and geography, where the world makes sense (again). A home, in other words. This is about loving another being (or two, since one is never complete, never enough) irrespective of family links, gender, and the established social codes. The characters are struggling to escape the rules to enjoy the "big noisy world around" and find a natural place in it. They are the opposite of stereotypical characters, at least once they are fully revealed to themselves. As for the end, it is not "unconclusive", it is what is called an open ending, and probably in this case the perfect ending, which means the only possible one. My advice: watch it, and read the novel too.
138 Reviews
Evocative of a time and the need to belong
mschnapp25 June 2004
I was profoundly touched by the film, but I can see why people needing a strong linear narrative might be left feeling incomplete.
The tagline doesn't quite capture the key to the film-- it's not precisely about redefining family-- I suspect the marketing folks thought that would resound with a likely target audience. (Like the Frameline GLBT Film Festival in SF.) To me it's about the need to belong-- to find a place in this world and then take that ride. The struggle is to find equilibrium with all the surprises that may come one's way.
Although the movie has its share of sadnesses, there are also quiet triumphs. In an odd way, this film touches some of the same chords as the far more eccentric "The World According To Garp" and "Cider House Rules."
To the director's and screenwriter's credit, they resisted the temptation to pack too much onto the film. I found the characterizations just specific enough. Fine performances from all. Beautifully established in youth.
The film trusts both your intelligence and intuition to carry you through the trip. Don't see this if you're hungering for car chases!
The tagline doesn't quite capture the key to the film-- it's not precisely about redefining family-- I suspect the marketing folks thought that would resound with a likely target audience. (Like the Frameline GLBT Film Festival in SF.) To me it's about the need to belong-- to find a place in this world and then take that ride. The struggle is to find equilibrium with all the surprises that may come one's way.
Although the movie has its share of sadnesses, there are also quiet triumphs. In an odd way, this film touches some of the same chords as the far more eccentric "The World According To Garp" and "Cider House Rules."
To the director's and screenwriter's credit, they resisted the temptation to pack too much onto the film. I found the characterizations just specific enough. Fine performances from all. Beautifully established in youth.
The film trusts both your intelligence and intuition to carry you through the trip. Don't see this if you're hungering for car chases!
Love Comes Full Circle
wes-connors30 December 2011
"Remember your very best friend in high school, the one who knew
and kept
all your secrets? Bobby and Jonathan, who shared that kind of friendship, meet again as adults in New York. Sparked by their relationship with free-spirited Clare, they forge a loving unit that redefines 'family'. Colin Farrell, Robin Wright Penn, Sissy Spacek and Dallas Roberts star in this lyrical film that's both a celebration of commitment and a music - and memory-driven portrait of America in the '70s and '80s. Adapted by Pulitzer Prize winner Michael Cunningham from his own novel, 'A Home at the End of the World' strikes close to home as an adventure as big as life itself: risky, surprising, sexually charged and real," according to sleeve scribers...
That description, while not entirely inaccurate, hints at how "A Home at the End of the World" fails to achieve its full potential. The film isn't altogether a "memory-driven portrait" of family and music over the decades covered; indeed, it is a portrait of an unconventional family unit, but that should have remained secondary. At heart, this is a love (the kind including a sexual attraction) story between the Bobby and Jonathan characters, possibly deemphasized to make it more palatable. The focus unravels, especially after Mr. Farrell's adult Bobby take over the action. The film draws its fault line by losing touch with the central relationship, and Farrell's characterization goes off course. Freed-from-the-wig Colin Farrell and Dallas Roberts could have recorded a hit version of "Look Out, Cleveland" with The Band backing...
The casting is excellent, with Erik Smith and Harris Allan especially winning as the teenage Bobby and Jonathan; they blend perfectly with the grown-up Farrell and Mr. Roberts. Note that criticisms of Farrell in the lead role are of characterization, not acting. Smith's Bobby was played as a self-assured and sexual adventurous young man, but Farrell's Bobby is suddenly an asexual puppy dog; something is missing. We begin with an uncommonly artistic story, from Mr. Cunningham's novel. Cunningham worked on the film; a double edged sword, for it reveals not only tantalizing bits of his artistic vision, but also invites criticism regarding its execution. The fine original story is still evident on film, and some cinematic moments give the material emotional strength...
A highlight occurs when Smith and Allan become "brothers" by exchanging jackets; most importantly, the jacket worn by Bobby belonged to his brother, and he symbolically replaces Carlton (a sexually-charged Ryan Donowho) with Jonathan. This is a circular story. Note we begin with "Bobby" walking in on his brother having sex with a young woman (on top); this scene is recalled when he walks in on his replacement brother, again with a woman (on top). In both instances, Bobby winds up in bed with brother. There is no evidence of incest, but the opening brother/brother relationship appears extremely intimate, as does the later relationship between Bobby and replacement "mother" Alice (an easily potted Sissy Spacek). This story is about replacing lost love. We end with a full circle...
******* A Home at the End of the World (6/9/04) Michael Mayer ~ Colin Farrell, Dallas Roberts, Robin Wright, Sissy Spacek
That description, while not entirely inaccurate, hints at how "A Home at the End of the World" fails to achieve its full potential. The film isn't altogether a "memory-driven portrait" of family and music over the decades covered; indeed, it is a portrait of an unconventional family unit, but that should have remained secondary. At heart, this is a love (the kind including a sexual attraction) story between the Bobby and Jonathan characters, possibly deemphasized to make it more palatable. The focus unravels, especially after Mr. Farrell's adult Bobby take over the action. The film draws its fault line by losing touch with the central relationship, and Farrell's characterization goes off course. Freed-from-the-wig Colin Farrell and Dallas Roberts could have recorded a hit version of "Look Out, Cleveland" with The Band backing...
The casting is excellent, with Erik Smith and Harris Allan especially winning as the teenage Bobby and Jonathan; they blend perfectly with the grown-up Farrell and Mr. Roberts. Note that criticisms of Farrell in the lead role are of characterization, not acting. Smith's Bobby was played as a self-assured and sexual adventurous young man, but Farrell's Bobby is suddenly an asexual puppy dog; something is missing. We begin with an uncommonly artistic story, from Mr. Cunningham's novel. Cunningham worked on the film; a double edged sword, for it reveals not only tantalizing bits of his artistic vision, but also invites criticism regarding its execution. The fine original story is still evident on film, and some cinematic moments give the material emotional strength...
A highlight occurs when Smith and Allan become "brothers" by exchanging jackets; most importantly, the jacket worn by Bobby belonged to his brother, and he symbolically replaces Carlton (a sexually-charged Ryan Donowho) with Jonathan. This is a circular story. Note we begin with "Bobby" walking in on his brother having sex with a young woman (on top); this scene is recalled when he walks in on his replacement brother, again with a woman (on top). In both instances, Bobby winds up in bed with brother. There is no evidence of incest, but the opening brother/brother relationship appears extremely intimate, as does the later relationship between Bobby and replacement "mother" Alice (an easily potted Sissy Spacek). This story is about replacing lost love. We end with a full circle...
******* A Home at the End of the World (6/9/04) Michael Mayer ~ Colin Farrell, Dallas Roberts, Robin Wright, Sissy Spacek
Playing house...
majikstl26 August 2004
Clare loves Jonathan, who loves Bobby who..., well, loves everybody. Bobby is either straight or homosexual or bisexual or asexual, depending on where you are in the movie. A HOME AT THE END OF THE WORLD is a relationship movie wherein everything hinges on the relationships, but those relationships remain strangely ill-defined.
