Urbania (2000) User Reviews

Urbania is highly recommended.

[isaak-1 · 8/10 · 2 June 2001]

Good films I will see two or three times in the theatre. Really good films, like Urbania, I will watch several more times on video. God bless the advent of video and DVD for cinephiles like myself. This is one work, as someone else noted, that begs for multiple viewings. Not only for it's entertainment value, but because it allows one to see just how cleverly this film keeps its secret until it's the right time to reveal itself. It also gives one the chance to see a beautiful and complex performance by Dan Futterman.

But there is one scene with Futterman and Alan Cummings which shines like a tiny diamond in the center of Urbania. While the scene fits neatly and contributes to the flow of the story, it is so well written and acted that it feels to me almost like a separate entity. Alan Cumming packs so much subtextual information into the turn of a phrase and a facial expression that it's breathtaking.

While it's not an easy film to watch due to the subject matter, it is intriguing. Oh yes, and also remarkable is Lothaire Bluteau's (Bent, I Shot Andy Warhol, Being at home with Claude) moving portrayal of a homeless man.

Urbania is highly recommended.

Dark, deep, full bodied, with a twist of crime....

[wonky6k · 8/10 · 9 January 2006]

I stumbled across this flick on late night TV while it was well into the movie and got intrigued by its tone and flavor. I later had to seek it out so I could see the entire thing. I found it a REALLY good watch. Some people will really hate it though. It isn't a movie for everyone. It is rather dark and brooding, and maybe even a little depressing. The humor is black and it deals with unclear emotions and psychology. Dan Futterman does a great job with his character and it was a pleasant surprise to learn that he had some real acting talent under his boyish looks. His character, Charlie, is suffering a kind of breakdown from grief, guilt and rage. The movie basically deals with how he functions daily and about the strangeness of the others and events of the city around him. Watching his personal journey and his transformation is certainly worth the time and money you will spend on the rental.

"Urbania" is Five Years Old! What's Shear Been Up To?

[cineaste-4 · 8/10 · 4 January 2006]

I've watched this film a number of times over the past 3 or 4 years. Last night, I put it on for my godson (24 yrs.) and his buddy after we watched "Open Your Eyes". Not a bad double bill, by the way. They were appropriately stunned by the filmcraft and, of course, the slow reveal in the third act.

My question this morning, though, is what has Jon Shear done lately? I came to "imdb" to search his more recent work. There's nothing listed! Is it possible that Shear hasn't been able to launch another project? His work on "Urbania" is great and completely promising.

When will we be treated to another film from you, Mr. Shear?

A unique film that demands multiple viewings

[kdufre00 · 25 September 2000]

Finally! A gay-themed movie with some depth! It is REALLY refreshing to see a movie about gay men that goes beyond their sexual orientation. It seems that most gay-themed movies in recent years are just about teenagers coming out to their parents. Although some of these films have been good ("Edge of Seventeen" for example), it is very nice to see a movie where the main character's sexuality is not the focal point of the film. While homosexuality plays a substantial role in what "Urbania" is about, it is not the centerpiece of the story. This film actually has a hauntingly resonant story, well-written and memorable characters, a terrific ensemble cast, and brilliant direction by Jon Shear in a directorial debut.

I really loved how this film was directed in a non-linear fashion. You only gradually learn why the main character, Charlie, (Dan Futterman in a great performance) is so troubled. The climax of the film and the resolution are both heart-stopping and cathartic. And there are many great scenes that lead up to this finale that are alternately hilarious and emotionally moving.

One of the best of the year 2000. I think I will see it again.

"I've got one and this one really happened. I swear."

[TuckMN · 9/10 · 20 September 2000]

A night in the life of obsessed Charlie (Dan Futterman) who, thanks to Daylight Savings Time, has one more hour of the night to fulfill his need – whatever it may be. Like a moth to a flame he is drawn to Dean (Samuel Ball) – but the question is: will the flame consume him?

The story is told in a disjointed series of flashbacks that means you must actually pay attention to the complex story.

