Waste of time

A Disappointing Continuation

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

The acting in this movie is really good.

This film was amazing. Amazingly bad! Fellow fans of terrible film, I call your attention to the works of the Jorge Ameer. I am convinced he is the reincarnation of Ed Wood. It's been a long time since the world has seen such terrible filmmaking. I "specially" love the comments that overly praise Jorge's entire oeuvre, comments that were more likely than not written by Ameer himself or those close to him. The comments add a veneer of extreme narcissism that vault Ameer from the realm of ordinary bad filmmaking to legendary status. So rejoice! A legend lives among us! I have already "enjoyed" Contadora Is For Lovers, and look forward to watching everything I can get my hands on by this inadvertent master of bad cinema. I was going to give him one star, but he deserves all the stars I am capable of giving him. So ten stars it is!P.S. World War II didn't start until 1939, not 1933. (Keep up the lazy research Jorge!)

Despite all the negative reviews, I rented this title several months ago. I don't agree with most. I thought the premise was, yes controversial, but intriguing. I thought the girlfriend was an imaginary character. Try studying this and you'll notice what I;m saying. Its as if the girlfriend never existed. Both men, when the Destiny is present, conduct their conversations interactions as if they were by themselves. Then toward the end the psychic says that there once was a soul who reunited both men. I thought that was in reference to Destiny. But I'm not sure. Maybe I'm reading a lot more into this... maybe not. I do agree with most. It is very creative and original.

There is deep meaning to this film. I watched it the other day and found it to be thought provoking and very profound. There were some production problems, I guess for its low budget, but all in all, I really liked this movie. I specially loved the music. I can't wait to see what the director comes up with next. You can tell he has a lot of talent and originality. Making reference to the gay holocaust is something that I found to be refreshing and have not seen in any other film since "Bent" which I loved. The moving back and forth within time periods was effective. The actors did a descent job. I'd like to see more work from Craig Pinkston. I read all of the bad reviews on this site. I think most here are too focused on the production values of the film rather than the message.

This film reminds me of the gay porn movies I saw in the early and mid-70s in Manhattan at such places as the Park Miller Theatre. In those pre-video, pre-DVD days--those early days of gay porn films--the films had a narrative line so that the exhibitors, if arrested for showing obscene films, could resist conviction claiming the films had "redeeming social value." Thus, those early gay porn films often focused on problems boys had with prison officials, school principals, other authority figures, etc. Inevitably, there came a moment in the plot when everyone got naked and had hard-core sex."The Singing Forest" has the same plot structure, the same poor production values of these early gay porn films, the same inept acting those porn "stars" provided, the same bad lighting, sets, and sound.The story here focuses on Christopher Hayes, a columnist for a magazine or newspaper, who appears to have a major drinking problem. He hasn't seen his daughter, Destiny, since she graduated from college some years ago.Time out here: Christopher "met" Destiny's mom, Savannah, when he raped her after following her as she walked home from the library! Savannah became pregnant with Destiny because of the rape. But she still married Christopher and, we're supposed to believe, lived happily with him and her daughter until her early death.Now Destiny is about to marry Ben Ross, so Christopher is going to the wedding. He will be staying with the couple at their home before the nuptials.Christopher believes that he is the reincarnation of a former self who was executed in 1933 by the Nazis. Back in that former life, Christopher was a gay man, whose lover, Alexander, was also executed.When Christopher gets to his daughter's place, he immediately thinks that her fiancé, Ben Ross, is his former lover Alexander, reincarnated! The plot is a hoot from beginning to end and makes no sense. Just as in those early gay porn films, if a woman was present, she had to be off the scene most of the time. Here Destiny is always at work, so she is not home when drunken Ben returns from his bachelor party and falls into bed naked with Christopher, who is already in bed and naked. Of course, Christopher turns over and begins to make love to Ben. Now in the gay porn flicks of yesteryear, we would have seen the explicit footage. Here there's a fade out.And the next morning we actually have that old dodge: Ben asking, "How did I get here in this bed? Why am I naked? I was so drunk I can't remember a thing." Ha! Not only does Ben have to be drunk to have homosex, he also has to be reincarnated, as does Christopher.There are other opportunities for Christopher and Ben to be in bed naked while Destiny is at work (is that a pun?). We have unintentionally hilarious lines like Jon Sherrin as Christopher trying his best to be confused and hesitant at the same time as he mutters, "Uh--here I am--I can't believe it--in bed with my soon-to-be son-in-law." That sounds like a line Rock Hudson would have needed 35 takes to get right.And Craig Pinkston as Ben can say, "I'm not some crazy ghost from your past. I'm from Des Moines." And you can imagine the many howlers that arise because of Destiny's name.The director doesn't realize he's making a motion picture since virtually all of the scenes are static, showing the actors speaking dialogue such as no actual people would naturally say. The actors are sitting on the couch in the living room, at the kitchen table, on a bed, on the rocks by the sea--but they are sitting, not moving. The locations appear to be actual bedrooms, kitchens, and living rooms in low-rent apartments.Although the film is listed as having a 93-minute running time, it actually runs just 62 minutes, followed by 7 minutes of slow-crawling credits. It just seems like--well, 93 hours.