Own the rights?
21 out of 23 people found the following review useful: Earnest drama of the search for an absent father, 11 November 2008 Author: bbmtwist from United States
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This is a well-meaning, earnest, low-budget film about a man and a boy, both fatherless, both seeking the love from and approval of a father/older brother image. One is straight, one is gay. They are thrown together, share stories, dreams, and influence each others' lives.It's not really a gay romance, so let's get that out of the way first. There is only one scene between the two men in bed and it is so laden with flashbacks of a former love, that it is unclear whether the two share just a kiss and a hug - or more. The director keeps the physical intimacy of the relationship a puzzle for the audience.Nate (Paul Preiss) is a fatherless young man, living with his mother and girlfriend in an impoverished rural area. He is about to enlist in the marines to find some purpose in his life. On a visit back from boot camp he encounters Andy (Bart Fletcher), a young man who wears eye makeup and seems as aimless as Nate. They both need ready money: Nate to put a down payment on an engagement ring; Andy to finance a trip across country to escape his life. They are hired to do a porn shoot, but once aware of the circumstances, leave. On the road, they bond.Andy suffers from the grief of a dead lover, also a marine. He doesn't tell Nate his sexual orientation, nor does Nate ask. To further complicate things, Andy has fathered a child in a moment of party drunkenness.Andy is the real catalyst in Nate's life, urging him to do what HE wants to do, not what he has been told he should do. He helps him find who he believes is his father, instilling the confidence to do so, and later in an ambiguous shower scene, he encourages Nate to decide if he wants to join him without regard to what he's been taught, but in response to what he really wants.There are three surprises in the last half hour, one after another, but none of them seem forced or out of character with the script and the relationships. The bonding seems very real and appropriate and the script beautifully shows the emptiness in both men's lives because of the loss of a father figure.Preiss and Fletcher are both fine young actors and give exemplary, totally believable performances. Fletcher bears an uncanny resemblance to the young Jared Leto. Candy Clark as Nate's mother does well also.There are a number of inconsistencies. How does Nate think he can go AWOL without being caught? How does he find his "father's" office, through a warren of floors and office and without a name on the door when he finally does find it? What happens to the uniform he ditches - doesn't that belong to the US Marines, not him? But these don't impinge terribly on the script.It's a very low key, intimate drama and quite poignant. I had wished the physical intimacy had been better established and not just hinted at - and I don't mean I wanted or needed to see sex, because neither was seeking that- they were seeking love in physical expression. Had the director given us some BROKEBACK scenes, it would be all we would have needed to have truly understood how both felt about each other.All in all, it's a nice film. I'm glad I saw it. I'm glad they made it. Preiss and Fletcher are both finds. They have the talent and the charisma to go far.
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful: Padded and Confused, 18 December 2009 Author: Franco-LA from United States
This film doesn't require the suspension of disbelief -- it's more like putting your complete trust and faith that some of the meaningless meanderings and pointless plot contrivances will actually solidify into something coherent -- however that trust and faith would be misplaced.Unfortunately, the marketing of this film -- even in film festivals and by the gay press -- prior to it's release as another in a long line of TLA piece of craps -- was as a gay romance or even a bromance between a gay man and a straight man on a mission of self-discovery. That may have been a good story -- but instead we get all these side tracks, the bad tropes of someone who directed and wrote a piece of crap like BEVERLY KILLS and still hasn't learn anything better -- such as the fiancé who wants to get pregnant to get ahead in life AND wants to send her fiancé to the marines (where if he died in war, she'd get squat) and so she still jumps on anything and everything -- and pointless and annoying conversations with the mothers of both characters -- or a long segue-way at a 'exclusive' gay party of the proper kind of 'rich' 'sophisticated' gay men every gay boy should dream of being -- which of course means a lot of martini's and not wearing underwear and having sex with the two guys willing to do gratuitous full frontal nudity (aka the porn models brought on set). As others have pointed out in their reviews, there are two many elements that make no sense or worse, add nothing to the movie -- other than to contradict what the director may have wanted to do with the characters -- such as having Andy lock his son in his car, not feed him, want to abandon him with either his mother or whomever took him while he was at said exclusive party. The scene having the Nate character walk all that long way to and from his supposed Dad's office was also unexplained -- and worse -- pointless. How did he know where the bathroom was without asking, much less the father's office, how did he know how to get around? And worse, as others pointed out, was the obvious use of a stand in portions of the so-called intimate scenes with Nate and Andy. In any event, there is no sense in how Nate goes from a fiancé who he is willing to impregnate to even simply kissing and showering -- and even more importantly -- trusting and just befriending a guy who is essentially a total stranger who was merely a transport from point A to point B. These plot holes are either pointless or plot contrivances (having Nate be walking in the middle of the desert just to be found by the local porn producer) and make what little there may have been to point this movie down a successful path and just shove it down a fruitless one.