This is one film where the term `cinematic style' cannot be under used. It is stylish, dark, atmospheric and intriguing from start to finish. It is also hilariously funny at times.

It was nominated for many awards and won most of them; including Best Actor for Dan Futterman at the Seattle International Film Festival. He is most well-known for his role in `Birdcage' as Calista Flockhart's boyfriend. He plays against type as the obsessed gay man determined to make this one night in his life count for something important.

Every urban legend ever repeated is exhumed; and as Charlie says near the end of the film `We would be the stuff of legend.'

Jordan Beswisck (Casting) and Director Jon Shear did an especially remarkable job with the supporting characters. They slink in and out of Charlie's night like the creatures of the dark they are. Particularly notable are Josh Hamilton as Matt the bartender, Lothaire Bluteau as the street person that has taken up residence on Charlie's door step, William Sage as Charlie's upstairs neighbor Chuck and his girl friend Clara brilliantly played by Barbara Sukowa. What an amazing, yet disjointed, ensemble!

The cinematography by Shane F. Kelly deserves special recognition: it is dark, fast, enigmatic and always brilliant.

The producers Stephanie Golden and J. Todd Harris also need to be acknowledged for their bravery and foresight in bringing such a difficult film to the screen. They have the ability to see beyond the obvious to the golden moment that IS this film.

This is not a film for everyone – but if you possess intelligence, wit and character it is a film you must see.

Something to see indeed

[FeLiPe-7 · 7/10 · 27 May 2006]

I stumbled upon this movie in the wee hours of the morning and couldn't stop watching it. It's not the best movie I've seen, but it's something that any gay/bi-sexual man should check out at least once in their lifetime. Ditto for those curious about what the GLBT life can be like, and anyone else who just happens to be in the mood for a neat, quick, very realistic drama. The main character is enticing and intriguing. He serves as kind of an enigma for most of the movie, until the end, when his full-on grief is laid out for all to see. It is heartbreaking and uplifting at the same time. It did my heart good to see that even though there is violence in the world, that the victims of such violence can learn to forgive and to rebuild. This movie is def a classic.

Excellent

[preppy-3 · 10/10 · 25 September 2000]

Charlie (Dan Futterman) wanders around NYC one night looking for another man who (might) have something he is looking for.

That's all I'm going to say about this--you have to see the film to understand it. The film starts off slow (and surreal) but quickly draws you in with fast, incredible images and a plot that becomes clearer as the movie goes on. Dan Futterman is just superb in his role...this had to have been a difficult part to play but he pulls it off. Actually no one is bad but Matt Keeslar (as his lover Chris) and Samuel Bell (as Dean) deserve special mention.

This film is not for everybody. It challenges you and makes you think (how many films nowadays do that?) and is very dark, disturbing and depressing. It also demands multiple viewings (I had to see it twice to actually understand it). Also there is some violence that is jarring. But, at the end, I was in tears--I've seen this movie at least seven times and I STILL cry at the ending. It's actually a happy ending (sort of) but really hits hard.

Basically this film deals with love, loss and coming to terms with it. Also there are urban legends played out during the film--they DO fit in. It deals with gay relationships primarily and there's plenty of kissing and flashes of nudity. Easily one of the best films of 2000 and it's in my list as one of the ten top films ever made. Just great--I highly recommend this.

Try to see it on DVD--the commentary and extras really explain the story and themes more.

Despite serious flaws, grips the attention and won't let go...

[Doylenf · 6/10 · 11 November 2007]

URBANIA held my interest primarily because of the performance by DAN FUTTERMAN as the troubled gay man experiencing pain and heartbreak over a bad week-end in metropolis. He wanders around, seemingly in a daze most of the time, but eventually we understand that this is going to turn into a revenge story where he seeks out the man who humiliated him and his gay lover.

Unfortunately, Futterman's character remains ambiguous throughout. At one moment, he's sympathetic and helps a beggar on the street--and the next moment he's completely heartless in the way he treats a street pick-up gone wrong or a young couple he attaches himself to for the mere sport of abusing them with the truth about their being his upstairs neighbors who are not discreet in their lovemaking.

