The Velocity of Gary
|
Our Price: $42.46 Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours Buy Used: from $5.99 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of The Velocity of Gary
Movie Review: you can judge this book by its cover
Summary: 4 Stars
When I first spotted this video on a used VHS sale rack, I had little to go on as there are no liner notes on the box. The cover photo, however, features very sexy Thomas Jane walking shirtless through Times Square -- an image reminiscent of John Rechy's "City of Night". Mainly on the basis of Mr. Jane's perfect body, I decided to give it a try, and the film is as attractive and sexy as its star.
The story opens with Dorothy, a young lip-synching singer in full country drag (as Patsy Cline) arriving at Port Authority Bus Terminal from someplace -- Kansas I suppose -- wide-eyed and innocent. She is promptly beaten up by street toughs. Gary saves her and, still shirtless, carries her off in his strong arms. Dreams are made of such stuff. But, Dorothy's fantasies notwithstanding, New York City not Oz and her dreams are quickly doused with cold water.
In fact, the film continually shifts moods with a fascinating, quirky rhythm. In flashbacks, Gary remembers his own arrival and how he was promptly met, seduced, and carried off by Valentino (D'Onofrio), a porn star. Thomas Jane has a quiet, strong, and sensual presence. He has a remarkable ability to shift between the jaded street hustler he has become, and the young ingenue, with flowing hair haloing his handsome face, he was when he arrived. His seduction by Valentino is another moment for dreams and is, quite simply, on of the sweetest and sexiest on screen. Valentino is also loved by Mary Carmen (Hayek) who hates the competition.
Dorothy is in love with her hero Gary, and it would have been even more interesting to see their relationship developed. But she dies early on, again in Gary's beautiful arms, where she wants to be. Gary and Mary Carmen must deal with the impending death of Valentino, their touchstone, from AIDS. She is obnoxious and loud. He relinquishes words for tears and, in the penultimate scene, the two rush into Valentino's hospital room to find, after a long vigil, that they have missed his death by moments. Gary comments that Valentino looks like Sleeping Beauty, but this time their lover cannot be awakened by a kiss. The adversaries are brought together through Valentino's death, as well as the baby he leaves behind for them in Mary Carmen.
Despite Selma Hayek's relentless loud crudeness nearly sinking the story, this is a surprising and touching little film with many treasures to be found in the story, the cinematography, and the characters.
Movie Review: Movie Art
Summary: 4 Stars
I've waited for some time to see this movie and it was well worth the wait. The movement, the angles, the lighting, the soundtrack, and the performances of D'onofrio, Jane, and Hayek displayed a landscape of surreal imagery that intrigued, delighted, and inspired me. The jagged ebb and flow depicted with smoothe elegance a mastery of film editing and movie sculpting. Just like a shooting star this film comes out of nowhere, catches the eye as it burns bright with immediacy and interest and then, fades into the distance and out of sight leaving behind a satisfying feeling of warmth, like a new birth.Movie Review: i love this movie
Summary: 4 Stars
YOU MUST LOVE VINCENT... TO WATCH THIS MOVIE. IT IS NOT FOR THE HOMOPHOBE.
THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE CHARACTERS IS MOVING AND BELIEVABLE. I WAS ANGRY I LAUGHED I CRIED AND WILL WATCH THIS MOVIE AGAIN AND AGAIN. ITS A RARE FIND TRULY A HIDDEN TREASURE FOR ANY VINCENT FAN.
Movie Review: Why Is It Named After Gary?
Summary: 2 Stars
A good cast wasted. Poorly written, filled with every cliche of "life on the edge", the film never gives depth to the three characters whose lives are so deeply intertwined. Their feelings for each other are never illuminated, so we don't know why they are together. They yell and fight and act outageously, but they give us no reason to care about them. For this I blame not the actors, but the director who seems to have no idea how real life happens or how real people talk to each other.
Salma Hayek comes off the best, though her charcter is unrelentingly irritating. Vincent D'Onofrio is good as always, a very intelligent actor. Thomas Jane is pouty and intense, but has the least well-written character to work with.
And why is the movie named after him, when the center of this drama is not Gary (Thomas Jane) but Valentino (Vincent D'Onofrio)?
Movie Review: Terrible
Summary: 1 Stars
Awful movie. Wishes it was art, but is really just poorly done crap. The characters are a bunch of self centered a*holes who aren't as interesting as they think they are. After finishing a copy of Dracula (that he borrowed from the hospital!) Gary is so deeply moved he pulls a Dominique Francon and throws the book out a window. Hey, someone else might have wanted to read that copy of Dracula, Gary! Did you really need to throw it out the window when you were done with it?
They act bizarrely and randomly spout philosophical dialog like "Things will never be like they used to be!" or "Be dumb enough to fall in love and smart enough to know better."
Vincent D'Onofrio is a characterless shell of a loser with really bad looking braided hair that everyone is inexplicably in love with (D'Onofrio's character. I don't know how they feel about the hair). Thomas Jane camps it up and alternately leaps like a ballerina (check him out after the taxi crash!) or flies into rages. Selma Hayek is a constant irritant that you just wish somebody would punch. Ethan Hawke comes out the best, probably because he has the least amount of screen time. The only one I had any emotion for was the dog.
A complete and total waste of time that is nowhere near as deep as it thinks it is.