Who payed the critics

So much average

Redundant and unnecessary.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

for a long time, I was fascinated by this series. without a clear explanation. sure, great cast, impeccable story, different themes in a splendid combination. and something else. special. unique. impressive at whole. a film about the roots of present. like a family album. like a remind about the forgotten details who, each, defines the present . a kind of poem about the small things and about the purpose of decisions. nothing surprising. only reflection of a state. a film about illness and motherhood and love and abdications and sort of death. a film about the truth and about the levels of the fear. about the need and courage and madness to be yourself. that is all. and, maybe, it is enough.

With 250+ reviews already, I'm probably not adding much to the conversation, yet I need a place to say it, so here it is.I've seen the stage version, and I've seen the film three times. And I really do not see what the fuss is about. I've tried, but I don't see it.It's not a bad film, and earned its 7/10 from me. It has good music, good acting, and acceptable effects.But I have a big problem with the writing. I found it to be overlong, without delivering a clear message, and too much directed like a filmed play, rather than a serious film.The angels in particular were among the most idiotic things I've seen in a long time. In a way, I guess that's appropriate, but just didn't fit with the rest of the film. If you edit all that out, I think you could get a better film. Of course, the title would have to go...I also found that the use of Roy Cohn and Ethel Rosenberg didn't fit. Why put a real man as a lead in a fictional film? It's not responsible. There was no Joe Pitt, and he never worked for a 2nd Circuit justice. It all unravels from there. If you're in fiction, it's best to stay there. If you're in docudrama, try to stick to the truth.Themes in this film are gay men and: AIDS, 1980s USA, Republicans, Mormons, the closet.While I have seen better films on gay men and AIDS (In the Gloaming, And the Band Played On) and closeted gay Republicans (Outrage) I haven't yet seen a film that covers as much ground as this one, or that covers the 80s as well. On the other hand, I know there are many significant ones I haven't seen, and I do expect I'll find one better than this.Anyway, I do admire the attempt, and the result is worth watching, although not great.

Yes, in these days of immature observations, stereotypes, a populace suffering from severe A.D.D., you, too, can write a hit Broadway show and/or TV series! All you need to do is have your own inflated sense of self pompously attack a major religion that had, quite simply, helped create Western Civilization for 2,000 years, lecture while talking down to your audience, and give us pretentiously conceived characters hooting and hollering, spitting and cursing their way through life, and you've done it.And remember, you ain't nothing, if you're not a victim! It's bad enough that the film and it's author exploits and tragic disease to his own, barely discernible end, (propaganda) and that it is done with such unabashed childishness, but must I be insult me as well, with such inane and unrealistic plots and dialogue, most of which would be rejected by a Junior High School theater class?? Stay away from this self-righteous, hypocritical mess, but if you do decide to watch it, ask yourself: why do I care about any of these people?

Its amazing how such a boring, ridiculous and unimaginative story has attracted such a high profile cast. The characters lack depth, the surreal sequence of scenes lacks any discernible storyline to the point were even the sad parts of it turn out unintentionally humorous.Furthermore the movies outlook on future events give away its limited, childish view of the world. The shock and awe of some scenes combined with the immature stereotypes that should have better been spared leaves any viewer scrambling for a message or intelligent spark with nothing to do but shake ones head.Instead of a time period, the movie depicts a small minds view biased by a specific mindset and fails to grasp the spirit of that era by pushing this immature and unobservant point of view on its audience.If you could (insert utterly boring task here) instead, do it. Your time is better spent than watching this movie.