HBO's "The Normal Heart": Your Thoughts- Page 4

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 12:18am

Maybe you could ask somebody you know who has HBO to let you have their HBO TO GO pass info?

[Wilmingtom]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 12:28am

I agree with those who say the play works better theatrically than as cinema. The names gradually appearing on the upstage wall is much more compelling than collecting Rolodex cards, to cite but one example. Murphy, for me, tends to be a bit heavy handed, slick and hysteric but he got the job done and told the story. Though many of the performances could have benefited from a stronger director bringing more specificity to bear, I found Ruffalo strong and honest, and Parsons, in a beautifully modulated, insinuating performance, was extraordinary. I admired Roberts gung-ho attack, but again, will lay some of what I feel she lacked at Murphy's feet. But overall, I was extremely moved by this very intelligent telling of this very important story. What a time it was to be living in NYC. Was it last week or a hundred years ago?

[adamgreer]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 12:42am

For those who saw the off-Broadway revival, can you tell us a little bit about Joanna Gleason's performance? I am curious how she played the role. I imagine she was a but more subtle than Barkin or Roberts, but equally as effective.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 1:07am

I have never seen the play, but thought the movie was well done - and devastating in its indictment of the failure of our government, and especially the Reagan administration to respond.

The line of the lost generation of artists, and the art they would have created ... I know many of you have experienced first-hand that lost generation.

Matt Bomer and Parsons were both fantastic - as was the entire cast.

But again, after watching this the two strongest emotions are extreme sadness, and extreme anger.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 1:14am

I think it would make a good double bill with the documentary "How to Survive a Plague."

[quizking101]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 1:42am

*SPOILER ALERT*

One of my biggest regrets is not having the opportunity to see the 2011 revival (as I was 17 at the time and didn't have any income to buy a ticket), so I have no parameter to compare performances, although I had read the play cover to cover many times. As a nursing student in college, as well as an openly gay man, this story has inspired me to pursue a path in LGBTQ* public health and awareness.

I found myself completely consumed with rage and sadness after watching this film, while I do feel some of the scenes were a bit heavy-handed (the bedside wedding), and some of the rage a bit nonchalant (Yes, Emma's final raging monologue), I couldn't find a damn thing wrong with this film. Normally, with plays that have such a high level of emotion, adaptation could result in a histrionic treatment of the dialogue (I'm looking at you, AUGUST: OSAGE COUNTY), the emotion of this film was evocative, and some of the subtlest moments left me a complete mess. There was not one performance out of place, but Jim Parsons fared the best with possibly the greatest mix of humor, pathos, and subtlety I have ever seen in a film performance. This film will become one of the most important films of the gay rights movement in the coming years.

Side Note: My favorite scene of the whole movie involved Estelle coming up to Tommy (Jim Parsons) and just spilling her entire story about her friend Harvey who passed the previous night, slowly breaking down while Tommy comforts her and assures that there is a place for her to help.

When she said "My lesbian friends ask 'What have they ever done for us?' I'm not doing this for me. I'm doing this for Harvey."...I had to pause the movie and cry for a good five minutes.

[quizking101]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 1:42am

Double post

Updated On: 5/27/14 at 01:42 AM

[qafgenius12]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 3:03am

Having seen both the recent broadway Revival and the movie, I have a few thoughts...I feel that it worked better as a stage play, not that I am not grateful that a new audience who would not have been able to see the play can now see it, just that it had more emotional impact in a theatre of 1000 people, vs me alone in my bedroom watching in silence. At the Golden Theatre, reactions were audible, monologues were followed by applause, or silence, but silence that you could feel, or laughter, and yes tears, many many tears, the final moments of the play, this production at least, showed the names of HIV/AIDS deaths plastered all over the wall, fillinf the stage with a stark and scary reality.

I also found some scenes, specifically Emma's okea to the government, and Bruce recounting Arnold's death, they were so visceral on stage, Ellen Barkin spoke to us, the audience nothing to interrupt her, she yelled at us, and Lee Pace who played Bruce told his story, with nothing but his memory, no flashback and I preferred it that way, anything we could imagine would be worse, the unknown, vs seeing it played out rather melodramatically.

Dont get me wrong I enjoyed the film, I even cried, as Felix's eventual demise dawned on me, and I also enjouyed many performances, especially Mark Ruffalo, Matt Bomer, Jim Parsons & Joe Mantello, who is as gifted actor as he is a director. I am glad I will eventually have this to rewatch, vs having to rethink about my experience at the theatre, that much I am happy with, but it just did not live up to my expectations of what itcould be, are the mediums different yes, are some of the words different, yes, but at its heart, should it be different, no.

[binau]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 7:49am

I am really sorry that anyone here had to live through these times .