1 out of 2 people found the following review useful: Too Many Problems, 21 November 2009 Author: ray lopez from Los Angeles
This films has some very good and very competent actors. Unfortunately, the script, directing and editing don't match the caliber of acting. There was never any connection between the main characters and those around them. They just popped in and out of the story. Sure, we know how they're related to each character. But we are never shown any reason for them being in the script. Some expositional dialog only makes it worse.The story moves way too slowly. Too many moments are built up, only to be let down by an unfulfilled scene climax. For instance (being very general so as not to give anything away) a soldier comes back from boot camp to discover something that should send him way over the top. Instead, the script has him easily dismissing this situation with nothing more than a sigh. What????? There are too many cross shots that really don't do anything to impact the story. Such as a shot of an abandoned drive-in screen to a shot of a garage door. There's no significance to it. This is just one example. The cross shots seem to be nothing than an exercise you'd do in college while trying to discover your vision and voice as a director.And lastly, if you're going to have a stand-in for the intimate man-on-man sex scene, at least find somebody who actually looks like your star! That guy had longer hair, long sideburns, a different profile and different body shape! It was glaringly visible that he was a mis-matched stand-in.I would have rated this film a "1" except that the acting kept me from doing so. The actors were the only reason I watched the entire film ... over 3 nights. There's no way I could have done it at just one sitting. There are some real stand outs in this film.
2 out of 5 people found the following review useful: Baby Toe-Tags, 29 April 2009 Author: thesar-2 from United States
First off, I loved the music. Wouldn't mind buying the soundtrack, if there is one. Secondly, for a low budget, indie, gay-themed movie, the production values and style were well intact and well done. Unfortunately, the actors and acting sucked. Also, I was sorely deceived (major spoiler alert ahead) by the premise of two males, one straight military dude and one gay guy on a road trip to discovery. Not exactly. And before I'm accused of giving anything away, the main menu (shame on you, production team, or TLA) shows clips of the movie, including the two stars having sexual intercourse. (Thankfully, I didn't pay too close attention to the main menu before watching the film, so it was still a question of whether or not the marine would bed the gay male.) I was (unsuccessfully) hoping for an original story of someone that's not only straight, but stays that way, and a gay man we can definitely root for. Not only is the gay character not worth rooting for, he's easily despicable. Sure he puts on makeup to show his rebel side, (oooh, character depth) but he takes on a baby who he does mind starving, smoking pot around, has plans of ditching and even locking him in a car in the desert. What? Are you serious? Previously, I hated 'Big Daddy' because I sincerely thought Adam Sandler's character would make a terrible father. Well, he's Father of the Year compared to this low-life. It's cringing to think this number-one CPS target could handle a child. Okay, yeah, I'm taking this fictional story too seriously, but nothing really offends me as child abuse and bad parenting. I accept very little excuses when it comes to handling children, especially babies. Did the writers think a baby's safety was a joke?