Achingly sincere, A HOME AT THE END OF THE WORLD strives for an easygoing reality, not fully appreciating that easygoing can also mean meandering. To its credit we are never sure where the film is going to take us, but to its detriment, the film doesn't seem to know either. The film relies on JULES AND JIM math -- one guy plus one guy divided by one girl equals melodrama -- as a way of exploring the changing social landscape of America from the laid back sex-drugs-and-rock'n'roll sixties to the early days of the AIDS epidemic. It covers a lot of ground, yet doesn't seem to really go anywhere.
The best part of the film is the beginning, before most of the main stars even make an appearance. Set in Cleveland, first in 1967 and then in 1974, the film has some gentle fun looking at suburban attempts at being mod and trendy, while romanticizing drug use and rock music. These are little Bobby Morrow's formative years, where one by one he tragically looses members of his family, leaving him an orphan by age 14. He befriends nerdy Jonathan Glover in high school and ultimately becomes part of the Glover family, whom he seduces with his genuine charm, gentle optimism and an apparently always ready supply of marijuana. It is also where Bobby and Jonathan begin exploring their sexuality. Even with it's discomforting approval of casual drug use, this is where the film is most successful, in the way it deals in an honest and intelligent way with blossoming sexuality and the awkwardness of being a gay teenager.
The film really deals with original ideas in these early stages, but that is just meant to be a foreshadowing of the main storyline, which, unfortunately tends to be rather trite and clichéd.
The bulk of the story takes place in 1984 and thereafter, as the adult Bobby (Colin Farrell) heads to New York to live with Jonathan (Dallas Roberts), who is now more or less openly gay. Jonathan is living with Clare (Robin Wright Penn), a gay guy's gal pal (i.e., fag hag) who is your standard New York City kook, complete with punkish magenta hair, crazy clothes and unconventional ideas that don't seem all that unconventional anymore. Clare loves Jonathan and wants to have his child, but she seduces and becomes pregnant by Bobby, who we suddenly are expected to believe isn't gay at all. The three continue to live together as something more than roommates, but something less than a marriage. And the film sorta-kinda explores the nature of this three-way union.
As a result we get three, or at least two intriguing characters who get lost in a story bereft of a dramatic point. And a perfectly good gay love story becomes an unconvincing a love triangle, where each member ends up playing odd-person-out at some point.
The most troublesome part of the story is that the character of Clare even exists. Clare's main function is to keep Jonathan and Bobby apart as lovers, even as her pregnancy is a gimmick designed to keep them together as family. And though the film is pro-gay on the surface, there is the suggestion that Clare has somehow cured Bobby's homosexuality and the added insinuation that Clare and Jonathan could both find true love if only he didn't have that darn quirk of wanting to sleep with guys. This is a gay love story which wants to avoid being a gay love story. Also, Robin Wright Penn is just not an interesting enough actress to bring any pizzazz to the stereotypical role of a bohemian kook and offers little reason to see why both Bobby and Jonathan are devoted to her. The character itself is a nuisance. Clare exists as a beard, a plot contrivance designed to turn a gay love story into a straight love story.
The main character, however, is Bobby and Farrell does a fine job playing him as a repressed man-child. There is no trace of the bravado that has made up Farrell's on-screen and off-screen reputation, only a gentle sweetness. Unfortunately, this causes an inconsistency in character. As played at age 7 by Andrew Chalmers and at 14 by Erik Smith, Bobby is an open, articulate, engaging free spirit. When Farrell picks up the character at age 24, Bobby has suddenly become repressed, shy and child-like. Even realizing the various hardships that marked Bobby's early life, his sudden display of emotional retardation is jarringly illogical. And though Farrell is good, it is the excellent performance of Smith as the teenaged Bobby that really defines the character.
The best thing about HOME is Dallas Roberts. As the adult Jonathan, he makes the character seem typically gay, without seeming to be stereotypically gay. His Jonathan views Bobby with love and lust as a friend, and with resentment and distrust as an ersatz favored sibling. Roberts embodies the conflicted nature of Jonathan better than Michael Cunningham's screenplay would suggest possible. Also, Sissy Spacek has some fine moments as Jonathan's mother. She is particularly effective in a scene where Mrs. Glover has just discover Jonathan and Bobby in a compromising position. The ensuing scene finds her distraught, not because she realizes that Jonathan is gay, but that know she must accept as fact what she had already suspected. It is poignant moment.
Had A HOME AT THE END OF THE WORLD been made in 1967 or 1974 or even 1984, it might have had an impact. Now, so much of it is, if not cliché, at least ordinary: the supersensitive gay man in love with a straight man; the flower child/mother hen/earth mother with a penchant for gay men, the alternative family unit, the odds and ends bits of feminist dissatisfaction and even the climatic special guest appearance by AIDS. The story's one original element is the naive (yet controlling), gay (yet straight), passive (yet dominating), eager to please (yet vaguely self-centered) Bobby, but the film shies away from either exploring or challenging the character. Indeed, the filmmakers even made a point of editing out a shot of Farrell's full frontal nudity; likewise they edited out his sexuality which is the linchpin of all the relationships. They don't want to reveal too much of the character and in the end they reveal too little.
Achingly sincere, A HOME AT THE END OF THE WORLD strives for an easygoing reality, not fully appreciating that easygoing can also mean meandering. To its credit we are never sure where the film is going to take us, but to its detriment, the film doesn't seem to know either. The film relies on JULES AND JIM math -- one guy plus one guy divided by one girl equals melodrama -- as a way of exploring the changing social landscape of America from the laid back sex-drugs-and-rock'n'roll sixties to the early days of the AIDS epidemic. It covers a lot of ground, yet doesn't seem to really go anywhere.
The best part of the film is the beginning, before most of the main stars even make an appearance. Set in Cleveland, first in 1967 and then in 1974, the film has some gentle fun looking at suburban attempts at being mod and trendy, while romanticizing drug use and rock music. These are little Bobby Morrow's formative years, where one by one he tragically looses members of his family, leaving him an orphan by age 14. He befriends nerdy Jonathan Glover in high school and ultimately becomes part of the Glover family, whom he seduces with his genuine charm, gentle optimism and an apparently always ready supply of marijuana. It is also where Bobby and Jonathan begin exploring their sexuality. Even with it's discomforting approval of casual drug use, this is where the film is most successful, in the way it deals in an honest and intelligent way with blossoming sexuality and the awkwardness of being a gay teenager.
The film really deals with original ideas in these early stages, but that is just meant to be a foreshadowing of the main storyline, which, unfortunately tends to be rather trite and clichéd.
The bulk of the story takes place in 1984 and thereafter, as the adult Bobby (Colin Farrell) heads to New York to live with Jonathan (Dallas Roberts), who is now more or less openly gay. Jonathan is living with Clare (Robin Wright Penn), a gay guy's gal pal (i.e., fag hag) who is your standard New York City kook, complete with punkish magenta hair, crazy clothes and unconventional ideas that don't seem all that unconventional anymore. Clare loves Jonathan and wants to have his child, but she seduces and becomes pregnant by Bobby, who we suddenly are expected to believe isn't gay at all. The three continue to live together as something more than roommates, but something less than a marriage. And the film sorta-kinda explores the nature of this three-way union.
