Buddies (1985) -
I'm sure that it was a huge thing to even contemplate making this film back in 1985 and I wonder if it actually made any difference to the AIDS crisis and how it was viewed. It's just a shame that there weren't any braver, stronger actors and directors, Etc that would have been more appealing and that could have leant their names to it, in order to show the world how things were.
So many other productions have confronted the issue since this one, that it didn't feel like it would stand the test of time like 'The Normal Heart' (2014) and 'It's A Sin' (2021) probably will.
I think a lot of the issues with people being homophobic in general is to do with the sex element and if this one was aimed at gaining sympathy then the producers might have wanted to cut back on the bits that were about numerous sexual partners and open relationships, because it showed some of the elements that those in more committed heterosexual marriages wouldn't necessarily understand or consider to be right.
Otherwise it was just a message of condolence to those with the disease at the time and served no real purpose, which wasn't helped by the bad acting.
The lead playing David had the most monotonous voice and the script tried a bit too hard to create balance between the two characters differences, which ultimately showed them both up.
I did like the opening and closing titles, which were a very clever idea.
As a film that was made during the height of the crisis, I would have hoped for more, with the expectation that they were trying to make a statement about the indiscriminate disease that was alleged to be discriminating against homosexual people. It could have been something very important that aided the progression of a a sympathetic solution and the science to ease the pain of so many individuals, but it was cheapened by its delivery and it's content and, to be honest, seemed to make light of things.
253.32/1000.
I'm sure that it was a huge thing to even contemplate making this film back in 1985 and I wonder if it actually made any difference to the AIDS crisis and how it was viewed. It's just a shame that there weren't any braver, stronger actors and directors, Etc that would have been more appealing and that could have leant their names to it, in order to show the world how things were.
So many other productions have confronted the issue since this one, that it didn't feel like it would stand the test of time like 'The Normal Heart' (2014) and 'It's A Sin' (2021) probably will.
I think a lot of the issues with people being homophobic in general is to do with the sex element and if this one was aimed at gaining sympathy then the producers might have wanted to cut back on the bits that were about numerous sexual partners and open relationships, because it showed some of the elements that those in more committed heterosexual marriages wouldn't necessarily understand or consider to be right.
Otherwise it was just a message of condolence to those with the disease at the time and served no real purpose, which wasn't helped by the bad acting.
The lead playing David had the most monotonous voice and the script tried a bit too hard to create balance between the two characters differences, which ultimately showed them both up.
I did like the opening and closing titles, which were a very clever idea.
As a film that was made during the height of the crisis, I would have hoped for more, with the expectation that they were trying to make a statement about the indiscriminate disease that was alleged to be discriminating against homosexual people. It could have been something very important that aided the progression of a a sympathetic solution and the science to ease the pain of so many individuals, but it was cheapened by its delivery and it's content and, to be honest, seemed to make light of things.
253.32/1000.