I did like the film although it moves slowly, but I liked Drew and he sort of made me like the film. Drew is the epitome of a gay dream I think. He's the typical nature boy who's caring, has a boyish charm and good looks. And I loved his voice, the way he talked. He reminded me a bit of Mouse in Tales of the City. Who could resist? It is true, however, that sometimes you feel you've dropped into a soft-porn film - esp. the music adds to this impression. And the other character looks a bit like a hustler. The other characters are quite weak however. And the relationship between the brothers is fairly strange and not quite convincing. Although the setting is quite realistic, this is more like a fairy tale or wishful thinking. Yet, I think this is a film I would have liked to see around my own coming-out because there's a profound goodness to it and being gay is not presented as an unsurmountable problem. So watching this film is more like an emotional indulgence than a intellectual experience.
46 Reviews
A Man With a Past
nycritic21 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
You know, I have to admit that while there are gay-themed movies that are so awful, so badly executed and so clichéd there is no other way to approach it that doesn't involve a sense of apprehension and at least three glasses of wine to soften the blow, there comes a movie that is so unassuming, so tiny, so much a blink-or-miss event that you would dismiss it because it doesn't have known actors and has been made on a personal level -- really, a labor of love.
Such is the case with this little movie. Its poster does little to attract the right kind of attention because of its flagrant depiction of Harlequin-esquire bodies entwined in a loving embrace. As a matter of fact I won't deny that much of my initial attention was focused on its poster and I thought to myself, "Eh, what the hell -- another gay-lite movie featuring perfectly chiseled bodies, little to zero acting, and a flimsy story that would make ETHAN GREEN look like an exercise in expert plotting."
I will be the first to admit, I was partly wrong. True, the story is pure Harlequin -- change the gender of one of the two leads and you have yourself a quintessential Hollywood weeper starring two of the days brightest leads paired together for sparks and an emotional ride. But there's a stark honesty, something else that is crucial to this movie's enjoyment, that I couldn't -- despite some occasional cheesiness -- take in like I'd never seen a love story before.
For two actors who have little to no credits to their name -- because perish the thought of seeing A-list actors condescend to playing gay men without losing their masculinity; only a handful do that, and even then it's not without some eyebrows being raised, yes, even now -- their interaction together was fraught with enormous sexual and emotional tension, and it's also a tale that takes it time to get to where it needs to get. Matthew Montgomery plays his part with a cheeky realism -- at times it seems like he's in on the fact this is a role, at times he's clearly inside his role. Aaron Orr also comes across very sympathetic as a man who's found the person he's been waiting for and is unmindful that it may cost him everything. And the actress who plays the woman in between Montgomery and Orr, Ariadne Shaeffer, has one intense scene reminiscent of Beatrice Straight in NETWORK that is frankly, chilling.
So, GONE BUT NOT FORGOTTEN is romance, pure and simple, but done with care to its characters, to its story, and comes out looking much better than if it had been made with a budget of 20 million and power-actors. I loved it and recommend it.
Such is the case with this little movie. Its poster does little to attract the right kind of attention because of its flagrant depiction of Harlequin-esquire bodies entwined in a loving embrace. As a matter of fact I won't deny that much of my initial attention was focused on its poster and I thought to myself, "Eh, what the hell -- another gay-lite movie featuring perfectly chiseled bodies, little to zero acting, and a flimsy story that would make ETHAN GREEN look like an exercise in expert plotting."
I will be the first to admit, I was partly wrong. True, the story is pure Harlequin -- change the gender of one of the two leads and you have yourself a quintessential Hollywood weeper starring two of the days brightest leads paired together for sparks and an emotional ride. But there's a stark honesty, something else that is crucial to this movie's enjoyment, that I couldn't -- despite some occasional cheesiness -- take in like I'd never seen a love story before.
For two actors who have little to no credits to their name -- because perish the thought of seeing A-list actors condescend to playing gay men without losing their masculinity; only a handful do that, and even then it's not without some eyebrows being raised, yes, even now -- their interaction together was fraught with enormous sexual and emotional tension, and it's also a tale that takes it time to get to where it needs to get. Matthew Montgomery plays his part with a cheeky realism -- at times it seems like he's in on the fact this is a role, at times he's clearly inside his role. Aaron Orr also comes across very sympathetic as a man who's found the person he's been waiting for and is unmindful that it may cost him everything. And the actress who plays the woman in between Montgomery and Orr, Ariadne Shaeffer, has one intense scene reminiscent of Beatrice Straight in NETWORK that is frankly, chilling.