As a result we get three, or at least two intriguing characters who get lost in a story bereft of a dramatic point. And a perfectly good gay love story becomes an unconvincing a love triangle, where each member ends up playing odd-person-out at some point.
The most troublesome part of the story is that the character of Clare even exists. Clare's main function is to keep Jonathan and Bobby apart as lovers, even as her pregnancy is a gimmick designed to keep them together as family. And though the film is pro-gay on the surface, there is the suggestion that Clare has somehow cured Bobby's homosexuality and the added insinuation that Clare and Jonathan could both find true love if only he didn't have that darn quirk of wanting to sleep with guys. This is a gay love story which wants to avoid being a gay love story. Also, Robin Wright Penn is just not an interesting enough actress to bring any pizzazz to the stereotypical role of a bohemian kook and offers little reason to see why both Bobby and Jonathan are devoted to her. The character itself is a nuisance. Clare exists as a beard, a plot contrivance designed to turn a gay love story into a straight love story.
The main character, however, is Bobby and Farrell does a fine job playing him as a repressed man-child. There is no trace of the bravado that has made up Farrell's on-screen and off-screen reputation, only a gentle sweetness. Unfortunately, this causes an inconsistency in character. As played at age 7 by Andrew Chalmers and at 14 by Erik Smith, Bobby is an open, articulate, engaging free spirit. When Farrell picks up the character at age 24, Bobby has suddenly become repressed, shy and child-like. Even realizing the various hardships that marked Bobby's early life, his sudden display of emotional retardation is jarringly illogical. And though Farrell is good, it is the excellent performance of Smith as the teenaged Bobby that really defines the character.
The best thing about HOME is Dallas Roberts. As the adult Jonathan, he makes the character seem typically gay, without seeming to be stereotypically gay. His Jonathan views Bobby with love and lust as a friend, and with resentment and distrust as an ersatz favored sibling. Roberts embodies the conflicted nature of Jonathan better than Michael Cunningham's screenplay would suggest possible. Also, Sissy Spacek has some fine moments as Jonathan's mother. She is particularly effective in a scene where Mrs. Glover has just discover Jonathan and Bobby in a compromising position. The ensuing scene finds her distraught, not because she realizes that Jonathan is gay, but that know she must accept as fact what she had already suspected. It is poignant moment.
Had A HOME AT THE END OF THE WORLD been made in 1967 or 1974 or even 1984, it might have had an impact. Now, so much of it is, if not cliché, at least ordinary: the supersensitive gay man in love with a straight man; the flower child/mother hen/earth mother with a penchant for gay men, the alternative family unit, the odds and ends bits of feminist dissatisfaction and even the climatic special guest appearance by AIDS. The story's one original element is the naive (yet controlling), gay (yet straight), passive (yet dominating), eager to please (yet vaguely self-centered) Bobby, but the film shies away from either exploring or challenging the character. Indeed, the filmmakers even made a point of editing out a shot of Farrell's full frontal nudity; likewise they edited out his sexuality which is the linchpin of all the relationships. They don't want to reveal too much of the character and in the end they reveal too little.
A Job Well Done
dhaufrect-117 March 2005
"A Home at the End of the World" is a film well done. Sissy Spacek is well cast as the mother, Alice Glover. Dallas Roberts plays a convincing role as her son, Jonathan Glover. Colin Farrell plays Bobby Morrow as a young man, and he is truly the star of this unusual picture. His life as a child is portrayed by Erik Smith, and he too is convincing in his child actor performance. The rare relationship in this movie is unique in this film. The story is compelling even if it is a little difficult to meld into our society's attitudes. This film is a good topic to observe in view of the current legal changes in marriage concepts. The music is inspiring and the photography is well done. There is an expected ending that remains with one long after the show is over. It is now in DVD, and it is a good movie to see.
'Home' Not The End of the World
katydid481924 October 2004
This is a small film with a small audience. After the nonsense about cutting out Colin Farrell's 'extremely distracting member' from the sex scene didn't create any new buzz, the movie was left to play to its minute slice of the pie in half empty art houses around the country. Still, just because mainstream America is too squeamish to sit through an openly gay film does not mean that the level of film-making is reflected in its box office totals.
Based on his novel of the same name, Michael Cunningham has written a screenplay that, although similar to The Hours in theme, is very unique. Its focus is on our search for acceptance, for the people who define us, for a home, even if it is at the end of the world. He creates three individuals to take the same quest in their own way. The first is Jonathan (Dallas Roberts), someone who needs to be loved but resents that quality about him. It makes him susceptible to pain because he takes everything as betrayal. Next to that, he feels that his life is always second to his best friend, Bobby's. Bobby is played by notorious bad-boy, Colin Farrell in his most toned down role yet. Bobby also needs people but not in a bad way. He just feeds off others and this feeding takes its toll on Jonathan. So much so that he heads off to New York and befriends a drifter, a personality of originality named Clare. The two of them play house despite the fact that Clare is older than Jonathan and he is gay.
Homosexuality is a major player in this film. And yet at the same time, it's not because only Jonathan is actually gay. Bobby would be classified as bisexual but that term comes with the same connotation as homosexual and so it is more accurate to say that Bobby just loves everyone. There is no word to describe his sexual inclination because it is not really a big enough part of him to demand a label. It does not matter perhaps one of the larger themes here that will sadly get overlooked, as many people are not ready to embrace this yet.
A Home At the End of the World is not a groundbreaker but it is a pioneer. It is one of the few movies about homosexuality, and about it in a blunt, unmasked way, that could have a chance with the more mainstream audience. It is shot with the gritty quality of the independent film but it has mainstream Colin Farrell who may just have a shot of killing two bird with one stone here: proving that he can do more than just the tabloids and bringing homosexual films to a more 'out of the closet' place among other films. Later this year he will try this same task again on a grander scale with Oliver Stone's Alexander and if that proves successful, A Home At the End of the World can be credited as the beginning of that. ***/*****
Based on his novel of the same name, Michael Cunningham has written a screenplay that, although similar to The Hours in theme, is very unique. Its focus is on our search for acceptance, for the people who define us, for a home, even if it is at the end of the world. He creates three individuals to take the same quest in their own way. The first is Jonathan (Dallas Roberts), someone who needs to be loved but resents that quality about him. It makes him susceptible to pain because he takes everything as betrayal. Next to that, he feels that his life is always second to his best friend, Bobby's. Bobby is played by notorious bad-boy, Colin Farrell in his most toned down role yet. Bobby also needs people but not in a bad way. He just feeds off others and this feeding takes its toll on Jonathan. So much so that he heads off to New York and befriends a drifter, a personality of originality named Clare. The two of them play house despite the fact that Clare is older than Jonathan and he is gay.
Homosexuality is a major player in this film. And yet at the same time, it's not because only Jonathan is actually gay. Bobby would be classified as bisexual but that term comes with the same connotation as homosexual and so it is more accurate to say that Bobby just loves everyone. There is no word to describe his sexual inclination because it is not really a big enough part of him to demand a label. It does not matter perhaps one of the larger themes here that will sadly get overlooked, as many people are not ready to embrace this yet.
