Rating: 
Summary: gone but not forgotten
Review: I enjoyed this little independent film very much. The two leads were wonderful. The sex scene was done artistically instead of pornographic which was nicely filmed . I was glad to not hear in the commentary on how hard it was to kiss another guy or being intimate with a man. The only negative aspect of the film was the bad acting on the part of the actress that played the wife of the amnesiac.I would love to see a sequel made with the two men.
Rating: 
Summary: A deep character study film framed in usual movie plotline
Review: "Gone But Not Forgotten" presents an original take on two themes
appearing in many gay movies: the struggles of a closet-case to accept
and live up to who he is, and the trials of an out-of-the-closet guy
determined to assert his own identity and forge his own life in his
small, rural town. The central premise is interesting and provocative:
how would a closet-case behave if he suddenly forgot his past, and how,
having gained a new perspective, would he react to his old life when confronted with it? And there are some ironies: the guy from the back
woods, who adores the mysterious, good-looking, polished urbanite, and
in comparison with whom he probably feels slightly inferior, has
something essential to teach him, for all his sophistication, about
having the strength of character to be himself. The story is well plotted, with lots of dramatic tensions and
contrasts. There is, of course, the spectacular contrast between Mark's
life with Drew and Mark's life with Catherine. But there is also the
tension between Drew and Paul, who movingly struggle to maintain their
close brotherly relationship in spite of different sexualities,
different attitudes to life, and unresolved emotional conflicts arising
from a tragic past. There is also an interesting tension between Dr.
Williams's insistence that Mark remember his past, and Drew's fear of
such a remembrance. And, of course, there is Mark's own conflict
between his unwillingness and his obligation to remember. The characters are interesting and engaging. Scenes of effective
though sometimes understated drama reveal a surprising depth and
complexitiy to their personalities. The Drew-Mark relationship, though
the principal, and most complex, is not the only one. The other
characters are not suborned to function merely as plot devices or Greek
choruses: Paul, Paul's wife, Nancy, and Dr. Williams all have
intriguing relationships with Drew, and Paul's and Drew's relationship provides an
engaging sub-plot. And, of course, there is that series of scenes
between Mark and his forgotten, furious, imperious, conflicted,
wounded, and by-no-means unjustifiably resentful wife, Catherine, which
remarkably succeed in being simultaneously electrifying and funny. The
very strong cast all give highly committed, developed, convincing, and three-dimensional performances. The story has not one but two central puzzles. First, of course, is
the mystery of Mark's forgotten past. Second is Drew's behaviour toward
Mark. As I sat through the movie, I was at first uneasy about what seemed to me to be Drew's pressuring Mark into a relationship, as well
as Drew's constantly dismissing the necessity of Mark's remembering his
past (contrasted with the other characters constantly asserting, with
considerable insensitivity to Drew, the importance of Mark's
remembering
and returning to his past). When the whole incident on the mountain is
revealed toward the end, Drew's behaviour suddenly makes perfect sense:
he hasn't been pressuring Mark so much as encouraging Mark to be the
man he is; and Drew has known (or suspected), as the other characters have
not, the dangers inherent in Mark's remembering his past, and the
possibility of Mark's being driven to the brink again, should he return
to his past. For me, the most interesting and certainly the most admirable
character was Drew. He has an irreverent, slightly subversive and
anarchic side which contrasts not only with the other Summit-Valley
characters (who, in spite of their affection for Drew, all in their own
ways express conventional, non-comprehending straight attitudes,
suggesting the loneliness of Drew's pre-Mark life), but also with Mark
himself. It is clear that Drew isn't perfect, a fact that gives
considerable interest and depth to his character: his struggles to live
as a gay man in a small-town environment have made him slightly self-absorbed. But his behaviour, especially as contrasted with Mark's
closetiness, displays both courage and a healthy (and probably
hard-won)
self-acceptance. Mark has a lot to learn from him. Although Drew
sometimes seems weaker than Mark, because not so severely controlled,
he
is arguably the stronger, because more true to himself, more open, and
more accepting of his identity and emotions.
Rating: 
Summary: Did we all watch the same film?
Review: After reading all of these ratings, I felt it an obligation to write a quick review--to hopefully save a lot of people money that would be better spent on deodorant. This film, while honest and endearing in it's own right, is riddled with sub-par acting and a shaky plot. There was never a moment during the film where I believed that these actors were anything but...actors. They were raw and robotic and forced not only lines, but emotions and gestures. The story had much promise...it was void of the trappings of urban life, the stereotypes and drugs and alcohol and all the other vices associated with the urban gay lifestyle. And...it was not a trite premise in any way...it was unique and interesting. But the unique and interesting premise never developed into a unique and interesting story. It was rushed. The relationships were unclear or lacking in poignancy. The ending was not satisfying. I didn't care enough about any of them to be happy with the ending. When I watch a film or read a book, I invest my time, and sometimes my heart, in the good ones. I felt nothing when I pressed the stop button on my DVD player. I really doubt that most of you will either. Rent this film if you want, but don't buy it. The world of gay cinema may be limited but there are dozens more quality films that are worth the view and purchase. This is just not one of them.