4 out of 9 people found the following review useful: "Did the Director ever find out what.............., 26 November 2008 Author: arizona-philm-phan from Arizona
............his true sexuality is?"When buying this film, I had hoped for something perhaps as well done and along the lines of the recently released "Shelter," a film highly received by many of we everyday, nonprofessional reviewers. However, that hope was quickly turned topsy-turvy (learn the primary reason for this by continuing on to both the last paragraph and the Postscript, below).To this viewer, this is NOT a "Gay Romance" and certainly not a "Gay Drama." (Oh, I know, I know, those of you who've seen the film will say: "what about the bed and shower scenes?" Then I'd come back with: "maybe he was just getting to that 'you-show-me-yours-I'll-show-you-mine' life phase a little later than most"). But to continue on, what this film is, is a story in drama form of two young men trying to find themselves and their roles in life. One is heterosexual (Nate), one is gay (Andy); one is more a goalless, live-day-to-day type looking for a way to change all that; one is, simply, a free spirit......with a haunting memory. Our lead character, Nate, is someone at the most vulnerable point in his existence, someone desperately in need of comforting----and it just happens that the person who then comes into his life is gay. And, now that you know bare details for each character, you should also be made aware that, because of strong needs brought about by problems in both men's lives, they do fall into sex.........but they do NOT fall into love. Still, Paul Preiss (Nate) and Bart Fletcher (Andy) are, together, able to achieve quite a high degree of "chemistry" (not of the Trevor Wright / Brad Rowe caliber), which is very important to making their characters believable to us.But, wait, there is yet another character of note making up this interesting little group of ours: Nate's mother, Deb (nicely played by Candy Clark). In this character we have someone who, to avoid a hurtful situation, sets an even more painful event into play. She seemingly loves her son, but whether she's always honest with him, as would be hoped, remains for us to find out.I do have to especially address Paul Preiss's performance because, as a newbie to film, he most definitely gives this viewer a sense of his being "a natural" to acting (similar, I would say, to the case of Wright). Further, unlike Fletcher who is very good in his role, it is Preiss who takes control of / commands our attention.One especially jarring note, for this reviewer, involves the writer / director's apparent need to insert what I consider gratuitous gay sex into the film's first twenty minutes. A heterosexual sex scene, on the other hand, seemed appropriate to developing aspects of Preiss's character. Again, I certainly did not see any real need for the male frontal and anal sex scenes associated with Fletcher's character building (I've already got enough of that type DVD). What was the director trying to do, anyway, shout out: this IS a gay movie?!! Obviously, Dietz chose not to aim this production for the mainstream market---too bad for Preiss's and Fletcher's futures; they deserved more. (Extra Point / Star given for Preiss and Fletcher performances..........none extra given for the director's)PS--Finally, to address this review's subject question (above), we know that character, Nate (representing the Director), at the most emotionally low and vulnerable point in his life, has a "gay event" with likely the most understanding and encouraging person he's ever met. But, from that point on and through film's end, is there anything that tells us, definitively (or even near definitively), what the sexuality future of Nate / Damion is going to be? Please don't give me conjectures in trying to answer this.((NOTE to Director Dietz: Check your Dog Tags, Damion........maybe in addition to Name, SSAN, Blood Type, they'll tell you your sexuality.))****
6 out of 13 people found the following review useful: Where will it lead when these two meet?, 9 February 2009 Author: ksf-2 from southwest US
Written and directed by Damion Dietz, Dog Tags opens with "Nate" (Paul Preiss) getting ready to head off to the army. We see that he is close to his mom, but not really so close to his girlfriend Trish. At the same time, we meet "Andy" (Bart Fletcher), serious and sad, who isn't sure what he wants to do, and doesn't fit in with his peers. Then we go to flashback, and see how Nate and Andy meet up, and THAT is an interesting story. We learn things about BOTH of them that they themselves hadn't known before. They have both come from extremely dysfunctional home-situations, with major gaps in their family histories. We "flash forward" here and there, and sometimes it takes a minute to figure out what's going on, but overall a good script and good story. Some nudity and sexual situations - definitely not for the kiddies. The only drawback I found was that there are no-subtitles for the hearing impaired. I see there is a director's commentary track, so that might be fun to hear. Impressive first starring role acc to IMDb (is that right??) for Paul Preiss. Fun and tastefully done.