A Home At the End of the World is not a groundbreaker but it is a pioneer. It is one of the few movies about homosexuality, and about it in a blunt, unmasked way, that could have a chance with the more mainstream audience. It is shot with the gritty quality of the independent film but it has mainstream Colin Farrell who may just have a shot of killing two bird with one stone here: proving that he can do more than just the tabloids and bringing homosexual films to a more 'out of the closet' place among other films. Later this year he will try this same task again on a grander scale with Oliver Stone's Alexander and if that proves successful, A Home At the End of the World can be credited as the beginning of that. ***/*****
The Colin Farrell Mystery Is Revealed
don_agu10 January 2006
What a stunning surprise! A family saga without familiar places or I should say that there are all familiar places but they feel completely new. I'm not one who likes to give away plot points so I won't I just want to say that I loved the loving involved in the unfolding of this realistic fairy tale. Personally, I've been questioning the apparent success of Colin Farrell. In very short years he worked with everybody from Stone to Spielberg, co starred with Pacino, Cruise and Willis but other than a winning pout and a clear willingness to take risks, his appeal eluded me - until last night that is. "A Home At The End Of The World" made me fall in love with him, with his power with his utter fearlessness. He creates a character with his heart in his sleeve and an innocence that it's compelling, aggressively on your face. Sweet and tough, wise and naive. Robin Wright Penn is also a standout. Her truth, unusual as it is, is unmistakable. Sissi Spaceck's suburban mom is an extraordinary creation. Subversive without meaning to, lovingly subversive, that's what she is. The opening with a startling Ryan Donowho grabs you by your heart and your throat and doesn't let you go. Wondering why this film didn't become an instant classic I arrived to the uncomfortable conclusion that it has to do with the casting of Colin's life long friend, Dallas Roberts, a good actor but not charismatic enough to give us a compelling pairing. I agree that he should be awkward and different but there is an element of petulance and physicality who didn't allow me to care for him as much as I wanted, as much as I needed. Sorry I had to mention that. But the experience that this little big film provides is unforgettable and the revelation of Colin Farrell mystique as an actor is nothing short of breathtaking.
A simple and poignant film about muddling through life and the desperation to belong somewhere
akash_sebastian25 August 2015
A simple and poignant film about muddling through life and the desperation to belong somewhere. The characters are interesting and commendably established, not too much and not too less, just enough to know their minds and emotions. The movie has quite a few unique and memorable scenes, from the initial elder-brother-having-sex scene, to mom smoking up, and mutual masturbation.
Colin Farrell really surprised me with his nuanced portrayal of a sensitive and innocent guy trying to find a firm grip on life, who time and again loses people closest to him. And talented actors like Sissy Spacek and Robin Wright were welcomed additions, who play intriguing characters, different from what they've played before. Debutant Dallas Roberts was good as well.
One would expect more conflict when three characters are trying to establish a family together, but the calm and composed outlook was refreshing. The story moves from one moment to the other, and then just tries to deal with it, just like life; doesn't lead to, or even promise, a strong or compelling ending. It takes us in and then throws us out, leaving us there to contemplate...just like Bobby (Colin); we see and feel everything through his eyes.
Colin Farrell really surprised me with his nuanced portrayal of a sensitive and innocent guy trying to find a firm grip on life, who time and again loses people closest to him. And talented actors like Sissy Spacek and Robin Wright were welcomed additions, who play intriguing characters, different from what they've played before. Debutant Dallas Roberts was good as well.
One would expect more conflict when three characters are trying to establish a family together, but the calm and composed outlook was refreshing. The story moves from one moment to the other, and then just tries to deal with it, just like life; doesn't lead to, or even promise, a strong or compelling ending. It takes us in and then throws us out, leaving us there to contemplate...just like Bobby (Colin); we see and feel everything through his eyes.
Deeply felt, strangely sad
Rogue-3214 June 2005
I just finished watching this film on cable, and it left me with a tugging, wistful and urgent feeling regarding the complex and fragile nature of what it means to be alive on this planet, faced with a myriad of choices, which we make based upon what we ultimately believe to be of value.
In this movie, the main character, Bobby (a magnificent performance by Colin Farrell), makes his choices based purely on need and love. From a very young age, his character is aware of certain truths about life and he's acutely in touch with his feelings. He trusts and follows these feelings, to the exclusion of everything else. This is not an ordinary character, and this is not an ordinary film.
Everything about A Home At The End of the World is off-center, in the best possible way - the characters do not fit into any stereotypical molds and there are no over-wrought emotional scenes, although the film is deeply emotional and profoundly intimate. Choices are made, consequences are dealt with, but nothing plays out in a trite, predictable way. Instead the story builds slowly, with intense subtlety, showing the changes Bobby and his childhood friend Jonathan experience in their conjoined lives. I recommend this movie to anyone who is willing to take this unforgettable journey along with them.
In this movie, the main character, Bobby (a magnificent performance by Colin Farrell), makes his choices based purely on need and love. From a very young age, his character is aware of certain truths about life and he's acutely in touch with his feelings. He trusts and follows these feelings, to the exclusion of everything else. This is not an ordinary character, and this is not an ordinary film.
Everything about A Home At The End of the World is off-center, in the best possible way - the characters do not fit into any stereotypical molds and there are no over-wrought emotional scenes, although the film is deeply emotional and profoundly intimate. Choices are made, consequences are dealt with, but nothing plays out in a trite, predictable way. Instead the story builds slowly, with intense subtlety, showing the changes Bobby and his childhood friend Jonathan experience in their conjoined lives. I recommend this movie to anyone who is willing to take this unforgettable journey along with them.
smooth,quiet,the story what might happen in your life.
googooji12 May 2005
a very nice movie which has a smooth,slow storyline and quite good performances of the actors and the actresses.the relationships between all those main characters in this movie are quite interesting.cuz they are sort of complicated.Bobby(Colin) is the one who is another side of all the relationships with others in the movie.but you could never feel that there is anything wrong that he has done with others which i meant to say that you could just feel that he is so innocent,he just does everything with his senses and feelings.he never does anything to offend others.though,it is kinda weird for that he is just being in such many relationships with others,but you could never be hard on him,cuz you know that everything he did was just because that he has a kind heart and the love in his heart for everyone.
it is a movie about the love,it is the movie about let things go in their own ways,it is the movie about something what might just happen in your life sometime someday.
it is a movie about the love,it is the movie about let things go in their own ways,it is the movie about something what might just happen in your life sometime someday.
The kind of sentimentality that grates...
moonspinner5529 January 2005
I'm a sucker for romantic movies, with meant-to-be relationships that last a lifetime, but "A Home at the End of the World" is a mishmash of romantic ideas, most of them cobbled from other movies (say, "Jules and Jim"), and yet it never gets its central relationships right. Colin Farrell plays a young man so guileless, we can't tell what his sexual orientation is; after having risen from childhood tragedy, he seems to grow up under a guiding star--he's innocence personified, an angelic virgin man-child, and everything falls into place for him. You would think any struggling, directionless gay man would worship and adore him, but boyhood friend Dallas Roberts treats him casually (Roberts' role is so underwritten, we at first don't even know that he's supposed to be homosexual, and the word is never used). We never see passion, we see 'free spirited' understanding. Robin Wright Penn, playing a kooky hat-designer, is here simply to stir Farrell's hetero side, not so much as a catalyst in the proceedings; it's a hopeless role and I couldn't wait for the movie to be done with her (Penn, a good actress, gets the worst of the screenwriter's pretensions, immediately having a baby and then just as quickly griping about the responsibilities of raising one). The finale is admirable, and--realistically--not a tidy one, yet I still didn't believe anything in this picture. They wanted a rosy ending so badly, they were willing to beg, borrow and steal. That's fine, but it's hard to stir the heart with characters as unreal as these. ** from ****
Loved it
dana_franco-young26 July 2004
The movie wasn't the book, but the performances of all involved were inspired. I admit to seeing the movie because Colin Farrell was in it and not being sure, after the book, that he could become Bobby.
