Ben & Arthur (2002)

User Rating:

1.5/10   

Director:

Sam Mraovich

Writer:

Sam Mraovich (writer)

Release Date:

2 January 2003 (USA)

Genre:

Drama | Romance

Tagline:

Love calms the soul...and so does revenge.

Plot:

Arthur Sailes must have the courage to marry his beloved Ben Sheets and stand against the obstacles that face him...

Plot Keywords:

Religion | Robbery | Hawaii | Anti Gay Potion | Marriage

Cast

Sam Mraovich	...	Arthur Sailes
Jamie Brett Gabel	...	Ben Sheets
Michael Haboush	...	Victor Sailes
Bill Hindley	...	Father Rabin
Julie Belknap	...	Tammy Sheets
Gina Aguilar	...	Attorney
Arthur Huber	...	Private Investigator, Justin Abraham
Oto Brezina	...	Priest
Richard Hitchcock	...	Stan
Bruce Lurie	...	Agent Moreen
Buck Elkin	...	Bar Owner
Nick Bennet	...	Scott
Loretta Altman	...	Mildread
Holly Mraovich	...	Grocery Lady
Chris Palmer	...	Extra

Runtime:

USA:85 min

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Color:

Color

Sound Mix:

Stereo

Trivia:

The role of Victor (played by Mike Haboush) was originally Victoria. Victoria was supposed to be the mother of Arthur.

Goofs:

Errors made by characters (possibly deliberate errors by the filmmakers): Ben asks that since gay marriage is not legal in California, would they have to challenge the Supreme Court to recognize their union. The lawyer says yes, although the Defense of Marriage Act states that "No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) need treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state."

Quotes:

Priest: May I have the rings?
Ben Sheets: [Both Ben and Arthur feel inside their coat pockets] I don't have the rings. Do you have the rings?
Arthur Sailes: No, no. No, I don't have the rings.
Priest: May I please have the rings?
Arthur Sailes: Ah, geee...
Ben Sheets: I don't have, I don't have a ring. Can we do this without a ring?

Movie Connections:

References Scarface (1983)

Just How Bad Can A Film Be?

...well, pop this into the DVD, waste an hour and a half of your life that you will never get back, and find out.

Acting? What acting?

Production values? ...Production? ...Values?

Story? Don't get me started.

After many years of posting on IMDb, I never thought I would see a film so bad that I truly wished for a lower rating than one. I always have found at least a reason or two to see merit - if only in the intent or the effort of the writer, the director, the cast, or the producer?

In this case, they're all the same guy (!) who really needs to get a handle on the fact, at least as demonstrated by this worthless waste of video tape, that he has no talent. I mean it would be a reasonable excuse if this were some junior high schooler's "production" for his first cinema class, but the referenced "artist" behind this dreck was twenty-six at the time of this miscarriage.

Just how did this ever get made? Who in their right mind ever wrote a check for this? Moreover, don't let the box cover fool you: there's not even anything that remotely resembles a good sex scene or any good "exposure" of the hunk on that cover.

Two final items: there was one second when this "film" had redeeming value: the aforementioned "talent" gets roundly punched out by his lover. I cheered! And, I did learn one thing from this "film.". There are times when something is so very bad that it is, indeed, truly very funny. But not in any comical manner; it's just sadly humorous. Very sadly humorous.