The Seminarian (2010)

Did you people see the same film I saw?

Boring, over-political, tech fuzed mess

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

One of those movie experiences that is so good it makes you realize you've been grading everything else on a curve.

This film lacks the luster to captivate it's audience right from the start. The story line of a gay closeted seminarian student Ryan (Mark Cirillo), working on a master's thesis based on love, relationships and hypocrisy, in order to get into a post graduate Ivy League school makes very little sense in the evolution of this film. The story makes an attempt at character development, but falls short in its execution. Ryan's character is bland and unexciting with extended close up scenes that's are without dialogue or expression which makes you want to press the "fast forward" button. The cinematography and editing was sloppy and unimaginative, and does nothing to enhance the film's objective which is to allow the audience to identify with Ryan's struggle on theologies and personal experiences. The gratuitously long nude scene with Mark Cirillo and Matthew Hannond seemed awkwardly out of place at the end of the movie and had no purpose other than to sensationalize Cirillo's well endowed member and to provide a hook for potential future audiences. There is nothing in this film with substance or character identification; making this film very difficult to watch in its entirety. This is perhaps due to the shortcomings and lack of vision that Joshua Lim has for movie making.

I found this to be a refreshing film and very satisfying. I watch many gay movies and find many to be mindless. I am forgiving of many flaws, but not poor writing. This film delivers excellent writing. I wondered for a while whether this was originally a play. Material starting life in another medium has usually been well thought out. I read one of the other reviewers who found the action too slow. Perhaps like many people, that reviewer is too impatient. They cannot wait around for character development and their impatience is their loss. I did not find this slow-moving at all.I found the relationship between Ryan and his mother believable. There was one scene where Ryan is ending his visit with his mother that I wished the camera had lingered just a little longer on his mother's face as she watches Ryan leave. We could have read in our own thoughts. No doubt some would have complained, though. Perhaps some were put off by the fact that the majority of characters were Evangelical Christians who were not easy cardboard targets.This film does not pretend to be anything but what it is and I found it to be immensely satisfying. This is one for repeat viewing.

I bought this movie somewhat on a whim after reading reviews on several sites, and I'm glad I did. "The Seminarian" is a thoughtful -- and thought-provoking -- study not only of main character Ryan's quest for love, but of how each person has to find his or her own path to happiness. Some people try to find this through religion, others through friendship, others through romantic relationships, others through purely sexual encounters. Ryan is trying to balance all of these, and sometimes his intense focus on one makes him lose sight of the importance of the others. The other characters represent these different parts of Ryan's existence -- Eugene & Kelli are God's love; Gerald & Anthony are friendship; Bradley is romance; and Kevin is sex. As an allegory, then, these interrelationships worked well for me. Other reviewers have commented on the slow pace, and they're right that this isn't exactly an action flick. But it wasn't meant to be. Some reviews mention the brief nudity in a couple of scenes, and yes, it was probably put there by the director solely to titillate certain audiences. But it was also realistic... No one wears clothes 24/7, so why should the characters in a movie? Bottom line: Take "The Seminarian" for what it is, accept it for what it's not, and I think most people will find it worth their time.

The trailer portrayed the film very promising but as I sat at its premiere I could not wait to get out of the theater. The audience agrees as you can hear and see their reaction to its slow paced development that lead to nothing and/or the awkward script. I am not sure why a lot of people are raving about this film. Perhaps it's production quality is slightly better than other homosexual-base films, or maybe just certain viewers only enjoyed its male frontal scenes? PRODUCTION: Above-average, simple sets. ACTING: Unimpressive and most of the actors did not commit to their characters. Therefore, it's harder for the audience to connectDIRECTING: See all above. Enough said.