But he did, with a performance that astonished me.
What is unfortunate it that the movie, in some ways, has been limited in appeal by the "sexuality theme" that has become attached to it. Yes, Jonathan is gay. But labeling Bobby bi-sexual is reducing him to a caricature. Bobby's life was about love, needing and getting it from the people in his life. He found no limits in how to return it. Imagine, no inhibitions in showing love and affection! Any scene with Bobby in it just continued to show his tender and honest heart.
Then there were the rampant rumors of the "deleted scene". I totally understand why the scene was cut. It would have been unnecessary and gratuitous.
It is unfortunate this film wasn't released to a greater number of screens. Missing these performances would truly be a tragedy.
But he did, with a performance that astonished me.
What is unfortunate it that the movie, in some ways, has been limited in appeal by the "sexuality theme" that has become attached to it. Yes, Jonathan is gay. But labeling Bobby bi-sexual is reducing him to a caricature. Bobby's life was about love, needing and getting it from the people in his life. He found no limits in how to return it. Imagine, no inhibitions in showing love and affection! Any scene with Bobby in it just continued to show his tender and honest heart.
Then there were the rampant rumors of the "deleted scene". I totally understand why the scene was cut. It would have been unnecessary and gratuitous.
It is unfortunate this film wasn't released to a greater number of screens. Missing these performances would truly be a tragedy.
Robin Wright Penn Phenomenal
spb32826 August 2004
This film is equally depressing and refreshing - however, it should not be missed. Depressing in that there are tragic events occurring throughout the film, refreshing because no matter how tragic - the characters manage to survive and move forward. Colin Farrell does a good job as Bobby but Robin Wright Penn clearly steals the show. Sissy Spacek, as always, gives a fantastic performance. At first I viewed the relationship between the three main characters as chaotic and dysfunctional, however, by the end of the movie they had all managed to convince me that what they were doing was both loving and normal. The movie ends on a sad note but clearly brings everything into perspective as you walk out of the theater.
Who needs homophobes?
sartoris9910 August 2004
Yick, another gay movie that revolves around a straight woman.
The "fag hag" motif limits gay characters and minimizes women.
We're encouraged to be mad at Jonathan for not falling in love with Clare. By the same token, we're supposed to resent him for getting tired of Bobby's headgames. In this movie, the straight folks come out on top. The tagline sells this movie as a claim that "Family can be whatever you want it to be." Ultimately the film suggests that you have to define yourself around reproduction to find family, and that a gay guy can only find fulfillment by attaching himself to a heterosexual couple in the servile capacity of a waiter.
Yikes-- with gay oriented movies like this, who needs homophobes? Gay audiences ask yourselves this: Why do they make sure that the straight male character is so much more attractive than the gay character? There is a message in that, perhaps subconscious, about how much respect this film has for gay men.
The "fag hag" motif limits gay characters and minimizes women.
We're encouraged to be mad at Jonathan for not falling in love with Clare. By the same token, we're supposed to resent him for getting tired of Bobby's headgames. In this movie, the straight folks come out on top. The tagline sells this movie as a claim that "Family can be whatever you want it to be." Ultimately the film suggests that you have to define yourself around reproduction to find family, and that a gay guy can only find fulfillment by attaching himself to a heterosexual couple in the servile capacity of a waiter.
Yikes-- with gay oriented movies like this, who needs homophobes? Gay audiences ask yourselves this: Why do they make sure that the straight male character is so much more attractive than the gay character? There is a message in that, perhaps subconscious, about how much respect this film has for gay men.
Stunning, Complex, and So Beautiful!
nikola1tesla26 July 2004
My sons & I saw the very first 2:30PM show Friday the 23rd at the San Francisco Lumiere theater. WE LOVED IT!! All the reviews are fairly sound-- great awesome wonderful sweet emotional very very touching & full of longing & love. Colin as Bobby was spectacularly adorable. This role shows so well how versatile Colin is an an actor-- what a talented genius he is and what a fully emotional person he's capable of being.
All the actors did an incredible job-- but in particular I was really impressed with the teens that played the young Bobby & Jonathan-- they were absolutely genuine in what these really complicated, mature roles.
Regardless of the necessary changes made from the book-- I was amazed at how so many moments were exactly as I'd pictured them when I read it.
Even though there's been a ton of reviews & the book to read-- there are some totally cute hysterical & goofy moments that knocked me out of my seat & completely surprised me.
And-- the one altered scene-- I'm thankful they changed it-- that scene without any irrelevant controversial distractions is an Oscar winner if I ever saw one-- completely beautiful & traumatic & sweet & loving. I don't want anything to stand in the way of the characters & what they care about there-- & if I'd been in a room of screaming fans I would have been annoyed for having anything interrupt those beautiful moments during the film-- though I wouldn't kick the deleted scene out of bed if it shows up on the DVD!
Saturday the 24th I saw it again. They're giving away Home books & CDs as raffle prizes, & though I wasn't lucky enough to win-- I was lucky to get a book anyway. One of the guys that won the CD/book set gave me his book because he already had one. It has the Home poster on the cover!
Everyone was filling out pink questionnaires for the film-- One of the guys collecting them said they had about 200 responses from the previous showings, & of those nearly everyone rated the film as excellent. Only 9 of that 200 rated it fair & only 2 poor (2 bastards!)
Colin's got some incredibly powerful moments in this film, and though I'm a fan of his anyway, I was happily blown away with how loving he is as Bobby. It's glorious to watch. I'm highly impressed with the whole film-- all the acting from everyone. It's a very emotional, poignant, & profound story.
_________________
All the actors did an incredible job-- but in particular I was really impressed with the teens that played the young Bobby & Jonathan-- they were absolutely genuine in what these really complicated, mature roles.
Regardless of the necessary changes made from the book-- I was amazed at how so many moments were exactly as I'd pictured them when I read it.
Even though there's been a ton of reviews & the book to read-- there are some totally cute hysterical & goofy moments that knocked me out of my seat & completely surprised me.
And-- the one altered scene-- I'm thankful they changed it-- that scene without any irrelevant controversial distractions is an Oscar winner if I ever saw one-- completely beautiful & traumatic & sweet & loving. I don't want anything to stand in the way of the characters & what they care about there-- & if I'd been in a room of screaming fans I would have been annoyed for having anything interrupt those beautiful moments during the film-- though I wouldn't kick the deleted scene out of bed if it shows up on the DVD!
Saturday the 24th I saw it again. They're giving away Home books & CDs as raffle prizes, & though I wasn't lucky enough to win-- I was lucky to get a book anyway. One of the guys that won the CD/book set gave me his book because he already had one. It has the Home poster on the cover!
Everyone was filling out pink questionnaires for the film-- One of the guys collecting them said they had about 200 responses from the previous showings, & of those nearly everyone rated the film as excellent. Only 9 of that 200 rated it fair & only 2 poor (2 bastards!)