Updated On: 5/27/14 at 07:49 AM

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 8:38am

I just saw it last night and watching it really shook me to the core. It was a very scary time for me as a 13 year old struggling with his sexuality and the fear that came along with it. The madness and the devastation of this disease scared me because it meant if I slept with another man I would die. So I stayed in the closet for another 8 years because of it.

I thought everyone did a great job...but Joe Mantello completely gutted me.



Updated On: 5/27/14 at 08:38 AM

[LYLS3637]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 10:14am

I was reading an interview in Entertainment Weekly, and I believe it was Julia Roberts or Ryan Murphy talking about one of the upsides to making the film for HBO-- the ability for the audience to experience the material in a more reflective and private environment. I tend to agree with that. One of the reasons I avoided the revival is that I didn't know if I could handle the material in a public setting like that. Being able to watch the film alone, at my own pace, worked well for me.

[SNAFU]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 10:22am

I actually missed the collective cathartic experience of seeing it in the theatre. When you left the theatre it was as if you and the other audience members had bonded on some deep level.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 10:24am

qafgenius12, it's so interesting reading your response. One of my least favorite scenes in the play is the one where Bruce tells the story of the fated flight to bring his lover home to see his mother. Each detail more excruciating and phantasmagorical than the one before, it struck me as Kramer Victim Porn at its most excruciating. I don't doubt that it is based on something that actually did happen, but sometimes recreating an atrocity doesn't make for particularly good art. Because the film by necessity is as much about showing as it is telling, I found the scene more believable and less over-the-top than, as you pointed out, what the imagination is left to create with the play's descriptive scenario.

I honestly think the quieter movie, with a more human Ned Weeks, makes for a better piece. At the same time I do not deny the visceral thrills of seeing it performed live by a good team.

Updated On: 5/27/14 at 10:24 AM

[MartyO49]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 10:51am

I saw all three staged versions of the play in NYC & it never failed to move me. I chatted with Larry Kramer at the Public Theater version and thanked him. However, Matt Bomer and Jim Parsons made this gay man cry, not only for their excellent acting but their lives of thoughtful openness. Bravo to all!

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 11:20am

I think trying to compare the film to the play is a fool's errand. They are entirely different entities with very, very different reasons for being. The play was a primal scream and it works so well as such. Especially in the hands of George C. Wolfe and Joe Mantello. The movie is far more elegiac in tone. It felt much more like it was created to honor the dead and the living who survived than as a call to action. For the most part, the film worked for me like gangbusters. Roberts was quite good, Ruffalo was not ideally cast but still terrific. The softer tone taken with Ned and the expansion of others' roles in the organization felt much like like the personal grandstanding disguised as personal laceration that the play can sometimes feel like. Parsons was heartbreaking, as was Bomer. He did some truly fearless work. That shower scene was almost unbearable in its equal measures of horror and beauty. The 'throwing the milk' scene always felt a little stagey, even when it was on stage. But here it was brutal and violent in a way that was deeply unsettling. I was not much of a fan of Kitsch, but good LORD the woman playing Albert's mother really went for it. Watching her load her son's garbage-bag-wrapped body into her car and letting out these guttural cries was horrifying. And the ending...seeing the gay boys and girls dance at Yale was a wonderfully quiet moment of triumph.

And can we, for one second, have a moment of joy over the fact that Lesbian Estelle was played by none other than the original Little Red, Miss Danielle Ferland. I squealed when she came on the screen!

[nealb1]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 11:33am

TMH was absolutely riveting, powerful, compelling and really stirred up your emotions that asked the question – why wasn’t anything being done about it?

Like the swinging 70’s of Studio 54 and Plato’s Retreat, the early 80’s was BA………Before AIDS. It was a den of debauchery, and a den of iniquity. No one ever thought you would die from having sex from multiple partners.

As far as audience members not relating to Ned because he was too loud, too opinionated, etc…as in the Broadway play, I didn’t find that at all. Back then there was nothing else to do but yell…get noticed……get in everyone’s face because nothing was being done about it. As many of us have discussed here on this board, Larry Kramer always has been, his own worst enemy. It’s a double edged sword as you have to have someone leading the fight, and when you have someone like Ned, he can also piss you off at the same time. His rants and anger is raw and real. He was the voice of the dying.

And, it was that same anger, same attitude that got him kicked out of the organization that he founded.

It probably should have been a 2 part movie, as it did feel a bit rushed at the beginning of the film. Yet, that was the reality of the situation, when people started to get sick, it happened so fast. Nobody knew what was going on.

The play was so staggering – long monologue’s that would literally stop the show with applause, cheers & tears. Those monologues were considerably trimmed for the film.