He's such a complex person, but the script doesn't explain why he behaves as he does. At least the unpredictablility of the story is not a drawback--in fact, it helps sustain interest since the viewer doesn't have a clue as to what will happen next. It's a nice build-up of suspense that keeps the drama edgy until the final shot.

All the performances are beyond reproach, so it's not the actors who are to blame for whatever shortcomings the story has. But some scenes are awkwardly staged, others deeply impressive--so it's an uneven mix of good and bad moments and sometimes guilty of style over substance.

It won awards from some of the gay film societies but seems to have made not much of an impression at all on mainstream moviegoers with its homoerotic content, despite the fact that one of its characters mouths off some homophobic comments and gets his comeuppance in the end in what is basically a tale of revenge, gay style.

Fascinating character study and so much more.

[ThrownMuse · 9/10 · 9 May 2005]

Urbania starts out with the protagonist asking us: "Heard any good stories lately?" Next, we see a couple well-known urban legends played out, and this sets the tone and theme for the rest of the film, which starts out to be about a man trying to come to terms with recent past events, while pursuing a potential love interest (but you don't really learn much about this man until the plot unravels.) This movie was so fascinating I watched it twice in one weekend. I rarely do that, but this seems to demand multiple viewings. This is easily the best movie I've seen about urban legends. It utilizes a bleak urban setting to weave this popular folklore with the story of one man's night and the difficult time he has struggling to face his past and gain control of his life. Fantasy and reality are appropriately difficult to separate, just as it is with urban legends. The cinematography is excellent and innovative, the script is tight, the acting is perfect (Dan Futterman is outstanding as the lead), the character development is exceptional. This is quite brilliant, really. Like a David Lynch film, every second, every sound, every word, every image tells you something important. Finally, this is a film that (going along splendidly with the urban legend theme) questions assumptions some groups of of people have about "the other" (and vice versa). My Rating: 9/10.

Confusing, but interesting story with outstanding performances.

[JesNollie · 7/10 · 26 August 2001]

While this story is mysterious and secretive on purpose, I found it to be a little too confusing at times. The use of the urban legends was interesting but I can't figure out why they were included, as they seem to have nothing to do with the plot. But the acting makes this film worth seeing. Absolutely wonderful performances, especially by the lead. The underlying story, once you get to it, is heartbreaking and tragic. A little less confusion would have improved this movie, but it was very good.

An utterly dreadful film

[wjfickling · 3/10 · 22 December 2001]

I had the misfortune of watching this dreadfully pretentious piece of drivel on HBO today. After 40 minutes, I realized that this was a perfectly dreadful film, but, since I had the glowing New York Times review online when deciding whether to watch it, I told myself that surely it would get better. No such luck. The adulation heaped on this film by the previous reviews on this website are a mystery to me. It just goes to show that if a work is pretentious, dreary, and boring enough, it will probably be hailed as a work of art. We all know what P.T. Barnum said, that there's one born every minute.

By the way, regarding all the praise heaped on Dan Futterman's performance: in my opinion, he seems to exhibit only two facial expressions, blank impassivity or an irritating smirk. Lack of talent passing as minimalism.

Excellent movie.

[succotash · 10/10 · 11 April 2003]

I got this movie through Netflix. The first time I sat down to watch this movie, it was late at night and I thought it seemed sort of wierd. The first scene made me a bit squeemish, it didn't seem like what I was expecting, and I was being interrupted by phone calls anyway, and couldn't really give it my full attention, etc. so I thought, "well, I'll put that one aside for now and think about whether I really want to watch it." Finally, one evening I was rummaging around for something to watch and I saw this lying there and said, "OK, I'll give it another try." I am so glad that I did. As I let it play on from the beginning I found myself totally engrossed. Turns out it's very fast moving and you have to be on the ball to get everything out of the movie. The ending moved me to tears. This is a thriller with a dark thread of ironic comedy woven into a very serious and moving story. I love the writer's and director's use of urban legends. I think the film clearly illustrates how there really are injustices in this life, (ie: the story of the main characters), but how many horrible injustices in society get overlooked and dismissed as trivial, through the desensitization of being grouped together and schluffed off as 'just another one of those urban legends...it didn't happen in my back yard so it must never really happen...etc.'? But, as Charlie's character points out, "s**t really does happen". The truth is that these types of injustices happen often (whether to straights, gays, lesbians, people of color, homeless, handicapped, etc.) but it's always easy to overlook and dismiss as non-existant injustices that have never happened to you or anyone you know. No amount of denial can negate fact. No amount of mass ignorance can void truth. This film is not a good 1st or 2nd date movie and not a good choice for the person who has no depth of character, intellect or emotion. But if you are someone who has the ability to think deeply and see further than the end of your nose, and enjoy reflecting on a film after you see it, you will not be disappointed.

