Love! Valour! Compassion!

Rating:
Summary: Love's! Shallow! Repression!
Review: "This is my house. I like to fill it up with my friends.... [Sadly, I don't have any, so these are the miserable people I invited instead.]" So paraphrases the opening voice-over of the screen adaptation of Terrence McNally's off-Broadway play. Better it had remained off-Broadway.

LVC is a clear nod to Mart Crowley's 1968 off-Broadway "Boys in the Band," likewise brought to the big screen in 1970. Like its predecessor, LVC is premised on a gathering of eight disparate and self-loathing NYC gay men with seemingly no emotional bond between them. Apparently the cultural stereotypes of the 1960's still live on in the 90's, as the group includes a choreographer prone to passive aggressive hissy fits, a bitchy theater queen, an air-headed pretty boy dancer, a whiny couple, and a tiresome yuppie (yes, he DOES tie pastel sweaters around his neck). Similarly, both films include most of their original theater casts. Even BITB's final scene of the partygoers line dancing to Martha Reeves and the Vandella's "Heatwave" is reprised in an oddly placed performance of the Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairies from "Nutcracker Suite." So with all this in common, what makes BITB a classic of gay cinema and LVC so laughably forgettable?

BITB, as repeated in so many gay retrospectives, hit the stage before the watershed Stonewall Riot of 1969. It was a whisper before gay identity truly found its voice. There is something compellingly sympathetic about this collection of men who hang together simply because they can be their uncloseted selves around each other. Their bitchiness and self-loathing too must be viewed in the context of their repressive era. This desperate need for camaraderie and acceptance, however, doesn't translate well to LVC and the 1990's.

Or maybe it's the film direction that sets them apart. William Friedkin, who directed BITB, is no stranger to the screen nor to controversy. His credits include "The Exorcist," "French Connection," "Cruising," and "To Live and Die in LA." Joe Mantello, by contrast played a couple bit parts in "Law and Order" in addition to directing LVC. And LVC is hardly a groundbreaking movie.

Or maybe it's the actors. The miscast Jason Alexander (Nathan Lane wisely declined the chance to repeat his stage role) leaves the audience expecting George Castanza's parents and Kramer to barge in at any time. And I for one would rather have the skin peeled off my still living body than see Jason Alexander in a tutu again.

LVC does attempt to evoke emotional involvement with its inclusion of a character with AIDS. He comes across, however, as a perfunctory toss-in and is rather unsympathetic, reminiscent of Kenneth Branagh's "Peter's Friends". For films in which HIV is more engaging and integral to the storytelling, see "Parting Glances", "Longtime Companion", "Grief", or "Opposite of Sex".

It's very likely that LVC stages much better than it screens. McNally, after all, wrote "The Ritz," "Kiss of the Spider Woman," "Ragtime," and "Frankie and Johnny," to deserved critical acclaim. Indeed, the forced dialect (including the sappy final voice-over) is far more appropriate to theater than to cinema.

Rating:
Summary: Love's! Shallow! Repression!
Review: "This is my house. I like to fill it up with my friends.... [Sadly, I don't have any, so these are the miserable people I invited instead.]" So paraphrases the opening voice-over of the screen adaptation of Terrence McNally's off-Broadway play. Better it had remained off-Broadway.

LVC is a clear nod to Mart Crowley's 1968 off-Broadway "Boys in the Band," likewise brought to the big screen in 1970. Like its predecessor, LVC is premised on a gathering of eight disparate and self-loathing NYC gay men with seemingly no emotional bond between them. Apparently the cultural stereotypes of the 1960's still live on in the 90's, as the group includes a choreographer prone to passive aggressive hissy fits, a bitchy theater queen, an air-headed pretty boy dancer, a whiny couple, and a tiresome yuppie (yes, he DOES tie pastel sweaters around his neck). Similarly, both films include most of their original theater casts. Even BITB's final scene of the partygoers line dancing to Martha Reeves and the Vandella's "Heatwave" is reprised in an oddly placed performance of the Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairies from "Nutcracker Suite." So with all this in common, what makes BITB a classic of gay cinema and LVC so laughably forgettable?

