Queereaders discussion

Just saw the film version not too long ago. Has anyone else seen it? If so, what did you think of it? I enjoyed it, but thought it had its flaws.

It opens next week in Baltimore.. I think I may go see it. I adore Colin Firth.

He was definitely the best thing about the film. I just wish he had been given a better script and director to work with.

I loved it.

Kyle, I just saw it tonight... and ... well... I really liked Colin Firth... but the film, not so much. I thought the beginning was really slow and drawn out, and the director wasted too many shots that seemed to scream "LOOK AT ME! SEE HOW ARTISTIC I AM!" and his other favorite seemed to be "LOOK AT MY EYEBALL!" And the story seemed to drag at parts... and I was not thrilled with the resolution... and I LOVE Julianne Moore and her talent was wasted. All in all, I did not really like this one.

I saw it last weekend and was very impressed, although I don't think it was quite complete. Colin Firth was absolutely brilliant - I've always liked him but I think this is the first time he's really taken a leading role and made himself completely unrecognisable.

I think Tom Ford is good as a director, although a couple of sequences tend to stray into a "perfume ad" aesthetic, and the whole film is a bit too pretty.

I think it's a nice version of the book though, not too close to the original but not taking too many liberties either.

I read Christopher Isherwood’s novel A Single Man at least a dozen years ago, and remember thinking it a real downer. So, when I heard that Tom Ford was making a film my reaction was – of all the gay literature, why A Single Man? Well, Tom obviously knows best, for A Single Man is one of the best films of the year – if not the best.

I’ve read a number of derogatory comments about former fashion designer Ford’s artsy-fartsy direction, and its all bullshit. Each of the production elements is top drawer: the music, costumes and cinematography are elegant and sophisticated. The look of the film is fresh and it moves with a sexy, sinewy fluidity. The screenplay by Ford and David Scearce is as faithful an adaptation from a literary source as I have ever seen.

The cast is headed by a brilliant Colin Firth as George, a literature professor who has only recently lost his companion of 16 years (Matthew Goode). Firth has been one of those generic British actors who fill out the casts of costume dramas like Shakespeare in Love and The English Patient, or plays the second lead in comedic films like Bridget Jones’ Diary or Mama Mia! His performance here is simply a revelation, communicating volumes with a simple glance or gesture, his face registering each emotion with a subtlety and surety that warrants idolatrous praise and prizes [he won the British Film Academy Award and is nominated for an Oscar:].

Unlike Firth, Julianne Moore has been delivering great performances for the better part of two decades. As George’s lonely, boozy, British friend Charley, Moore creates an indelible character, perfectly articulated without a trace of overreaching or camp. Goode, from last year’s Brideshead Revisited, plays George’s deceased lover Jim; Jon Kortajarena plays a fetching young hustler; and Nicholas Hoult (from About a Boy) plays Kenny, a student who pursues George, reviving his faith in the possible and the future.

In lesser hands this could have turned into a vapid or maudlin ‘day in the life’ or ‘a grief observed’ movie of the week. However, the opposite is true. A Single Man is a sad, though oddly life-affirming film.

I slightly disagree about Ford's direction. Like you say, for the most part it is elegant and sophisticated. But the opening sequence with the car accident just doesn't feel like it fits with the rest of the movie. The mountain top scene filmed in black and white later in the movie comes across the same way. Why is it filmed in B&W? There are other flashback sequences that are filmed in full color, so there's really no reason for it. Both scenes come off as pretentious from a director's viewpoint. I didn't like the attempted suicide scenes either. It is not even hinted at in the book that George would ever consider suicide. I also don't like that the topic was made light of in such a humorous way. Just my thoughts...

I think it's in black and white because he's having the flashback having looked at that B&W photograph. I do agree however that it doesn't really sit comfortably with the rest of the film.

I like the added depth of the suicide plans, I think that actually adds to the character. George in the book is a little flat. However the 'comic' suicide sequences were very discomfiting. I couldn't decide if they were supposed to be disturbing in their attempts to be comic, or just a bad attempt at levity.

I really disliked the owl at the end, now that's a bit of the director's pretension. I think the book has a more satisfying end than the film, because of what has gone before although I prefer the film's differences leading up to the end.

Forgot this movie was coming out. I find Tom Ford interesting...and I am curious to see the movie. I will have to get on it.

The DVD of this is now available.

I think Colin Firth's performance makes the film worth seeing. I would have picked him rather than Jeff Bridges (though I like Bridges) for this year's Oscar.

Julianne Moore is wonderful too in the role of the unrequited friend.

Regardless of what one feels about Ford's filming, his direction of the actors was effective.

Andrew wrote: "However the 'comic' suicide sequences were very discomfiting. I couldn't decide if they were supposed to be disturbing in their attempts to be comic, or just a bad attempt at levity."