Rating: 
Summary: brilliant movie
Review: after reading all the reviews here I just keep my remarks to myself because everthing is said about this movie. I have watched it I guess 10 times and still love it. It's a touching love story, the acting is a little amateur like, but it makes this film still worth watching. There are just 2 kinds of reviewers here, either they love it or hate it. I'm one of those loving it.
Rating:
Summary: For those who think this is a bad movie...
Review: After watching this movie, I am perplexed as to the bad reviews I am reading. For those trashing the admirable effort, I suggest you watch a truly tragic effort called "Ben & Arthur." After the sheer horror of sitting through this truly "flop-on-your-face" flick, you will definitely be handing out Oscars to "Gone..." and revising your reviews of this truly wonderful movie!
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding !
Review: Gone, but not forgotten is an outstanding film. I was impressed at the tasteful manner that the film was done and the excellant quality of production. The acting was good and the story was sweet, romantic and fulfilling. This is in the top two (Date Movies) I have seen. The other top date movie is "Trick". No heavy social comments or depressing subject manner, it did have some rather racey shots but nothing I would consider to be in bad taste. I would suggest you add this gem to your collection. It was a very upbeat film that left you feeling good. No tears here, just warm and satisfying.
Rating: 
Summary: Who cut the Budget? A totally amateurish production
Review: Gone, But Not Forgotten might have made a good book. The concept for this story is interesting and well designed. But the dialog in this film is amateurish at best. Kudos to the guy who played Drew's brother for being the most believable actor in the story. I found the Doctor fairly believable as well. Having said that, everyone's performance including the 2 leads looked like something out of community theater that forgot to rehearse before going in front of the camera. Every performance was weak! It's as if there was noone behind the camera directing at all!
On the technical side, the audio was particularly bad: Vocal overdubs that were totally sterile (no ambiance at all), dialog levels that changed from scene to scene, and a music bed that was disproportionately loud to the dialog. I'm convinced that whoever did the audio post-production only did it to demo their own music.
Then there's the poor camera work and lighting. While the camera was steady and properly exposed, there was no thought given to camera position or lighting the set to make the shots more interesting. NONE! The scenic beauty of the location was never used to full advantage.
In every respect, this looks like a film student's first try at makking a home movie. How it gathered any nods at all is totally beyond my imagination.
All in all, this is a story I would like to see again with a real budget and a real crew and some real actors and some real post-production.
Rating:
Summary: Wretched, in every respect. Clean your sock drawer instead.
Review: How this movie received any stars whatsoever is puzzling. (Oh, yeah, we were forced to give it at least one....) The acting is atrocious -- in fact, that adjective is kind; it's wince-inducing. (Sort of like having to sit through your middle school cousin's production of...well...anything. Characters lack development, the plot contains more holes than sense, and the ending is obvious from the first ten minutes. Good Lord, what is the gay cinematic world coming to when this type of amateurish dreck receives "Official Selection" standing? I read other reviews with disbelief: passion? dramatic tension? Please... The dialogue is so stilted that it's difficult to believe these characters are supposed to be real people. Yes, it's an independent first film, but does that excuse its near unwatchableness? When a forest ranger in a small community frosts his hair, you know you're in trouble from the get-go. The best thing about this -- the DVD's cover art. Watch at your own risk.
Rating:
Summary: Gone, But Not Forgotten
Review: I am a straight woman who watched this movie mostly for educational purposes. I found it to be not only an intelligent film with universal themes that touch a cross section of people, but also a film that shows that love expresses itself the same way whether it is between a man and a woman or two men (or two women). The rhythms and the cadences of love don't change according to gender. Love is love across the board. It was a beautiful discovery for me. And on top of all that, it was hot!
Rating:
Summary: Best Left Forgotten
Review: I bought this DVD based on the glowing reviews of others and if something so weak and badly done can win such praise it just shows the truly poor state of affairs this particular genre is in. I'm normally a very forgiving film goer, I don't have to see highly polished, slick production values to enjoy a movie; "Sordid Lives" comes to mind, a wonderful movie done on a small budget but the worth of the film still shines through any production shortcomings, while "Gone, But Not Forgotten" on the other hand suffers from ailments too numerous to list. Save your money and your time while I do my best to forget I ever saw it.
|