BITB, as repeated in so many gay retrospectives, hit the stage before the watershed Stonewall Riot of 1969. It was a whisper before gay identity truly found its voice. There is something compellingly sympathetic about this collection of men who hang together simply because they can be their uncloseted selves around each other. Their bitchiness and self-loathing too must be viewed in the context of their repressive era. This desperate need for camaraderie and acceptance, however, doesn't translate well to LVC and the 1990's.

Or maybe it's the film direction that sets them apart. William Friedkin, who directed BITB, is no stranger to the screen nor to controversy. His credits include "The Exorcist," "French Connection," "Cruising," and "To Live and Die in LA." Joe Mantello, by contrast played a couple bit parts in "Law and Order" in addition to directing LVC. And LVC is hardly a groundbreaking movie.

Or maybe it's the actors. The miscast Jason Alexander (Nathan Lane wisely declined the chance to repeat his stage role) leaves the audience expecting George Castanza's parents and Kramer to barge in at any time. And I for one would rather have the skin peeled off my still living body than see Jason Alexander in a tutu again.

LVC does attempt to evoke emotional involvement with its inclusion of a character with AIDS. He comes across, however, as a perfunctory toss-in and is rather unsympathetic, reminiscent of Kenneth Branagh's "Peter's Friends". For films in which HIV is more engaging and integral to the storytelling, see "Parting Glances", "Longtime Companion", "Grief", or "Opposite of Sex".

It's very likely that LVC stages much better than it screens. McNally, after all, wrote "The Ritz," "Kiss of the Spider Woman," "Ragtime," and "Frankie and Johnny," to deserved critical acclaim. Indeed, the forced dialect (including the sappy final voice-over) is far more appropriate to theater than to cinema.

Rating:
Summary: Touching, funny, and real...See it!
Review: "Love!Valour!Compassion!" is a touching film that depicts the truth in many relationships. It brings out the best and the worst in humans as they continue to explore their friendships, relationships, and enemies. These all fall into one category: friends. This movie will entertain you as it makes you laugh, cry , and reminisce along the way...

Rating:
Summary: Watch This With One You Love!
Review: By Richard Valentine Reily, author of Gregory's Hero.

This is not a production for the close minded, or children.
Ramon returns from skinny dipping in the lake with only a big towel draped loosely over his shoulder, his short muscled body exhibiting all its Latin splendor. The show is on.
L!V!C! allows audiences a glimpse into the usually disdained world of every day gay life, giving them the opportunity to laugh nervously and to glance at their partner's responses. Once settled in, the production shows that gay and straight lives are roughly similar. This play is certainly reminiscent of The Big Chill.
Bobbie turns in a stunning performance as Gregory's blind lover. His hesitancy at movement, stammering articulation and resistance to pandering by his friends works. Not to mention his naked, practically hairless blond body, complete with a kneeling scene on the lake raft with his tight posterior pointed directly at the audience. Blindness obviously keeps him from visualizing his less than attractive lover.
Gregory is an over the hill choreographer who owns a fabulous country house to which the six friends retire on weekends from Memorial Day to Labor Day. Gregory is in search of his final routine, yet dispenses his energy in fear of Bobbie leaving him. In the end he finds his final piece while finding his body to fatigued to perform it. Thankfully, Gregory's nakedness is exposed only in the ending scene.
All the actors played their roles superbly. Yet, in every production, one must shine (even more that Bobbie's gorgeous ass and Ramon's muscled body) and that one is the musical trivia champion, Buzz. With boundless energy, the flaming musical queen bounces about with wit and compassion. His act is a dramatic cover for his tragedy of living a loveless life with AIDS. Yet in the end, even he finds a purpose; caring for the cold and heartless John Jeckyll's brother James. James dissolves from a friendly, caring antithesis of John to soiling himself in a canoe.
Each of the characters and themes will touch the audience differently. Arthur and Perry touched me most closely as they showed me more of my relationship with each passing act. A humorous scene in their car on the way to the country house and a touching scene of each trimming the other's ear hairs, brings an insight of things gays really do together. Opposed to what some think we spend all our time doing.
In the beginning you may be edgy at the in your face frontal nudity. You will quickly settle into the fun and feeling of the production. Finally, you are left honestly and compassionately understandng many of the very questions, concerns and frustrations most gay men encounter in their search for meaning, and the end.