So, GONE BUT NOT FORGOTTEN is romance, pure and simple, but done with care to its characters, to its story, and comes out looking much better than if it had been made with a budget of 20 million and power-actors. I loved it and recommend it.
What's wrong with nice?
dixichux22 May 2006
OK, so I've watched the maybe five good English speaking gay themed movies released over the last five years. My internet rental queue has about 70 titles for which I remain ever hopeful. One after another, they rate anywhere from simple horrible to pointless, depressing, tedious, condescending, or French horrible. Hope has not completely vanished, but expectations are no longer exceedingly high.
Maybe low expectation was why I liked this movie. I certainly think way too high expectation is why some others did not. The best of film makers would be hard pressed to do better with a budget that wouldn't pay for food service on most movie sets and undoubtedly filmed in less time than a big budget director spends picking his nose. Come on, this little guy deserves a break. The story is feasible and interesting situationally. The characters are believable and their interactions seem real without stereotype. The storyline is laid out in a logical fashion. There is a point. The acting is at least up to soap opera standards. Problems that hound gay relationships are addressed honestly. The video format seems very fitting for the simple, small town, natural surroundings in which it was filmed. The guys are aesthetically decent enough. And it has one of the best choreographed romantic love scenes of any gay movie, big budget or not. As far as pace, this is indeed not an action packed, ADHD storyline, but the pace does thankfully allow the characters to develop. It's just a nice story to let you know the big bad world is not going to always eat you alive.
"Gone but not Forgotten" is more like a granola bar grabbed at the checkout counter rather than say, "Foie Gras en Terrine", at the French Laundry. Simple, momentarily satisfying, and basically healthy. I hope it gets judged accordingly.
Maybe low expectation was why I liked this movie. I certainly think way too high expectation is why some others did not. The best of film makers would be hard pressed to do better with a budget that wouldn't pay for food service on most movie sets and undoubtedly filmed in less time than a big budget director spends picking his nose. Come on, this little guy deserves a break. The story is feasible and interesting situationally. The characters are believable and their interactions seem real without stereotype. The storyline is laid out in a logical fashion. There is a point. The acting is at least up to soap opera standards. Problems that hound gay relationships are addressed honestly. The video format seems very fitting for the simple, small town, natural surroundings in which it was filmed. The guys are aesthetically decent enough. And it has one of the best choreographed romantic love scenes of any gay movie, big budget or not. As far as pace, this is indeed not an action packed, ADHD storyline, but the pace does thankfully allow the characters to develop. It's just a nice story to let you know the big bad world is not going to always eat you alive.
"Gone but not Forgotten" is more like a granola bar grabbed at the checkout counter rather than say, "Foie Gras en Terrine", at the French Laundry. Simple, momentarily satisfying, and basically healthy. I hope it gets judged accordingly.
Beautiful film
wjaddict11 March 2008
This movie was a wonderful surprise for me. From the reviews and basic plot synopses I'd read, I was already pretty sure I'd like it. What I didn't expect was to fall completely in love with it. I was immediately drawn into the storyline with characters I really cared about. With his very first scene, Aaron Orr drew me to his character, and throughout the movie, proceeded to make me laugh with and cry for Drew. His chemistry with Matthew Montgomery was nothing short of electric, and the two of them easily made me forget that Drew and Mark were only characters on the screen.
The less polished production quality is one of the things I love most, and I'm amazed at how the cast and crew put this little gem together on such a tight budget. I've been recommending this film to everyone I know!
The less polished production quality is one of the things I love most, and I'm amazed at how the cast and crew put this little gem together on such a tight budget. I've been recommending this film to everyone I know!
Don't know why, but I enjoyed it
flowerboy7 January 2006
The actors aren't very good looking and don't really act very well. The storyline of a guy with amnesia whose past life is unknown is rather predictable and despite what another reviewer here says, there's really not any "mystery" to it. The movie seems to be shot on a handy cam. But despite all this, I enjoyed the 90 minutes I spent watching this movie and found it to be quite engaging. The lovely locales surely helped. And maybe even the fact that our heroes aren't good looking but are sweet and ordinary (Drew's face reminds me of a cute chipmunk). Anyway, an independent gay movie is bound to suffer when compared to slick Hollywood movies, so I think it's best not to go there. I recommend this movie to all gay people, but don't go in expecting Bareback Mountain.
