[Content Note: Homophobia]
Last night, as I scoured both Netflix And Amazon Instant Video for gay-themed movies to watch, I came across Impossible Choice, an extremely-low budget film that came out in 2012. The brief description on Amazon caught my eye:
For the minister’s son, Brandon, this is a summer of awakening and acceptance of his homosexuality. For his father, this is a challenge to his roots in the bible.
In many ways, that description reminded me of the movie Rock Haven, which I love (and still wish I could find my copy of). I decided to watch it.
After watching it, I skimmed through the customer reviews on Amazon. This is a movie where it seemed like either reviewers loved it or hated it. In many ways, I agree with the negative reviews, as they all brought up great points. This was an extremely low-budget film. The writing was awful. The story — actually at least two different plots that were only related by the fact that they happened at the same time and in the same place — jumped all over the place. And there were several questions the story left unanswered. (Like whatever happened to the criminal charges that were brought against Lance? You get the sense that they were trumped up, but it’s never shown that the police learn this fact.) Or there was the sudden shift of Captain Dan from being totally opposed to the idea of running a gay cruise (in the first scene or two, he throws around the word “fag” quite liberally) to being entirely in favor of it and defending the idea in front of the people of Palmyra. In fact, I had to go back and verify that the virulent homophobe I remembered from the first few scenes really was Captain Dan, because they seemed like completely different characters.
The best part of the movie — as many of the negative critics noted — was the ten minute “play within,” a play created by some of the movie characters for a college drama class. In the “play within,” Matthew Shepard and Tyler Clementi meet up in the afterlife and tell each other about the events leading up their eventual deaths. It was well acted, moving, and possibly the only truly memorable part of the entire movie. It also really didn’t seem to have any bearing on the rest of the movie, which made it odd in context.
I will admit that despite all its technical flaws, I do have some warm feelings toward this movie. This is partly because its setting is local to me, as the gay cruise that serves as subject matter of one of the plotlines and the setting for the climax of the other takes place on the Erie Canal and starts from the nearby town of Palmyra New York. There’s something about seeing shots of local geography — and having it recognized in the film as such — that’s just touching to me.
Also, the themes of the movie, while poorly executed, are near and dear to my heart. Granted, in many ways, that makes the poor execution of the movie all the more sad. In the long run, I think it would have been better if those who made it would have focused either on the work to get the gay cruise approved or on the story about Brandon’s relationships with his father and his love interest, Lance.
Would I recommend watching it? If you have a couple hours to spare and access to Amazon Prime, sure. Especially if you live in or around Monroe County New York. Especially if you’re also gay.
But if you have access to a movie like Latter Days or Rock Haven (and haven’t already watched it to death), you may want to check one of them out instead.
I agree with you on the execution of the script writing and story. By the way, the friend / boyfriend’s name is Logan, not Lance. Everything is there for a great movie, except the randomness of the script and scenes I guess they couldn’t afford to film, or for some other reasons got cut out. There’s so much there that doesn’t have to be, it’s a shame, because this really could have been a great story. I particularly disliked the writing of the Character of the minister/father, and felt a great deal more time should have been devoted to his relationship to God, the Church and community, and to his son – to give the character more context. I would also have written his plotline differently and not turned him into the “physical” monster he became in the film, but an even stronger dark force and concentrated on changing his views to loving and accepting his Son, “the way God made him.”
The music in the film, and the actual filming were done pretty well.
Thanks for catching the misnaming. Regarding your comments on the father, I’m of mixed minds. I certainly can see the appeal of taking the character in the direction you’re suggesting and I think there’s a place for telling that kind of story. But I also feel there’s something to be said about telling the story as it is. Not everyone has a change of heart. Not everyone fixes their relationship with their queer child. Some people really shut that person out and even engage in violence against their child or other people.
Granted, I think they could’ve done a better job of portraying and exploring the impact of the father’s actions then. Because to me, that would be the real value of that story. How those harmed are affected and how they try to put their lives back together.