Rating:
Summary: Get all your courage and compassion to watch this Flop
Review: Characters are different stereotypes: the gay musical queen, the "perfect yuppie couple", the tormented pianist, the terminal aids character, the collected aging dancer with the handsome to dye for blind and cheating lover, the hispanic wannabe dancer.

At the end this movie has no point to it, you never learn to appreciate profundly any character, you never can see any depths in each of the relationships, and just learn some gossip about their lives, and how they eventually die. Perhaps many can relate to the charactyers in basic levels, but there is not much love or at least not very well expressed, not much sympathy either, and some compassion for both characters played by John Glover (perhaps the only real "actor" in this film).

Conclusion: the film is shallow superficial and with only some bright moments provided by J.G and a small scene with JG and Jason Alexander; the rest are just ordinary "characters/actors" who dropped by this countryhouse/film.

Rating:
Summary: I told you big men can act!
Review: Girls! Get this video and laugh and cry the night away. Gather your sisters and stir the tea! I've never seen volleyball played so 'nellie' before in my entire life! And oooohhh, as far as the latino boy is concerned, I have only one thing to say: "yo quero taco bell, honey!"

Rating:
Summary: Not Your Usual
Review: I came upon the movie by accident and though my finger hovered over the channel changer I found myself increasingly caught up with the characters and their lives. I laughed and cried and thought it was a work of art. At first when I realized it was a movie about gay men I thought, "Oh no not another movie about AIDS",and indeed Aids was there but it only really hovered in the background for most of the film. The characters were quite believable and I laughed and cried and fell in love with this brave and intelligent film. The movie which comes to mind when I try to find a comparrison is, "Smoke signals" which is not about gays or aids or anything but life love and relationships and co-incidentally American Indians. I will buy this movie so I can see it again and I recommend it to anyone with a heart.

Rating:
Summary: It's a must own film
Review: I did not see the play, so perhaps without it to campare to, I can honestly say I was not disappointed, becasue I had no prior expectations. This movie is funny, funny, funny; while at the same time dealing with life, AIDS, and relationships.

Yes it is very over the top in some places, but it fits the characters, and there are some very dramatic camp queens out there, so I think this movie is an example of some gay men, but not all. Just watch it and enjoy, don't get caught up in whether or not it is a representation of you personally.

Rating:
Summary: It's a must own film
Review: I did not see the play, so perhaps without it to campare to, I can honestly say I was not disappointed, becasue I had no prior expectations. This movie is funny, funny, funny; while at the same time dealing with life, AIDS, and relationships.

Yes it is very over the top in some places, but it fits the characters, and there are some very dramatic camp queens out there, so I think this movie is an example of some gay men, but not all. Just watch it and enjoy, don't get caught up in whether or not it is a representation of you personally.

Rating:
Summary: Not as good as I'd hoped, but it did have its moments.
Review: I expected more from this movie than I actually got out of it, but it was entertaining at times. It seemed that a couple of the characters were too stereotypically gay (especially the part played by Jason Alexander), but overall seemed to be an accurate portrayal of eight gay friends and how they related to one another. If you want to get through this life without catching a glimps of Alexander's bottom...close your eyes during the volleyball scene!