Definitely Not 'Polished'
alucard1-125 June 2005
I, as a gay man, am happy that there are more and more films, Indie, and Mainstream that are relating too, and telling more 'gay-positive' films.
However, I do wish this film had been done better. I saw that the story had much more potential than what was actually delivered; it was actually quite interesting, and the main reason I did watch it all the way through.
The bad *
The audio was terrible. There were places in the film where the dialog was completely covered by 'really bad' background music.
The writing left a little to be desired and has been compared to an Afterschool Special, with good reason.
The acting was adequate, and this I can't tell if it could have been done better by better dialog in script, or if it was poor delivery from the actors.
The good *
I did feel that the leads, Mark (Matthew Montgomery) and Drew (Aaron Orr)scenes together were done well. They 'pulled off' the intimacy very well, and their interactions were believable. They seemed to have a true chemistry that worked.
As has been stated previously, DO NOT watch this film if you are expecting a lot, as you will most certainly be disappointed. If you have the time to waste... no worries.
As a side note... I would like to see the leads in other roles though, to see if they can do a better job with a 'better script.' I hope this has been a helpful 'review.' -A
However, I do wish this film had been done better. I saw that the story had much more potential than what was actually delivered; it was actually quite interesting, and the main reason I did watch it all the way through.
The bad *
The audio was terrible. There were places in the film where the dialog was completely covered by 'really bad' background music.
The writing left a little to be desired and has been compared to an Afterschool Special, with good reason.
The acting was adequate, and this I can't tell if it could have been done better by better dialog in script, or if it was poor delivery from the actors.
The good *
I did feel that the leads, Mark (Matthew Montgomery) and Drew (Aaron Orr)scenes together were done well. They 'pulled off' the intimacy very well, and their interactions were believable. They seemed to have a true chemistry that worked.
As has been stated previously, DO NOT watch this film if you are expecting a lot, as you will most certainly be disappointed. If you have the time to waste... no worries.
As a side note... I would like to see the leads in other roles though, to see if they can do a better job with a 'better script.' I hope this has been a helpful 'review.' -A
Amnesia Seizure Just Might Please Ya
NJMoon8 January 2006
Having just watched MATRIMONIUM (by the same creators) I had pretty low expectations for GONE BUT NOT FORGOTTEN. Perhaps that's why I liked it so much. The performances are realistic and likable, rising to the level of the script (stronger in story than dialogue). The plot is allowed to unfold in a realistic and satisfying way and the romantic scenes are erotic without being gratuitous. Best performance is turned in by the actor playing the brother Paul (ditto in MATRIMONIUM). I found the story to be clever and interesting, somewhat predictable, but not enough to derail the project. The aggressive 'original score' doesn't always serve up the proper tone and is a real mixed bag of styles. The actress playing Paul's wife isn't quite up to par, but (unlike MATRIMONIUM) she's the exception, not the rule. Give this film a try, but don't think that because this one is watchable, their subsequent effort is likewise. Sophomore slump? While this film may not be memorable, it is MATRIMONIUM that should be gone AND forgotten.
a disaster
kindkit6427 July 2005
I really wanted to like this movie, but I just couldn't. The plot is contrived and nonsensical, the dialogue is trite, and the acting is amateurish, to say the least. Aaron Orr, who plays the park ranger, is the worst offender. He delivers all his lines in the same flat, whiny tone, whether his character is supposed to be happy or torn apart by grief. Plus he's simply miscast--he looks and sounds like an extra on Queer as Folk, not like a guy who clears brush for a living. Matthew Montgomery, the amnesiac guy, does a better job, but he's not good enough to carry the whole story.
Then there's the look of the movie. The lighting and set design are porn-movie quality. In fact, the opening scene looks so much like a porn lead-in that I started to laugh. A few outdoor shots look better, but there aren't many. And as if all this wasn't bad enough, the direction is inept and the soundtrack is lame and intrusive.
About all the movie has going for it is one moderately appealing sex scene. But that's about three minutes out of an hour-and-a-half running time.
Admittedly, this was a low-budget film. But a competent director and actors can do great things on a small budget. Unfortunately, Gone But Not Forgotten doesn't have that level of talent behind it.
Then there's the look of the movie. The lighting and set design are porn-movie quality. In fact, the opening scene looks so much like a porn lead-in that I started to laugh. A few outdoor shots look better, but there aren't many. And as if all this wasn't bad enough, the direction is inept and the soundtrack is lame and intrusive.