Colin's got some incredibly powerful moments in this film, and though I'm a fan of his anyway, I was happily blown away with how loving he is as Bobby. It's glorious to watch. I'm highly impressed with the whole film-- all the acting from everyone. It's a very emotional, poignant, & profound story.
_________________
Youth, friendship and a Lover's pact
thinker169126 July 2005
Director Michael Mayer and screen writer Michael Cunningham combined their formidable talents to create an emotional masterpiece which is seldom found in the world of film. This is the tearful story of Young Bobby Morrow (supurbly played by Andrew Chalmer) who is untimely separated from his older brother, but discovers that he is gifted with supreme insight. With it, he establishes a loving and emotional foundation with both his lifetime,companion (Harris Allan) and their triadic lover Sissy Spacek. From his early boyhood days when Love could be found in a kiss or shared at arm length, to the countryside estate which allows him to fulfill his fanciful dreams, the touching story is supremely crafted to illicit the most heart wrenching emotions and delightfully delivers hope and love as a divided. If the viewer possesses a heart, this film will touch it.
Nice story told too late.
siderite14 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This is one of those movies that you watch not for the end, but for the little details in it. You don't know exactly what it is going to be about at first, but then it becomes clear and by the end of the film you don't really wish for an ending, you know what is going to happen.
The actors play well, the story is nicely told, a story way better than the boring The Hours, with which it bears almost no comparison. The script looks like a play script, not a movie one, with basically just 3-5 characters. I would have loved a little more originality, but then I guess the book was original in it's print days, the movie is not, so that's what I think the story was told too late. And stupid little clichés like AIDS hitting the gay one did seem out of place.
I loved the main character, so free. In the end it becomes clear that his apparent freedom is actually based on codependency, but still a fascinating kid and man. What would it be like to be happy just for the sake of it, rather than fight with yourself and others?
This is a movie that you want to watch with your girlfriend or maybe with a couple of friends. It is not to be watched with parents, though, ideal mothers like in the film are really rare. :)
The actors play well, the story is nicely told, a story way better than the boring The Hours, with which it bears almost no comparison. The script looks like a play script, not a movie one, with basically just 3-5 characters. I would have loved a little more originality, but then I guess the book was original in it's print days, the movie is not, so that's what I think the story was told too late. And stupid little clichés like AIDS hitting the gay one did seem out of place.
I loved the main character, so free. In the end it becomes clear that his apparent freedom is actually based on codependency, but still a fascinating kid and man. What would it be like to be happy just for the sake of it, rather than fight with yourself and others?
This is a movie that you want to watch with your girlfriend or maybe with a couple of friends. It is not to be watched with parents, though, ideal mothers like in the film are really rare. :)
Compelling performances make this a film worth seeing
ListenBucko5 March 2005
While the script may not be a perfect adaptation of the novel (note that it was the author's first, and as such, may have been difficult to make into a cohesive whole. Also, the importance of good editing should not be overlooked).
In any case, the first part of the movie spends a bit too much time on exposition, or perhaps simply doesn't use the time well enough. We're fairly clubbed over the head with Bobby's near-worshipful identification with his older brother. The scenes with Sissy Spacek were far superior to the others, and brought out the best in the young actors playing the boys.
The film's most pleasing aspect was the wonderfully crafted relationships among the four adult characters, played by Farrell, Roberts, Wright Penn and Spacek. They were convincing, and drew the audience into the entire complex of the the interaction between the characters, even among those I've spoken to who identified more strongly with one of them. These scenes are crafted very well, and display the director's skill from live theatre. This part of the movie, I wanted to see more of. Yes, folks, Colin Farrell can indeed act; you'll find many different shadings in his performance, and a vulnerability you probably haven't seen before. Dallas Roberts, who was nominated for an Outer Drama Critics' Circle award for Best Actor for his outstanding performance in "Nocturne" in New York, and who recently finished a run of a two man play with none other than the renowned Sam Shepherd, does an extremely fine job. He maintains honesty and intensity, and isn't drawn into the easy trap of trying to play the whole weight of the drama at once. He keeps himself firmly in each moment. Robin Wright Penn turns in a delightful performance in a character whose range of outlook on life is wide and complex. Sissy Spacek is simply superb; aside from the tendency to like her in whatever she does, her character took only moments to become highly engaging. The scenic design and location choices were notably excellent.
This movie, which unfortunately has yet to receive wide distribution, is definitely worth seeing. Not only does it feature fine performances and direction in the latter part of the story, but it raises questions about what "family" really IS, and who gets to decide what that definition should be? That makes it a VERY timely film. Unless you've read the book, you probably can't tell what's going to happen at each stage, and you may find yourself with more questions than answers by the time the end credits roll. A piece of art that ASKS questions and doesn't claim to provide all the answers is to be valued and appreciated. It's also unusual for Hollywood to produce, given their corporately-driven tendency to release "neat and packaged" films. It allows far more room for the audience to make up their OWN minds, and thus displays more respect for them. In my opinion, it was this aspect of the script that enabled the producers to draw in three "name" stars, and give us a welcome introduction to the highly talented Dallas Roberts, whose performance takes no back seat to any of the others.
This film contains varied & perhaps unconventional relationships. For that reason, it has had a lot of screenings at Gay/Lesbian film festivals. Don't let that fool you into overlooking this film. Its appeal is in the humanity of the characters, not their sexual preferences.
I highly recommend the film. Be patient with the first portions; the older the characters get, the better the film gets.
In any case, the first part of the movie spends a bit too much time on exposition, or perhaps simply doesn't use the time well enough. We're fairly clubbed over the head with Bobby's near-worshipful identification with his older brother. The scenes with Sissy Spacek were far superior to the others, and brought out the best in the young actors playing the boys.
The film's most pleasing aspect was the wonderfully crafted relationships among the four adult characters, played by Farrell, Roberts, Wright Penn and Spacek. They were convincing, and drew the audience into the entire complex of the the interaction between the characters, even among those I've spoken to who identified more strongly with one of them. These scenes are crafted very well, and display the director's skill from live theatre. This part of the movie, I wanted to see more of. Yes, folks, Colin Farrell can indeed act; you'll find many different shadings in his performance, and a vulnerability you probably haven't seen before. Dallas Roberts, who was nominated for an Outer Drama Critics' Circle award for Best Actor for his outstanding performance in "Nocturne" in New York, and who recently finished a run of a two man play with none other than the renowned Sam Shepherd, does an extremely fine job. He maintains honesty and intensity, and isn't drawn into the easy trap of trying to play the whole weight of the drama at once. He keeps himself firmly in each moment. Robin Wright Penn turns in a delightful performance in a character whose range of outlook on life is wide and complex. Sissy Spacek is simply superb; aside from the tendency to like her in whatever she does, her character took only moments to become highly engaging. The scenic design and location choices were notably excellent.
This movie, which unfortunately has yet to receive wide distribution, is definitely worth seeing. Not only does it feature fine performances and direction in the latter part of the story, but it raises questions about what "family" really IS, and who gets to decide what that definition should be? That makes it a VERY timely film. Unless you've read the book, you probably can't tell what's going to happen at each stage, and you may find yourself with more questions than answers by the time the end credits roll. A piece of art that ASKS questions and doesn't claim to provide all the answers is to be valued and appreciated. It's also unusual for Hollywood to produce, given their corporately-driven tendency to release "neat and packaged" films. It allows far more room for the audience to make up their OWN minds, and thus displays more respect for them. In my opinion, it was this aspect of the script that enabled the producers to draw in three "name" stars, and give us a welcome introduction to the highly talented Dallas Roberts, whose performance takes no back seat to any of the others.