0 out of 3 people found the following review useful: Dog Tags. Straight bate. Finding dad, 26 August 2009 Author: Toadinthehole from United Kingdom
If you are prepared to suspend disbelief on this low budget film then you may have enjoyed Dog Tags as I did. While the primary thrust of the film is self awareness, the buddy stuff jogged along nicely in its wake and those makeup disputes, the baby that never cried and unconvincing ending never managed to take a firm hold on me partly because I was so determined not to let them. I think that if you make a conscious effort to just enjoy the ride, you can and seeing this film without knowing anything about it was like that for me. I then found it easy to let Mr Paul Preiss dangle his doggie tags at me without asking too many questions. The Military Chaser may have been getting ready after seeing the film's poster of Nate's pecs and tags, but I wonder if something a little more up front would have been more in order or if another poster entirely would have been more appropriate. The gay audience was obviously targeted, although it was more a film about friendship than anything else. How important is a poster? If Nate had joined those other Marines flashing themselves all over the internet strapped for cash and waving their doggies around, it would have been another film entirely and the film tried to make this point and succeeded to some extent. I suspect if it had gone up that path it would have had more appeal, but instead it chose a more interesting and difficult route, that of moral support between a gay and a straight male, both "Tags" or labels if one thinks about it. I let this buddy film entertain me. It has a good heart even though it lacks real discussion. It is well acted for all the minor weaknesses in the script. Those endless cool one liners and knowing looks also made me laugh. The films main strength was in the camera-work which gave it a sense of real poetry. A surprisingly good and well made low budget film. Keep'em coming!
16 out of 35 people found the following review useful: A very well acted movie!, 6 December 2008 Author: raonull1 from United States
It is hard to find this genre and have it acted well. I found DOG TAGS to be one of the best I have seen in recent years. The story is moving and believable. The characters are well drawn. Brad Fletcher is fantastic as Andy the carefree gay guy. On the surface, he is free-wheeling, but underneath he is vulnerable. Paul Preiss is amazing as Nate the marine recruit who is trying to find himself and his long absent father. He is strong and sensitive. After Nate and Andy meet in a less than ideal setting and a bad experience happens for Nate, the two form a bond. In the end, they are left with hope for better lives. I think it is wonderful that we are getting some better gay genre movies of late. SHELTER, LONG TERM RELATIONSHIP, BACK SOON and OUTING RILEY to name a few. I am glad to add DOG TAGS to my recommendation list. See it, I don't think DOG TAGS will disappoint.
5 out of 19 people found the following review useful: Bad film..equal to Socket, 3 December 2008 Author: namnhan2003 from Canada
A irresponsible, effeminate,Gothic twink who has an adventure with a confused, highly improbable suddenly-turn-gay soldier who has a cheating wife...and a drunk father who suffers post-traumatic war syndrome !!! The parents of both side are either rich, dysfunctional or low-class, defenseless woman. Some cheap shots of nudity, i guess to lure some viewers. The acting of two main actors are badly directed, hard-to-believe, pueril. The gay scene are badly portrayed by promiscuous, short scene of orgy, free sex. What a depressing film and a waste of time, money. After watching the wonderful film called 'Shelter', i naively hope that some amateur film makers would learn from other to perfect their skill but i guess i put my hope too high.My bottom lines, it's good for the dump!!! Rent ''Shelter'' instead!
1 out of 13 people found the following review useful: 6 or 7, 7 or 6, 13 February 2009 Author: Janko007 from Serbia
Maybe acting is good and idea grate (dialogs not so grate), but direction is simply bad. 10 minutes wasted on that gay party, that was just useless. Director tried to make film mysterious, did Nate died or he just do not want to see Andy, did they have sex only once or did they saw each other again. Let me quote someone here - ''At one point, the two end up in a motel room, and a tentative sex scene commences. But wait... throughout the scene, Andy's thick eyeliner comes and goes, and Nate's shaved head grows hair and then loses it. Even his dog tags change, appearing both with and without black edges. What's going on?'' Maybe it's just an error, maybe Paul Preiss (Nate) didn't want to kiss Bart Fletcher so they hire understand or maybe it's directors attempt to be mysterious and intelligent. Either way, it's not working.It's a cheep production and we have to give them a slack. So, not so bad, not so bad, 6 or 7!
Add another review