About all the movie has going for it is one moderately appealing sex scene. But that's about three minutes out of an hour-and-a-half running time.
Admittedly, this was a low-budget film. But a competent director and actors can do great things on a small budget. Unfortunately, Gone But Not Forgotten doesn't have that level of talent behind it.
True love gay based movie.
muslimbellydancer10 March 2021
Well done, original story that transcends its budget
JetBoy29 September 2003
This story of a forest ranger and the man whose life he saves transcends its low budget to present a compelling tale with a lot of originality. While the acting could be better in parts, the writing is superb. Unlike many low-budget productions, I was able to see and hear what was going on (the director apologized before the screening for the volume being low, but I thought it was perfect).
As the story unfolds, we learn about the ranger and his family and the small town in which they live. As the man whose life is saved recovers from amnesia, we learn with him who he is.
The characters are compellingly drawn. The small-town environment, with its mix of support and limitation, rings true.
if you get the chance, see this film!
As the story unfolds, we learn about the ranger and his family and the small town in which they live. As the man whose life is saved recovers from amnesia, we learn with him who he is.
The characters are compellingly drawn. The small-town environment, with its mix of support and limitation, rings true.
if you get the chance, see this film!
Extremely unbelievable film - Gone and Who Cares
coventrydude13 November 2005
Poor script. Poor acting. Central characters I couldn't develop any empathy for. Porn movie quality with any porn removed. Managed to photograph the lush California forests of Yosemite and Mammoth Lakes as though they were at the end of a ten year drought. Cute lead actors who offered nothing else. In the age of the medical information safeguard laws being enacted, a doctor disclosing to a patient without prompting that the ranger who found him was "a homosexual". Get the picture? I guess the point is, don't get it, either as a rental or purchase.
Suggested films: Latter Days, The Object of My Affection,Don't Tell Anyone(Peruvian), New Year's Day(UK), Get Real(UK), Burnt Money(Argentina), A Very Natural Thing, My Life on Ice(French), Grande Ecole(French), You'll Get Over It(French).
Suggested films: Latter Days, The Object of My Affection,Don't Tell Anyone(Peruvian), New Year's Day(UK), Get Real(UK), Burnt Money(Argentina), A Very Natural Thing, My Life on Ice(French), Grande Ecole(French), You'll Get Over It(French).
Gem of a Movie
leeharmony30 January 2007
This is a gem of a movie. A friend just lent me the DVD even though it came out about 3 years ago. I really didn't know what to expect because he didn't say anything about it.
It has a combination of mystery, romance and a bit of comedy. I like the how storyline progresses and the mystery unfolds. The two lead characters, Drew and Mark, are adorable as the actors who play them. I also enjoyed the music as well.
I went and bought the DVD for myself to watch again (and again). I especially enjoyed the commentary track on the DVD, but I recommend just enjoying the movie the first time around. It's interesting to hear about the scenes and the thoughts from the director, producer and the actor who plays Mark.
It has a combination of mystery, romance and a bit of comedy. I like the how storyline progresses and the mystery unfolds. The two lead characters, Drew and Mark, are adorable as the actors who play them. I also enjoyed the music as well.
I went and bought the DVD for myself to watch again (and again). I especially enjoyed the commentary track on the DVD, but I recommend just enjoying the movie the first time around. It's interesting to hear about the scenes and the thoughts from the director, producer and the actor who plays Mark.
Guilty Pleasure
lakenyc4 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I'm glad I watched. The dark haired guy was cute, but the film was just illogically bad at points.
1. Why make a point of twice flipping a switch to activate a FAKE fireplace? We're in the woods. Why isn't it REAL??? 2. If everybody's walking around in AUTUMN jackets and in "a few weeks" the lake will be drained for winter, why would Drew jump in the lake to go swimming??? 3. Drew's brother goes to the lake and finds Drew sitting in it. It's nighttime, fall and the brother has a winter coat on. Yet Drew is sitting in water! Laughably bad is the 5 beer bottles that are floating around him. So did he walk in carrying 6 beers and sit alone in the dark drinking one by one? And the tide kept all of the empties right around him? It was just ludicrous.
4. The doctor says it's not her area (the amnesia). Because it's a psychological amnesia, he would need a psychiatrist. Again, the doctor said it's not her area. And, yet, no explanation is ever given why the guy keeps going to see her.
