Reviews

Normally I don't comment on a movie unless I feel the other comments don't do it justice, and this is no exception. I'm absolutely stunned that this movie received even remotely favorable comments from other viewers. I can't think of anything about this film that was to its credit, and after just 5 minutes in I was sure this was either a joke or a high school film student's class project.

To begin with the script is just atrocious. The characters are very two- dimensional, the coincidences are ridiculous (such as the main character's son skinny dipping when the main character comes home, wrapping a towel around himself, then sitting on his dad's lap right after the child abuse accusation and right before the arrest), and above all there is absolutely no motivation for the boy, Tommy, to accuse the doctor of molestation in the first place. In fact, there is every reason that he WOULDN'T do this. It just makes no sense.

The lines themselves are contrived and make sure that even the most inept of viewers understands every single detail of what is going on, including what everyone is thinking. It is also unbelievable dialog at many points, such as the emotional outburst of the accused doctor as he is surprised by the questions he's being asked during deposition. The doctor even makes the comment that he's testified at many child abuse/molestation cases before, so he in no way should be surprised by the questions.

The acting, without exception, is pitiful. It doesn't help that both of the main characters, the accused and the accuser, are the worst actors of the lot. The main doctor character reminds me of John Walsh, the host of the old show America's Most Wanted. He reminded me of John so much that I had to look up his IMDb profile to confirm that it wasn't him (I thought perhaps John had gotten fat and aged poorly then began staring in film student level movies).

The directing and editing are on par with the other criticisms. Pointless shots that lasted too long and that often included characters that were superfluous to the plot.

I just have nothing good to say about this waste of time.

Having seen the 1981 mini-series of the same name I have to admit that I am spoiled on what the way this movie SHOULD have turned out. The 1981 mini-series captured everything from the book, including the true purpose of the movie - as a glimpse into the complicated lives of a group of English high society citizens, their Catholic religion, and the very subtle way they communicate strong points to each other. This last point, the subtlety, is of highest importance because the character development that comes along with it makes the original mini-series. The movie version has none of this. The characters are just crude summations and dim reflections of the complex beings presented in the mini-series. The entire point of the book is completely lost by this rushed compilation of scenes. None of the characters are developed thoroughly, even the main ones. The audience never connects with the lives of these people and certainly isn't enveloped in their world. I don't really have one good thing to say about this movie... it is an insult to the book and mini-series. I highly recommend that you see the mini-series, despite it being 11+ hours long, because only with that investment of time do you really see the original intention of this story.

I feel so betrayed by IMDb! I only gave this movie a chance because so many reviewers claimed this it was a brilliant classic that stands the test of time. Instead I found it to be a trite, poorly executed film that took important topics and packaged them into one of the most drawn out movies ever made.

The acting was the worst I've seen in a long time (and keep in mind this is after I saw Justin Timberlake in another film, so that's a real insult for Silent Running). Despite me agreeing with the points of the lead character he still came off as a complete nutjob in the delivery. While the director attempted to make him sympathetic I found the opposite to be true; I grew to dislike him more and more as the movie went on.

I know this might be a trivial observation but Bruce Dern's hair was so frizzy and poorly cut that it drove me to distraction (all the human characters were like this but the lead was the worst). I know this was the early 70's but come on. I hope the stylist was laughed out of LA when this hit the box office. Even though I don't require that a lead character be overly attractive, I do ask that he at least be tolerable to look at, especially if he's the only human left after 20 minutes of the film's beginning. I think I winced for a solid hour having to look at Bruce Dern's frumpy features and undefined… everything. Could anyone relate to this guy even back then? Everything else about this movie was probably as bad as the choice of lead character. The special effects were really under funded (every spaceship shot was glaringly a cardboard/foam model, the point of embarrassment). The robot characters were supposed to come off as either cute or at least multi-dimensional; I found them to be neither (maybe this was back when giving robots a personality in movies was the cool thing to do and thus the audience ate it up). Finally, the music score is gut-wrenching.

I honestly cannot think of one thing I liked about this movie.