This film contains varied & perhaps unconventional relationships. For that reason, it has had a lot of screenings at Gay/Lesbian film festivals. Don't let that fool you into overlooking this film. Its appeal is in the humanity of the characters, not their sexual preferences.
I highly recommend the film. Be patient with the first portions; the older the characters get, the better the film gets.
odd plot for a strange film
antoniotierno27 February 2005
This adaptation of Pulitzer Prize-winning author Michael Cunningham gives an excellent acting ensemble: Colin Farrel, playing a gay part, is very professional, like every time. Sissy Spacek also deserves a special note, along with Robin Wright Penn and Dallas Roberts. Certainly a deep and touching, film showing three people all searching for lives completely different from the ones they find themselves in. There is an overall sense of sadness pervading the film, but nevertheless the whole story is not depressing at all, though showing so many deaths to get you to think the characters are the unluckiest people all over the world.
A Home at the end
Jamessemaj1217 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I saw an incredible movie last night I had to mention, I was at the local trade/buy movie place and found "A HOME AT THE END OF THE WORLD" for .99, you will recall the movie from all the hyperbole Colin Farrell received for a full frontal nude scene he did which was cut by the director after a screening audience were reportedly gasping so much that it was affecting the artistic flow of the film. The movie is so heartfelt from the poignant connection you feel as the two main characters have their first intimate contact at age 16 to the closing frames with the ambiguous ending. Colin is simply amazing as the romantic lead, the level of tenderness he achieves with his boyhood love is so sweet and innocent, hard to imagine from someone as hard ass as the reputation that belies him. The scene when they are dancing and kissing on the balcony to the strains of the Mozart aria is both erotic and magical, reminiscent of classic Hollywood.
The most emotional part for me was when they were watching ALL ABOUT EVE b/c one of my very best friends in this life and many previous ones instantly came to mind as this was the last film we saw together not long before he passed.
Bobby (Colin) moves to NY to be with Johnnie and Johnnie is now living with a woman, a very colorful woman named Clare. We later find out that Clare is really in love with Johnnie but can get what she truly wants only from Bobby (see the movie to find out). The chemistry really isn't there between Bobby and Clare even awkward at times, like he's there in body but not in spirit and Colin shows us this emotional dichotomy perfectly. Clare soon discovers while she loves Johnnie that the love of Johnnies life is Bobby but what she doesn't know then is the same is true of Bobby which we find out as she sees them dancing and she has a painful epiphany. What she does after coming to terms with this is to say she is going to leave to see her mother in Philly for a few days but she's actually saying goodbye and then she does something I didn't find to be true of her character which I thought was cruel, she tried to get Bobby to leave Johnnie and go to Philly with her and he tells her NO at first but then once she asks again finally he understand what she is really asking of him and gives her a resigned NO................... See This Movie, I always knew Colin was an amazing actor but I never dreamed he was capable of such an ingénues intimacy.
The most emotional part for me was when they were watching ALL ABOUT EVE b/c one of my very best friends in this life and many previous ones instantly came to mind as this was the last film we saw together not long before he passed.
Bobby (Colin) moves to NY to be with Johnnie and Johnnie is now living with a woman, a very colorful woman named Clare. We later find out that Clare is really in love with Johnnie but can get what she truly wants only from Bobby (see the movie to find out). The chemistry really isn't there between Bobby and Clare even awkward at times, like he's there in body but not in spirit and Colin shows us this emotional dichotomy perfectly. Clare soon discovers while she loves Johnnie that the love of Johnnies life is Bobby but what she doesn't know then is the same is true of Bobby which we find out as she sees them dancing and she has a painful epiphany. What she does after coming to terms with this is to say she is going to leave to see her mother in Philly for a few days but she's actually saying goodbye and then she does something I didn't find to be true of her character which I thought was cruel, she tried to get Bobby to leave Johnnie and go to Philly with her and he tells her NO at first but then once she asks again finally he understand what she is really asking of him and gives her a resigned NO................... See This Movie, I always knew Colin was an amazing actor but I never dreamed he was capable of such an ingénues intimacy.
Top notch cast and director sunk by a shoddy screenplay
grahamclarke5 June 2005
Writing novels and writing screenplays necessitate two very different skills. It's rare that both are successfully accomplished by the same person. "At Home at the End of the World" is proof positive that acclaimed author Michael Cunningham is something of a novice as a screenplay writer. The result is that his novel has been transformed into a far less successful movie than it deserved.
There is a serious lack of character development in all three principals which robs them of the authenticity needed to make them truly believable. They tend towards the stereotypical which severely weakens the work as a whole.
It's a great pity, because on hand are a highly talented cast of actors, helmed by veteran theater director Michael Mayer. They all do excellent work, but Cunningham's screenplay keeps getting in the way.
Mayer elicits strong performances from the child and teens actors who grow into Colin Farrell. The physical similarity of all three characters, render this transformation a natural one; something of a rarity.
Despite the script, Robin Wright Penn and Dallas Roberts do have many powerful moments. However Sissy Spacek 's underwritten role has an artificiality about it that not even an actress of her caliber can overcome.
The real eye opener is Colin Farrell. He deserves admiration for momentarily taking an artistic detour from his meteoric Hollywood career for a role far more challenging than the blockbusters he seems destined for. What may surprise many is that Farrell proves himself an actor capable of emotional depths one might not have expected from him. It's an effective, heartfelt performance and largely the reason to see the movie.
There's a lesson to be learnt here for authors who are reluctant to relinquish there novels to more experienced screenplay writers. Cunningham's novel has not been well served and for this he has only himself to blame. He could not have wished for a better cast or director, but certainly should have wished for a better screenplay.
There is a serious lack of character development in all three principals which robs them of the authenticity needed to make them truly believable. They tend towards the stereotypical which severely weakens the work as a whole.
It's a great pity, because on hand are a highly talented cast of actors, helmed by veteran theater director Michael Mayer. They all do excellent work, but Cunningham's screenplay keeps getting in the way.
Mayer elicits strong performances from the child and teens actors who grow into Colin Farrell. The physical similarity of all three characters, render this transformation a natural one; something of a rarity.
Despite the script, Robin Wright Penn and Dallas Roberts do have many powerful moments. However Sissy Spacek 's underwritten role has an artificiality about it that not even an actress of her caliber can overcome.
The real eye opener is Colin Farrell. He deserves admiration for momentarily taking an artistic detour from his meteoric Hollywood career for a role far more challenging than the blockbusters he seems destined for. What may surprise many is that Farrell proves himself an actor capable of emotional depths one might not have expected from him. It's an effective, heartfelt performance and largely the reason to see the movie.
There's a lesson to be learnt here for authors who are reluctant to relinquish there novels to more experienced screenplay writers. Cunningham's novel has not been well served and for this he has only himself to blame. He could not have wished for a better cast or director, but certainly should have wished for a better screenplay.
They Cut the Best Part
cornflakeboy2012 November 2004
Spoilers ahead, of both the book and the movie, since they both vary wildly in interpretation.