5. Blurring the license plates? Why? Is the director in the Federal Witness Protection Program? It's a feel good movie I guess. But it tries too hard to throw in "drama."
1. Why make a point of twice flipping a switch to activate a FAKE fireplace? We're in the woods. Why isn't it REAL??? 2. If everybody's walking around in AUTUMN jackets and in "a few weeks" the lake will be drained for winter, why would Drew jump in the lake to go swimming??? 3. Drew's brother goes to the lake and finds Drew sitting in it. It's nighttime, fall and the brother has a winter coat on. Yet Drew is sitting in water! Laughably bad is the 5 beer bottles that are floating around him. So did he walk in carrying 6 beers and sit alone in the dark drinking one by one? And the tide kept all of the empties right around him? It was just ludicrous.
4. The doctor says it's not her area (the amnesia). Because it's a psychological amnesia, he would need a psychiatrist. Again, the doctor said it's not her area. And, yet, no explanation is ever given why the guy keeps going to see her.
5. Blurring the license plates? Why? Is the director in the Federal Witness Protection Program? It's a feel good movie I guess. But it tries too hard to throw in "drama."
Lesson number 1: How NOT to make a movie, gay or straight themed.
machogazpacho4 September 2005
In the brilliant 1995 documentary "The Celluloid Closet" we end on a positive note: There are more and more gay themed movies being made. Talking with a friend about this and reflecting on some of the movies we'd seen the last ten years at gay film festivals and at the movies we talked a lot about difference in quality. A tight budget might force the filmmaker to cut down on location, use a video camera, have friends play the parts and not afford the music he might have wanted. But basically: if he had a strong script it would turn out to be a movie worth seeing.
Now: this movie doesn't even have that going for it. With dialog you would find embarrassing in a porno and actors who put as much into the acting as a porno actor would do, you can't help but think that the director at least have some really good friends who would bother to help him out with his "child". It all seems so "unplanned". If somebody in a movie is supposed to be a great cook you could at least have him practice on the dicing of vegetables before the camera start rolling! Every scene you just pray for it to at least not be an embarrassment but it just goes on and on...
There are movies being made for the gay audience that are nothing else than feel good movies in a gay setting. Having grown up with gays invisible or portrayed as something to laugh at it makes me feel like the teenager I never was: Carefree and with role models on how life could be. But when the only agenda you have is to make a "gay movie" you should spend your money and the goodwill of friends on something else.
Now: this movie doesn't even have that going for it. With dialog you would find embarrassing in a porno and actors who put as much into the acting as a porno actor would do, you can't help but think that the director at least have some really good friends who would bother to help him out with his "child". It all seems so "unplanned". If somebody in a movie is supposed to be a great cook you could at least have him practice on the dicing of vegetables before the camera start rolling! Every scene you just pray for it to at least not be an embarrassment but it just goes on and on...
There are movies being made for the gay audience that are nothing else than feel good movies in a gay setting. Having grown up with gays invisible or portrayed as something to laugh at it makes me feel like the teenager I never was: Carefree and with role models on how life could be. But when the only agenda you have is to make a "gay movie" you should spend your money and the goodwill of friends on something else.
A Fun And Endearing Trek
NYCNetguy29 February 2004
It's great to see such an endearing movie that doesn't rely on the usual gay storylines of AIDS, coming out, or campy drag queens. Wearing it's heart on its sleave, `Gone, But Not Forgotten' is a charming, adult, romantic love story with a touch of mystery from writer, director, producer, and editor Michael D. Akers. This guy does it all and on a shoestring budget! But with an intriguing story and a fine cast it's first class all the way! Shot on digital video, which does give it a home video feel to it and takes some getting used to, but once you settle in, it's an enjoyable trek.
Shot in and around Yosemite National Park the story revolves around an openly gay forest ranger named Drew (Aaron Orr) who's rescued a young man, Mark (Matthew Montgomery), from an accident that leaves him with amnesia in a smalltown hospital. Drew takes him `under his wing', they develop a friendship, and ultimately a relationship. But as the story unfolds and Mark begins to remember his past, through a series of flashbacks to what led up to his accident, he begins to question who he is and where he is headed. Is he gay or straight? Will he stay with Drew or go back to his previous life, whatever that may be? Mark's not the only one with secrets but Drew holds some of his own as well regarding his past and his relationship with his brother. They're all revealed as the story continues and ultimately come together in a satisfying ending.