I felt the same way. I laughed a bit, but it was more of a horrified/shocked giggle. That whole scene made me really uncomfortable because of the comedic aspect. As an attempt at levity, I think it failed.

I didn't interpret the 'suicide' attempt as comic, but as someone doing what was expected. I told Chris early in the movie that I thought there would be a suicide attempt. I suspect most people losing a long term spouse considers suicide as an option when thinking, "what am I going to do now". It was obviously not a serious attempt. But, he can say, "oh, I tried that, but...".

I saw it and I added the song from Etta James from this movie. I liked the movie but it's not one i would see over and over again

I just finished reading this last night and have to say I was really not impressed. I found it terribly pretentious and not very engaging. It seems like, perhaps, it served as Isherwood's thoughts on aging since most of the dialogue was soliloquies by the main character. (I don't know much about Isherwood's life.) I didn't even get much of a sense of his devastation at being widowed.

Does anyone who's read the book think the movie was better? I've not seen the movie yet and was looking forward to it but really wanted to read it first. Now I'm not so sure I want to bother with the movie. I have a feeling that much of it was changed given that I can tell that the ages and appearances of the 2 main characters (George and Charley) on the movie's ads were much different than in the book. But then I suppose that Tom Ford and Hollywood would be unable to make a movie with old, unattractive people in it!

I can only think of one other time that I thought the movie was an improvement on the book - "The English Patient." If I hadn't seen the movie, I wouldn't have had any idea of what was going on in the book.

I agree with you Tom, that the writings of Michael Ondaatje are often quite difficult to grasp, and especially so in The English Patient where the narrative is non-linear. However where this author really impresses me is in his stunning ability to write such complex characters; in my opinion, the aforementioned book and In the Skin of a Lion which is often regarded as its prequel since it introduces both Hanna and Carravagio to the reader, are extremely well-crafted pieces of literature. I certainly agree with you though that the late Anthony Minghella did a remarkable job of deconstructing his writing into a screenplay in order to present an accessible, engaging and profoundly-beautiful film.

I have neither read or seen 'A Single Man' yet. Like you, I tend to prioritise book over film adaptation; I highly value the opportunity to explore and consider the source material first. I am looking forward to considering your comments whilst I read the novel by Christopher Isherwood and also as I view the film.

Thanks for your comments, and to Ivan for his review also...

Adam wrote: "I loved it."

I've just finished watching it and I have to agree that opinions are like noses, everyone's got one.

I loved it, like Adam. I loved the saturation of colour when Colin's character sees some hope (and a diversion) from his grief.

Plus I wasn't sure (looking at these posts) how anyone thought the 'suicide' attempt was comic. I'm on the same train of thought as Kernos. Never crossed my mind. Just something someone in the 1960s might have considered under those circumstances.

A very moving film.

I didn't think the suicide attempts were comic. Quite the opposite. But I think it was pretty clear from the way they were staged that Ford was trying for a bit of humor with them that failed miserably.

I still think the film was somewhat of a missed opportunity, or at least a very different take on Isherwood's work. Instead of just telling the story Ford frequently insists upon showing off his abilities with grand flourishes that aren't necessary.

And also, by emphasizing the character of George's deceased lover, Kenny's role in the story becomes much reduced and changed quite significantly. He becomes just another pretty face George is attracted to, instead of a real character in his own right. And what was with the addition of the hustler character? Was he absolutely necessary in telling the story? He doesn't appear in the book at all.

The film overall left me rather cold. The book did too, but I felt at least that I had read something worthwhile. The film I could've skipped.

Kyle, the suicide attempts didn't strike me as an attempt at humour. They were just scenes of a man attempting something that he is in two minds about.

I took the sleeping bag scenario as that of a man who didn't want to make a mess.

Thanks for enlightening me on the differences between the book and the movie. Especially the Kenny role. I haven't read the book, so the movie worked for me. Am interested in reading the book now.

But I'm also someone who loves both the book and movie of The Talented Mr Ripley and understands why the film script is different.

I am interested though, Kyle, on some of your favourite gay themed flicks.

I adored the film and found the cinematography enchanting. I felt, while watching it, that I was seeing one of the best realized gay films of all time.

*Spoilers ahead!*

My only issue was the ending, but my husband and I reinterpreted what was shown to create an ending more suited to us. The intent was fairly obvious, but we like the idea that Kenny's spirit came back to give George a jump kick so he could sthe stroke and enjoy his life. Yeah, we're grasping at straws, but I felt the message of dying once you no longer wanted to was like putting a gun to hope's head and pulling the trigger. I'd hate to think of what a person with suicidal tendencies would think after watching it.