The entire cast was fantastic – especially Julia Roberts as Emma. She had anger just below the surface throughout the entire film and she was so vulnerable. The scenes of Alfred Molina as Ned’s brother were very powerful. All Ned wanted from his brother was to be treated & thought of as equal. His brother just couldn’t accept it, until it was too late.

I did prefer Joe Montello's anger in the play over Mark's.

Matt Bomer completely transformed himself by losing 40+ pounds for the role and his scenes with Mark Ruffalo, after getting sick, are gut wrenching. Seeing his body covered in lesions, just showed how brutal and uncaring the virus is. And, of course their final scene together as they profess their love for one another and get married, just rips your heart out.

I have to admit, I was quite surprised with the new ending in TNH. In the stage version, after he dies, Ned has a speech about being mad at himself and not trying hard enough - not picketing The White House, even if nobody showed up. Perhaps it was thought to have a more upbeat ending of him going to the college event, rather than just ending with Felix's death, as the play does.

Emmy nominations are announced in July and I’m sure TNH will be showered with many nominations – as it should.

The scenes of Jim Parsons keeping the cards from his address book was very powerful. I started to do musical theatre right out of high school at various theatres - community, regional, summer stock, civic light operas, etc. I still have all my cast lists going back to the early 80's. I keep them in a drawer in my closet. And, it's been decades since I've seen or spoken to many people from that time period. But I've always kept it as a memory of that time.

When I first saw TNH three years ago in New York, after I came home I pulled out all my old cast lists, and started to count the number of young men that I knew, who died from all those shows. 35.

It was such a terrible time of fear, worry, not knowing, and pure fright.





Updated On: 5/27/14 at 11:33 AM

[Brick]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 11:47am

Thank you for sharing.

35. Hard for my brain to grasp.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 12:45pm

I have not seen the play nor did I know a thing about this cast. I had only heard mention of it passingly on the board, so I downloaded it. I am still processing it.

The moment that rocked me to the core was the wailing mother, loading the body of her child into the backseat of her car.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 1:08pm

35. Hard for my brain to grasp.

Still hard for my brain to grasp and I must have lost that many or more. After a while, you just stopped counting. We would see each other at memorial services and think "Oh, is he still around?"

And then we would go to family gatherings or work events and it was as if no one in their world knew what we were going through. That's why there was such anger at the media and politicians like Reagan and Koch. By the time they decided to say anything or do anything, we all had lost so many it was overwhelming.

Catherine Chadwick is the name of the actress who played Albert's mother.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 1:42pm

"And then we would go to family gatherings or work events and it was as if no one in their world knew what we were going through."

Oh. My. God. Yes.

I remember one family reunion specifically. I remember thinking they had no idea what I was carrying around on my metaphorical shoulders and in my overactive brain. No idea. And of course I was too petrified to tell them because I assumed they would never get it.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 1:50pm

Catherine Chadwick is the name of the actress who played Albert's mother.

Thank you. Without words, she conveyed so much.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 3:27pm

Ellen Barkin spoke to us, the audience nothing to interrupt her, she yelled at us

I also wish that they hadn't changed the last line. I think that "Just do something for them" packs a stronger punch than "Just do something with them."

[finebydesign]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 3:41pm

>>And then we would go to family gatherings or work events and it was as if no one in their
>>world knew what we were going through.

PJ it is so true. I was entering my teens when my uncle was diagnosed. He lived far away and only visited on holidays. His sexuality was never discussed but we loved him all the same. The news of it and saying the word AIDS still sends chills down my spine. Our family lived in a very small rural place and maybe we heard about this "cancer" on 20/20 or Donahue. My mother would be hold-up in her room whimpering all night. So much shame and so many questions. She'd drive miles to discretely buy books on the subject or a Time magazine. He visited us a few times after the diagnosis but it was just awkward. My mother was never able to afford a flight to see him before he passed. She wasn't even able to attend the memorial service held by his few remaining friends. My grandmother went to retrieve his remains and what was left of his belongings. One of the saddest things is that the people that knew him are gone now as well.

To this day the thought of him being all alone it the world like that haunts us. At 32 he was just getting started. This movie did a good job in showing the double lives people had to lead as homosexuals. It's so easily dismissed these days.

[MTVMANN]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 3:42pm

Thank you guys for sharing!

I predict Emmy Awards for Mark Ruffalo, Matt Bomer and Julia Roberts on acting.

So...this originally came out when? 1985?!? Can you guys talk about what that meant to see something then? RENT, Angels in America and the slew of films "It's my Party" came out in the 1990's...so what was the significance of the Original Normal Heart in the 1980's?

[Jane2]

Posted: 5/27/14 at 3:54pm

Are you really asking the significance of this story in 1985? I'm sure I'm misunderstanding what your question is.