Rounding out the film are some supporting roles played by Joel Bryant as Drew's estranged brother Paul, Brenda Lasker as the sister-in-law and Bryna Weiss as Dr. Mary Williams.
There are some moments that seemed a bit over-the-top and somewhat unbelievable, but as a first time effort Michael Akers has done a fine job with his ensemble cast. But it's the male leads that drew me in and found their relationship sweet and charming. The culmination between the two comes in the form of one of the best, most intimate, sex scenes I've seen and is most tastefully done. The questions the story posed were also intriguing with regards to amnesia, sexual orientation and past memories. Intriguing.
It's not without its flaws but overall I really enjoyed this independent film and look forward to Mr. Akers next directorial effort. Grab a big bowl of popcorn, settle back on your couch and enjoy!
Shot in and around Yosemite National Park the story revolves around an openly gay forest ranger named Drew (Aaron Orr) who's rescued a young man, Mark (Matthew Montgomery), from an accident that leaves him with amnesia in a smalltown hospital. Drew takes him `under his wing', they develop a friendship, and ultimately a relationship. But as the story unfolds and Mark begins to remember his past, through a series of flashbacks to what led up to his accident, he begins to question who he is and where he is headed. Is he gay or straight? Will he stay with Drew or go back to his previous life, whatever that may be? Mark's not the only one with secrets but Drew holds some of his own as well regarding his past and his relationship with his brother. They're all revealed as the story continues and ultimately come together in a satisfying ending.
Rounding out the film are some supporting roles played by Joel Bryant as Drew's estranged brother Paul, Brenda Lasker as the sister-in-law and Bryna Weiss as Dr. Mary Williams.
There are some moments that seemed a bit over-the-top and somewhat unbelievable, but as a first time effort Michael Akers has done a fine job with his ensemble cast. But it's the male leads that drew me in and found their relationship sweet and charming. The culmination between the two comes in the form of one of the best, most intimate, sex scenes I've seen and is most tastefully done. The questions the story posed were also intriguing with regards to amnesia, sexual orientation and past memories. Intriguing.
It's not without its flaws but overall I really enjoyed this independent film and look forward to Mr. Akers next directorial effort. Grab a big bowl of popcorn, settle back on your couch and enjoy!
Acting good. Writing week
rjlafont15 April 2006
The idea, premise, twists and turns of this movie are great. The actors are beautiful and I suspect are good. However the best actor born can't shine when given lines that haven't been fleshed out. If this movie had spent a few more dollars on the screen writer it would have been a good one. Others have already commented on how horrible this movie is but I would like to comment otherwise. This is a perfect picture to show at an advanced USC film class, after they have learned what to do and now need to be shown what not to do.
My primary objection is still with the screen writer. It seems as if he/she took the book and cut and pasted it into the script. Almost every scene has no congruity or relevance to the previous one. The actors were given lines that you or I might say in real life, we are not interesting people, we need talented writers to transcribe our thoughts into words for the screen or stage. I feel bad saying that and am sorry for upsetting the screen writer but he/she needs to learn.
Screen writing is a talent more artistic than the actor's craft. If the words don't pull emotion from the viewer the actor can not. I also blame the director and producer of this atrocity for not pulling out, they ought to know better. This story can and should be told again with the realism injected with good writing and production. I have not seen the actors before or since so I assume that they can act and feel most sorry for them.
My primary objection is still with the screen writer. It seems as if he/she took the book and cut and pasted it into the script. Almost every scene has no congruity or relevance to the previous one. The actors were given lines that you or I might say in real life, we are not interesting people, we need talented writers to transcribe our thoughts into words for the screen or stage. I feel bad saying that and am sorry for upsetting the screen writer but he/she needs to learn.
Screen writing is a talent more artistic than the actor's craft. If the words don't pull emotion from the viewer the actor can not. I also blame the director and producer of this atrocity for not pulling out, they ought to know better. This story can and should be told again with the realism injected with good writing and production. I have not seen the actors before or since so I assume that they can act and feel most sorry for them.
Oh the humanity!
dirtychild8 December 2004
Gone, But Not Forgotten is the most gawd-awful gay movie ever made... for all the wrong reasons.
The plot - which revolves around an amnesic man who falls for his gay rescuer Drew - is so paper thin, contrived and uninteresting. It doesn't seem to be grounded in reality - it is set in a red-neck mountain type area but there is such a lack of homophobia... it is sort of scary!