I've heard the argument that book and film are totally different media, and one should never expect the movie to be as good as the book, because what an author has the luxury of describing at length, the director must compress and depict visually. I agree. However, this does not change the fact that there are both good and bad adaptations of books. Some books are tricky adaptations, and lengthy plot lines have to be changed or eliminated to accommodate a transition to film. On the other hand, some books are focus-grouped and edited and changed for no rhyme or reason to the point where the movie bears little relation to the author's original work.
Such is nearly the case with this one. Plot developments, especially relating to backstory and the side-stories of supporting characters were either eliminated, or in the case where the screenwriter - which is, I've come to discover, the actual author of the book - evidently found them interesting, were compressed and de-contextualized into confusing scenes that add nothing to the overall narrative arc of the film, if it can be said to have one.
And politically, as is nearly always the case with gay movies, this movie goes astray from the source material in once again giving a lead character AIDS (in the book, it is a side character who suffers from AIDS, this character is eliminated in the movie). Plus, famously, this cuts out a scene of Colin Farrell naked, which would - had it been preserved in the DVD - have been the only thing in this movie worth seeing. Once again, Hollywood's double standard: We can see all the breasts in the world, but show us a penis, and it'll be complete anarchy in the theaters, like the last scene of "Day of The Locust." Ditto a gay character ending up happy and healthy.
Robin Wright Penn's character is totally marginalized here, as is Sissy Spaceck's. You'll have to go back to the book to get any sense of these women's identities and motivations or their place of relevance in the story. Penn's character is the worst of the chick flick fag-hag characters: dumbly needly, she hangs off a gay man because he's the only one who'll put up with her, and she doesn't seem to give a damn about any of his feelings, including evidently whether he lives or dies.
The end result of all this is a confusing story with little or no narrative, no emotional value, and no point. Colin Farrell gives a good performance, but he's given nothing to work with. In all, an utter, bitter disappointment.
I've heard the argument that book and film are totally different media, and one should never expect the movie to be as good as the book, because what an author has the luxury of describing at length, the director must compress and depict visually. I agree. However, this does not change the fact that there are both good and bad adaptations of books. Some books are tricky adaptations, and lengthy plot lines have to be changed or eliminated to accommodate a transition to film. On the other hand, some books are focus-grouped and edited and changed for no rhyme or reason to the point where the movie bears little relation to the author's original work.
Such is nearly the case with this one. Plot developments, especially relating to backstory and the side-stories of supporting characters were either eliminated, or in the case where the screenwriter - which is, I've come to discover, the actual author of the book - evidently found them interesting, were compressed and de-contextualized into confusing scenes that add nothing to the overall narrative arc of the film, if it can be said to have one.
And politically, as is nearly always the case with gay movies, this movie goes astray from the source material in once again giving a lead character AIDS (in the book, it is a side character who suffers from AIDS, this character is eliminated in the movie). Plus, famously, this cuts out a scene of Colin Farrell naked, which would - had it been preserved in the DVD - have been the only thing in this movie worth seeing. Once again, Hollywood's double standard: We can see all the breasts in the world, but show us a penis, and it'll be complete anarchy in the theaters, like the last scene of "Day of The Locust." Ditto a gay character ending up happy and healthy.
Robin Wright Penn's character is totally marginalized here, as is Sissy Spaceck's. You'll have to go back to the book to get any sense of these women's identities and motivations or their place of relevance in the story. Penn's character is the worst of the chick flick fag-hag characters: dumbly needly, she hangs off a gay man because he's the only one who'll put up with her, and she doesn't seem to give a damn about any of his feelings, including evidently whether he lives or dies.
The end result of all this is a confusing story with little or no narrative, no emotional value, and no point. Colin Farrell gives a good performance, but he's given nothing to work with. In all, an utter, bitter disappointment.
Oscar for Colin
morgan83127 November 2004
I'm not sure if I just saw the same movie as some of the other reviewers on here. I would include this film as one of the best of 2004 (so far) along with Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Garden State, Spartan, and Kill Bill Vol 2. Colin Farrell's character, Bobby Morrow is one of the most fascinating people I've seen in the movies for some time. I hope his performance (and this film) are given the recognition they deserve. The rest of the performances are excellent as well. The screenplay and the direction are also very good, too. The story isn't something that we haven't seen on film before, but the characters and the way the film unfolds isn't your standard fare. Don't listen to the detractors, see this film.
Thought-provoking story with good performances, yet uneven
BeneCumb22 February 2014
Unconventional families, search for love/happiness, homosexuality are the topics attracting lots of attention as well as different opinions. It is the approach and fresh angle that matter - as there is plenty of space between mawkishness and platitude. The movie in question is a warmhearted narration with sad undertones, but not all parts are of equal importance or intriguing, some scenes remain a bit incomprehensible (I had to read Wikipedia afterward). But the movie is around 1,5 hours long only and includes many things to ponder on and over.
And the performances are distinct, particularly Colin Farrell as Bobby since 1982, Robin Wright Penn as Clare and Sissy Spacek as Alice Glover; Dallas Roberts as Jonathan since 1982 was not much inviting to me.
All in all, a good movie for those not afraid of thinking out-of-the-box, and admirers of the actors above.
And the performances are distinct, particularly Colin Farrell as Bobby since 1982, Robin Wright Penn as Clare and Sissy Spacek as Alice Glover; Dallas Roberts as Jonathan since 1982 was not much inviting to me.
All in all, a good movie for those not afraid of thinking out-of-the-box, and admirers of the actors above.
Disappointing...
jmichaeli31 July 2004
For anyone who has read the book, this film version will be very disappointing - especially the ending. The ending in the book leaves questions open and hope still alive. The movie has a completely different ending and it is a bit of a downer, especially since it is missing a very important character from the book - Erich, Jonathon's "boyfriend." There is a hole in the development of Jonathon's character because of this omission and an even bigger whole in the meaning of the story.
I questioned Collin Farrell playing Bobby before seeing the film, but he was the best thing in the movie. He really was Bobby. I'm am greatly impressed with his portrayal and have a new sense and appreciation of his acting abilities. I would not be surprised if he at least gets an Oscar nomination for this.
The other characters were played well. Two observations: 1) Alice would have been the perfect role for Sissy Spacek if she were given more to work with; 2) It would have been very helpful to know what Jonathon's father (Ned) did for a living since there were so many references to films. In the book there is much made of the fact that he owns a movie theatre. It is important in understanding some of the symbolism in the story.
There also seemed to be some editing problems, though this could have been the copy sent to the theatre I was in. It was choppy in places with just clicks to the next scene with no transition.
I think if I had not read the book, the movie would have been a different experience for me. This is one time I can truly say the book was better than the movie.
I questioned Collin Farrell playing Bobby before seeing the film, but he was the best thing in the movie. He really was Bobby. I'm am greatly impressed with his portrayal and have a new sense and appreciation of his acting abilities. I would not be surprised if he at least gets an Oscar nomination for this.
The other characters were played well. Two observations: 1) Alice would have been the perfect role for Sissy Spacek if she were given more to work with; 2) It would have been very helpful to know what Jonathon's father (Ned) did for a living since there were so many references to films. In the book there is much made of the fact that he owns a movie theatre. It is important in understanding some of the symbolism in the story.
There also seemed to be some editing problems, though this could have been the copy sent to the theatre I was in. It was choppy in places with just clicks to the next scene with no transition.
I think if I had not read the book, the movie would have been a different experience for me. This is one time I can truly say the book was better than the movie.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
