web
counter
 

Netflix Watch: Weekend Review -- Finally, The Gays Are Free To Be Just As Boring As The Straights!

By Brian Prisco | Posted Under Film Reviews | Comments (11)



weekendreview.jpg

The old trope goes, “Why not allow gays to marry so they can be just as miserable as the rest of us?” As a society, we haven’t gotten to the point where we can look at a non-traditional couple and feel the need to comment, be that with scorn or adoration. Gay characters on television are still represented over 50% flamboyant comic-relief, and the revelation of a character as gay is still used as some sort of Shyamalanian twist. But we’re getting there. Even if the MPAA still treats gay sex as witchcraft and automatically bumps a film’s rating if two same-sex characters get down to some consensual, mutual spellcasting. Andrew Haigh’s Weekend is a huge step, in that it allows two gay men to come together in exactly the same kind of dreary, boring romance that we’ve come to appreciate in our indie drama. It’s about two notches above mumblecore, and the drama is so low-key that it’s easy to miss if you aren’t paying attention. Which you probably won’t be. For me, there’s nothing more boring than watching two people fall in love — straight or gay. I can appreciate there’s a lot of folks who will this film to be poetic and captivating. I can understand that. I loved films like Easier With Practice, Once, and Blue Valentine, which are all wistful romantic dramas. This one didn’t speak to me.

Weekend suffers from the same plight that many romances do in that there’s no way to describe it without sounding incredibly lame or cliched. Our hero is Russell (Tom Cullen), a lonely fella who’s never quite told his family and friends that he’s gay. He fakes his way through stag parties and social events, that kinda sad, vaguely bearded guy that you wonder why he’s never found a nice girl to settle down with. After one of the frat-tastic adventures, he heads out to a gay night club, where he meets and beds Glen (Chris New). And the rest of the film consists of Russell struggling with his own sexuality versus scenes of him and Glen engaged in some intense sexuality. That’s it. That’s the entire movie. Will they be a couple or won’t they? Will Russell finally come out or will it be too late? The ending is sweet and understated, but to get there, it’s a long, mopey, lazy slog.

Andrew Haigh’s been getting insane buzz for his film, particularly from festivals and critical circles, but when compared to the usual shoegazing blue-filtered dreck most of the indie dramas tend to be, when the actors actually look up and say I love you once in a while, it’s cinematic Robocop riding a unicorn on a rainbow. Cullen and New give effortless performances, but when the entire film’s script is basically “Fuck. Mope. Apologize. Walk Away in a Long Shot. Bathe. Repeat.” it’s not a difficult draw. I can’t even tell people that if you typically enjoy dreary romance to watch this, but it’s probably a safe bet. It’s odd that I didn’t enjoy this, because this is usually my wheelhouse. Yet, I hated Shame and Like Crazy this year for similar reasons — when your primary dramatic obstacle is your own sexual insecurity and can pretty much be cured by Cher from Moonstruck slapping you upside the head and shrieking, “Snap out of it!” — it doesn’t make for compelling cinema. And I’m beginning to suspect that when some of my female friends refer to a romance as “touching,” that just means there’s attractive full-frontal male nudity.

Some people’s boring is other folk’s beautiful, and I am perfectly willing to accept that I am deeply flawed when it comes to film romance. I thought Harold and Maude was a perfect film — right up until they decided to have sex. It was the loudest “wokka wokka” in film history and cheapened the beautiful relationship between them. Sacrilege, I know. So take my approbation of ignoring this with a grain of salt. I think if you’re a rainyday romantic, if you like your passion with a little pouting and angst, then give this a gander.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



"Cougar Town" Returns at 8:30 on Valentine's Day | Happy Birthday, Betty White! | A Celebration of Geriatric Awesome









Comments

Sounds like you went out of your way to be fair and objective about your tastes vis a vis this film. Not your cup of tea, not likely mine. Big deal. Good review.

Posted by: lordhelmet at January 17, 2012 3:12 PM

PROGRESS!...?

Posted by: Alabaster Salamander at January 17, 2012 3:13 PM

It's a film you could argue is slow and boring, but I happen to like both slow and boring films, and this one in particular. It is a film that does not try to be a) like most every other gay film in existence where it's got obvious messages and is cliche or b) anything other than a normal couple behaving the way normal couples do. I found the film incredibly erotic because of there conversations and the chemistry that they had between each other, but I won't call you stupid for not liking it.

Also, fuck Like Crazy. Seriously. Just fuck it.

Posted by: Kamikaze Feminist at January 17, 2012 3:17 PM

i had the same boring experience.
at times, it felt like shots were just random moments, and that they could have been switched out/around with other random moments, and nothing of the development would have been lost.
and just looking off into the distance (you know, every 4 minutes of film time) doesn't convey what you think it conveys. i found my eyes falling down to inspect something on the carpet or at my own hand, as nothing was making me look at the movie.

a rare instant of having peen on the screen and all i wanted was to switch it off.

Posted by: gp at January 17, 2012 3:18 PM

Weekend worked for me, but I think indie romances are hard to nail down. If you don't connect with the characters, there's not much more in the film for you. Just close-up after endless close-up.

Posted by: kelsy at January 17, 2012 3:49 PM

M-O-O-N, that spells Tom Cullen.

Posted by: krix at January 17, 2012 3:51 PM

So on a scientific scale of "slow and boring" where does this fall, if:

(1) = Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy which I'll call "methodical and detailed" but some people might find "slow and boring"

and

(10) = 1st half of Melancholia which I'll call "overly-self-indulgent and endless"

I ask because I'm typically drawn to what most people consider slow and boring so some quantitative analysis would be very helpful.

Posted by: PaddyDog at January 17, 2012 5:21 PM

I can understand that this movie won't appeal to everyone, but from you recollection of the movie I have to wonder if you were even paying attention:

Our hero is Russell (Tom Cullen), a lonely fella who’s never quite told his family and friends that he’s gay. [...] Will Russell finally come out or will it be too late?

It's made fairly explicitly clear that Russell is an orphan without any family, but that he is out to his friends.

Posted by: gravyboat at January 17, 2012 6:39 PM

Fair review. I really dug it. But, I really connected with Russell who looks and acts exactly like a good friend of mine. I really like the slow build and I love watching people fall in love in that slow realistic way. Paddy I thought it was closer to Tinker Taylor Soldier Spy. But, I also really connected to the characters.

Posted by: Nimue at January 18, 2012 9:07 AM

Thanks Nimue. I'll give it a go.

Posted by: PaddyDog at January 18, 2012 10:41 AM

I kind of agree, I think Maude should have given Harold a peck on the lips and a quick handy.

Posted by: Mit_Huffman at January 18, 2012 11:40 AM