On the back of the DVD box - Drew, one of the main characters is described as "rugged" - yet the two leads are just a couple of old queens. You might find Drew rugged if you find Britney Spears blokey.
The leads don't have any chemistry - they have a lot of awkward dialogue scenes and conversations which lead nowhere. In fact - just about everyone cannot string a decent enough conversation to begin with! The dialogue makes Star Wars look like Shakespeare!
When the two leads finally get their gear off and "do it" - the production values scream bad porn without the penetration. In fact - I think I have watched Eastern European gay porn (with no dialogue) that has deeper plot line and characters than this movie.
Another laugh is the fact that all the number plates on cars in this film are blurred out. Probably because the makers of this film don't want to be tracked down (a la Terminator) because of this ghastly piece of donkey droppings!
This movie would have to be near the top of the all time movie goofs people walk in and out of shots with different haircuts and clothes. When Drew jumps off the boat he appears to land in a different lake!
I'm not into censorship - but this film makes me want to grab all the copies of it and do a public burning! Oh the humanity!
The plot - which revolves around an amnesic man who falls for his gay rescuer Drew - is so paper thin, contrived and uninteresting. It doesn't seem to be grounded in reality - it is set in a red-neck mountain type area but there is such a lack of homophobia... it is sort of scary!
On the back of the DVD box - Drew, one of the main characters is described as "rugged" - yet the two leads are just a couple of old queens. You might find Drew rugged if you find Britney Spears blokey.
The leads don't have any chemistry - they have a lot of awkward dialogue scenes and conversations which lead nowhere. In fact - just about everyone cannot string a decent enough conversation to begin with! The dialogue makes Star Wars look like Shakespeare!
When the two leads finally get their gear off and "do it" - the production values scream bad porn without the penetration. In fact - I think I have watched Eastern European gay porn (with no dialogue) that has deeper plot line and characters than this movie.
Another laugh is the fact that all the number plates on cars in this film are blurred out. Probably because the makers of this film don't want to be tracked down (a la Terminator) because of this ghastly piece of donkey droppings!
This movie would have to be near the top of the all time movie goofs people walk in and out of shots with different haircuts and clothes. When Drew jumps off the boat he appears to land in a different lake!
I'm not into censorship - but this film makes me want to grab all the copies of it and do a public burning! Oh the humanity!
good story, poor execution
TrivWhiz11 October 2011
To keep my review simple, this movie has a good, enjoyable story (although there are a couple of holes in the plot and/or time line), but it was clearly a low budget film, the production values are poor, it was clearly filmed on video, and not celluloid film photography, and most of the actors are mediocre at best. I give this movie a 5 out of 10 rating based on the very good story alone, and if the production and acting were better, I am sure I would have rated this movie higher. It is interesting that the subject matter and theme of the film is still as topical and relevant in 2011 as it was when filmed in 2003, which is not always the case. Some movies are clearly obsolete in subject matter or plot, but this movie is not.
Quite possibly, THE WORST movie...
wolfreak125 May 2005
...EVER!
This horrific production is a terrifying car wreck bound to traumatize even the most even-keeled.
I have nothing more to say... except... must now bathe in a bleach/vinegar mixture to cleanse myself!
I'm thinking...what "could've been", and what resulted were two totally different entities. The one-hour-thirty-four minutes were agonizing, as I was always waiting for something "to happen", and it never did (there was a brief tease of of a very loving relationship, NOT TO HAPPEN, though!
I suggest you turn off this terrifying journey just about half-way through (or even before that, and not rent it at all).
This horrific production is a terrifying car wreck bound to traumatize even the most even-keeled.
I have nothing more to say... except... must now bathe in a bleach/vinegar mixture to cleanse myself!
I'm thinking...what "could've been", and what resulted were two totally different entities. The one-hour-thirty-four minutes were agonizing, as I was always waiting for something "to happen", and it never did (there was a brief tease of of a very loving relationship, NOT TO HAPPEN, though!
I suggest you turn off this terrifying journey just about half-way through (or even before that, and not rent it at all).
A delightful movie - a real gem.
DaveDC4 February 2006
This little movie, made on a shoestring budget with a small cast and crew, cannot fairly be compared with a multi-million dollar Hollywood production. In spite of any production limitations, this is a true gem... A simply delightful little film.