Marc Hall is an openly gay teenager in a private Cathloic high school. His conservative school requires students register beforehand any date they plan to bring to the prom. Because he wants to bring another male his request is denied. Prom Queen: The Marc Hall Story portrays his struggle to take his boyfriend to the senior prom and the legal, emotional, ethical, and personal issues this journey entails.

With that plot summary out of the way, this movie really typifies the poor standards for film in the gay genre. It was made for TV release so I'm trying to take that into consideration, but with every turn there is another cinematic pothole to fall into. Like too many other gay themed movies, Prom Queen has all the hallmarks of bad storytelling. If this were made back in the 80's then perhaps it would have been more acceptable as in those days anything that touched on homosexual topics, especially in a positive light, was treasured by the gay community because there was so little out there on the subject. But now the bar has been considerably raised and movies such as Prom Queen only drag the gay genre down and further the idea that because a movie is on a gay subject it shouldn't be held to the same light as a mainstream film that we'd expect more from.

The most glaringly obvious mistake of this film was that it largely trivialized the subject matter. While they could have gone the very dignified and professional route of analyzing issues of religion (since Marc Hall attended a Catholic school), teenage homophobia, educational homophobia, general intolerance of gays by society, and various other issues, they instead opted to make this a light-hearted inspirational movie apparently aimed at gay teenagers (the American Pie type subplots, like the three straight boys trying to book a hotel room for prom night, gave a clear indication of the audience they hoped to appeal to). Some of the aforementioned topics were touched on, but only in a very superficial manner and with 2-dimensional characters that formed very dichotomous themes, such as the Catholics being the bad guys and the pro-gay individuals being the good guys. I'm not Catholic but I'm open-minded enough to know that a good movie on what should be a serious topic should portray the struggles of both sides of an argument and not dehumanize/marginalize either party.

The irony of this movie is that it's based on a true story and yet is completely unrealistic. In real life there was little support from any of the straight students, no inspiring rally by the student body around Marc Hall, no students running through the school with rainbow flags, and no heartfelt limousine scene to carriage the boyfriends away. This story was dowsed in fairy dust and veers far away from what really happened in all but the most basic details.

Additionally, the acting was mediocre (at best), though as previously mentioned this was a made for TV movie so you can't really expect Oscar winning performances. One element of Prom Queen that no one else has commented on is the CGI added eye twinkle that the characters get when they have overcome a milestone or come to some important realization (and the accompanying tinkerbelle chime). Why was this included? It's at best unneeded and amateurish and at worst insulting to the viewer as it attempts to spell out the fact that a character has had a revelation or turning point.

The user 'directsci' on here commented that, "The gay boyfriends did not look gay in any way. They were both heterosexual actors playing gay roles." Aside from this comment being insulting (most gay people do not "look gay"), it's also inaccurate. The actor that plays Marc Hall is Aaron Ashmore, who is gay in real life (he is an out actor and I've also seen him at various Los Angeles gay establishments). His twin brother, Shawn Ashmore, is straight in real life and plays Iceman in the popular X-Men movie trilogy.

I also have to comment on something else that same user said: "They were masculine and extremely good-looking. Most people in general are average looking. I know that it's wrong to stereotype, but most gay males have feminine qualities." Yes, Directsci, it is wrong to stereotype when you have no idea what you're talking about. First, I didn't find any of the actors that played gay characters in this movie to be extremely good-looking… perhaps average to moderately attractive at best (but to each his own on taste). Second, I don't know what your background is but it seems fairly obvious that you've had very limited contact with gay males. Most gay males are not effeminate, and you probably unwittingly know many gay people that are masculine (thus you do not know to identify them as gay). Not only are all of my gay friends masculine (enough to be completely indistinguishable from straight males in casual conversation), but at the many gay establishments in my city I've found effeminate males to be the minority of the crowd. So please don't assert points that you have no backing for.

If you really want to see some great gay cinema that focuses on gay teenage/high school/college issues then I highly suggest Edge of Seventeen, Get Real (1998), Sommersturm, Denied (2004), and to a lesser extent The History Boys. I also recommend Torch Song Trilogy (1988) and Longtime Companion simply because they're good gay themed movies (though not teen related) and The Celluloid Closet as a wonderful documentary on the history of homosexuals in cinema.