 | |
List Price: $19.99 | | Label: Tla
Salesrank: 80730
Released: September 5, 2006 |
| Our Price: $7.16 |
| Used Price: $1.48 |
|
MPAA Rating: R (Restricted)
Media: DVD |
|
Editorial Review:
A young artist (Peter Paige) desperate to replace the relationship he had with his recently relocated godson is targeted by a neighborhood mom (Kathy Najimy) as a potential threat to the community.DVD Features:Available Subtitles: EnglishAvailable Audio Tracks: English (Dolby Digital 2.0 Stereo)Director commentaryBehind-the-scenes featuretteStoryboardsTrailerSystem Requirements:Run Time: 91 minutesFormat: DVD MOVIE Genre: DRAMA Rating: R UPC: 807839002683 Manufacturer No: TLAD168
Say Uncle Reviews:
Just Plain Creepy on So Many Levels 
2009-01-12 - The film deals with a community's misunderstanding over the exact role single gay men play in society and how gay men relate to children within the framework of our society. The film doesn't believably deal with that dilemma.
1. Not all gay men are pedophiles. In fact, quite the opposite is true: most child molesters are heterosexual. 2. Many gay men feel a need to nurture children, but society is not willing to allow for those feelings.
The main character, Paul (played beguilingly by Peter Paige) loves children and soon misses a young godson who has moved away with his parents. To make up for the loss, Paul haunts playgrounds to play with children, and tries to establish careers in toy stores, as a baby sitter, as a "manny" (a male nanny) to maintain close contact with kids who can help him nurture his love for children. He even attempts to adopt a child while having no financial means to take on such a responsibility.
And there lies the problem with this film: in any neighborhood on any planet, Paul's behavior would be justifiably suspicious; and any parent would be diligent in protecting his/her child from predators. As is pointed out ad nauseam in the film, Paul "fits the profile" of a child predator, and a concerned mother (played by Kathy Najimy) goes on a mission to have Paul taken off the streets because of her misguided suspicion that he is a child molester.
While no person should be accused of a crime without fundamental proof, the attempt to have the concerned mother's character portrayed as a homophobic buffoon is an insult to all concerned parents. Adversely, it's time for gay characters to be portrayed in film as responsible adults rather than forlorn, misunderstood victims who can act as they choose and expect society to fawn all over these idiotic misfits.
Even though not a pedophile, Paul's character is clearly unbalanced and should not be presented to us as a victim of society's homophobia. Clearly, this is a character that, if really found in our neighborhood today, would need some sort of counseling.
If the film portrayed a responsible, working gay man facing obstruction at every turn in his attempt to adopt or to work in a field that could bring him the fulfilment he needs, then this film would have worked in so many different ways. Instead, we are expected to feel sorry for an unstable character who probably shouldn't be allowed to adopt because he clearly does not have the means to establish a safe, stable life or a stable relationship, which is offered to him (and refused) by his best friend (Anthony Clark, who is quite excellent in the part). And there we have it again...another film with a self-loathing gay character who can't find a meaningful relationship but instead indulges in selfish and misguided fantasies about the sort of life he believes society denies him.
Perhaps it's time for gay filmmakers to stop with the "woe is me, I'm a poor misunderstood victim" style of filmmaking and present believable characters who strive to achieve what they want while meeting the responsibilities required by a civil society.
On the other hand, straight society needs to get over the moral high-handed belief that only heterosexuals are fit for parenting or that gay men cannot possibly be able to love children without criminal intent.
It could have been better
2008-11-24 - I'm a fan of Peter Paige and I really don't want to write a negative review but seriously I just didn't get it. Maybe I don't understand black comedy or whatever this might be called.
I can suspend disbelief up to a point. I mean, in what place can a woman claim a man is a pedophile and not be sued for defamation of character. Certainly, mob mentality exists but really, all these women (no men, just women until later in the movie) easily believe such an allegation?
While the intent was good, showing how gay does not equal pedophile, I don't think the illustration of it was very good. It frustrated me and made me mad. I didn't laugh. Nor felt happy at the end. If that was Peter Paige's intent then job well done.
I think the performances were decent. I just didn't dig the story and how it unfolded.
Not What I Expected 
2008-03-07 - Was not happy with this selection. Was hoping for humer. WOuld have liked to have seen a preview of this film b4 i purchased it. This was wasted money.
Disappointing..... 
2007-11-17 - I had high expectations, perhaps too high, for this film. I loved Peter Paige in Queer as Folk, and I thought incorrectly that this movie would mirror his performance in his earlier work. Also, how could a movie starring Lisa Edelstein and Kathy Najimy go astray? There are several things I did not like about this film.
Let me first say what I did like about Say Uncle. I thought the overarching message of the film was quite noteworthy, that being gay men can actually love children for all the right reasons. The film highlights our societal predisposition that tends to connect a love of children and gay men with pedophilia, and gives the audience an alternate path that reconciles this prejudicial misconception with a much more fair and realistic truth. Hence, three stars.
Now what I didn't like. The acting was not what it should have been. I hate to say it, but it's true. The movie could have used an experienced director, because throughout the film the performances had a forced quality that lacked depth and fluidity. The movie could have benefited from a liberal editor, as well.
There are scenes in this movie that should have been cut, period. Exactly why did Paul Johnson (Paige) want to give his godson Morgan a nude painting of himself encapsulated in the outline of a hand? Extremely strange, regardless of any allegorical significance. On what planet would any parent in this universe appreciate such a gesture? Also, what's with Sarah (Edelstein) giving Paul a nude picture of her son dressed up in a cowboy hat and boots? If these types of parents actually exist, keep them far away from me. And let's not forget Paul's addiction to both donuts and playgrounds. Come on....
It was sad to see Paige squander an opportunity to make a good film, because I think he does have talent. I came away from this experience with a creepy/sad/bored frame of mind, ultimately disappointed with this movie. I think highly of the cast, but this film simply lacks wind....
Great 
2007-07-14 - Great Movie Funny and Dramatic.
May drag a little but it is def. worth the wait.