I'm sure that most of us have a short list of movies that are the entertainment equivalent of soul food - movies that we watch over and over again... we may not fully understand why we like the movie, but it gives us a sense of inner peace - for me, "Gone, But Not Forgotten" is such a film. I found the story refreshingly different from the mainstream gay-themed movies and I thought that the two principal actors, Aaron Orr and Matthew Montgomery were excellent, particularly in the very well crafted love scene.
It doesn't take a huge budget and expensive special effects to tell a story well. All it takes is a good storyteller... and Michael D. Akers and Sandon Berg, along with their excellent cast, have managed to tell an interesting and unusual story in an honest and straightforward way.
I'm sure that most of us have a short list of movies that are the entertainment equivalent of soul food - movies that we watch over and over again... we may not fully understand why we like the movie, but it gives us a sense of inner peace - for me, "Gone, But Not Forgotten" is such a film. I found the story refreshingly different from the mainstream gay-themed movies and I thought that the two principal actors, Aaron Orr and Matthew Montgomery were excellent, particularly in the very well crafted love scene.
It doesn't take a huge budget and expensive special effects to tell a story well. All it takes is a good storyteller... and Michael D. Akers and Sandon Berg, along with their excellent cast, have managed to tell an interesting and unusual story in an honest and straightforward way.
It's really not good...but I couldn't stop watching.
aharon-izraeli14 November 2021
This movie is genuinely awful and yet.... It is kinda cute. I watched it when it is already 19 years old and so many bigger and better gay themed movies have been made over that time so this really doesn't stand up. The acting is clunky as hell and everyone is badly dressed, the lighting is awful and a million other things are wrong with it but, as I said earlier, I couldn't not finish it and the end almost evoked a happy tear. If you like gay themed cinema and cinema and you're in the mood for something oh-so-light and don't take it too seriously, you'll probably find yourself quite liking this too. How to rate it? I think I'll give it a 7.
embarrassingly bad
Joeda20 March 2006
this movie is uncomfortably bad. unfortunately, even after i had realized this, i continued watching; i put my hope in this film that it would redeem itself in the end, that it would contain a moment of beauty or evoke and ounce of emotion. i watched until the very end and consequently endured the worst acting i have ever seen. the cover of this movie is nice--irrelevant and misleading, but, ah-hem, nice. i don't remember the story line; perhaps there was nothing wrong with the story; perhaps it was beautiful. i am, however, embarrassed for those involved with this movie. does the director think his actors are doing a wonderful job? is the writer happy with how his creation is being played out?
An entertaining and believable quest for gay happiness
geoff-34530 November 2006
I wasn't looking for or expecting a low budget soft porn movie (in spite of the poster) so wasn't disappointed by the movie. The movie successfully explored the search for a gay soul mate, not just quickie sex that sadly seems to characterize so many lonely gay relationships. It also displayed the latent intolerance to homosexuality that is still rife even in enlightened societies and the tragedy of being a closet gay trapped in a straight marriage. It was nice to see two gay men portrayed as "normal" human beings without having their gayness stigmatized or emphasized as their only character trait. It is an enjoyable film - not too deep but entertaining and believable.
Gay, but not for watching.
paulcreeden11 December 2005
Someday, hopefully not too very far off, this movie will be shown on Friday afternoons at public high school assembly periods. It will take its rightful place with movies about psoriasis and bad driving habits. But, for the present, it must be recognized as an admirable GLBT independent effort with a heartwarming story of two young narcissists who find each other in the back woods and fall in lust. It's "one of ours", so I cannot really say here what I would like to about bad music, poor cinematography, bad writing, worse acting and cutesy corn. The male leads are attractive and light up the screen for a few minutes without most of their clothing if you hit the mute button.
Not Easily Forgotten
ryantbo288 April 2004
This is a small budget indi film that will settle into your heart. The idea of repressed desire and living as others wish you would live was the same theme touched on in films such as Big Eden. Director Michael Akers gives a warm and touching story of a man looking for love and another who doesn't even know who he is or what his life was like before the accident. These 2 are truly likable characters. Rounding out the cast is the brother who doesn't know how to express his love or frustrations, his Christian wife, the town doctor who's devotion to Drew transcends his sexuality and a shrewish wife who makes you understand why Mark would want to forget his past. Fine acting and storyline that keeps you hoping that love wins out. There is no preaching, no fear of AIDS, just a single gay man looking for his soulmate. What could possibly be wrong with a movie like that?
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