Gimmick and art make this film

[marchesa · 7/10 · 25 July 2000]

It is unfortunate that a director feels the need to play the audience with gimmickry to make his point. I felt that the cleverness in toying with the "Urban Legends" (hence the nomer) is undermined by the application of device and gimmick to be sure to drive home his point. "Sure to be a hit with the art house/festival audience" must have been in this director's mind: The same effect could have been accomplished without toying with the viewer. It takes 1/3 of the film to discover that you care what is happening to these characters and find out that a finely acted and written film is unfolding before you. Flashbacks and imagination works well in places and a solid performance is turned n by Dan Futterman, although the whole characterization is not quite carried out as far as it could have been if the time were spent on this instead of gimmickry.

Utter Dreck

[sisyphus-12 · 1/10 · 15 March 2001]

This is the worst serious movie I have seen in years. It's non-narrative exists on a continuum between boring and loathesome. Follow lonely Charlie as he goes from practicing the, uh, "solitary sin" while his noisy neighbors have sex, to picking up strange men for anonymous sex, to running into his noisy neighbors at a bar and insulting them, to searching for the homophobe who terrorized him in the past....

If you like homoerotic sex scenes, you MIGHT be able to withstand the long, talky, weepy scenes that separate them, scenes in which men talk sensitively with one another about their feelings, their relationships, their disappointments, about "us, what we had." This movie is Oprah with chest hair. The dialogue is not witty; it is persistently unclever, despite the attempts at spooky subtleties, and the corner-of-the-eye observations of urban legends (the point of which remains obscure).

Here's an example of the shamefully trite dialogue the filmmakers torment us with. Charlie and his anonymous pickup are lying in bed, and Charlie confides, "I'm afraid that if I stay in your space, you'll be in my dreams." Really! BARF! Soap opera pablum.

Charlie finds the "friend" he is looking for, a vicious homophobe who, OF COURSE, is really a gay who hasn't acknowledged this to himself yet...Yes, THAT old cliche. I really can't say more without giving the ending away...let me just say that when you think this movie can't get any more loathesome, it does. And then it goes back to boring.

This movie is a real dog. Do yourself a favor: Spend two hours watching roadkill rot instead.

A refreshing departure from the c**p that is most gay films

[iago-6 · 5 October 2000]

If you're tired of gay-themed movies about groups of catty, superficial gays backstabbing each other over guys and then offering platitudes of eternal friendship, or treacly movies about English schoolboys in love set against the gritty urban backdrop of their working-class neighborhood, or movies about a fabulous woman's best friend who is clean-cut, bitchy, and dresses to the height of fashion but is in no way a gay stereotype AT ALL, then Urbania is for you. It stands apart from every gay-themed movie I've seen in that it's unsentimental, free of the feel-good sentiment almost every other gay movie is terrified to be without, and is a challenging piece of writing and film. It's the first gay movie I've seen that doesn't bend over backwards to excuse the fact that it's gay.

This is a movie that is impossible to synopsize without giving away its biggest plot point, but suffice to say it's refreshing to see a movie that takes the depth and intellect of its gay characters for granted, and also assumes a decent level of intelligence of its audience. The movie contains complex characterizations and a challenging structure, exploring the dark side of human nature, especially the nature of those who have dealt with a number of additional issues revolving around being gay. This film begins a mile and a half past the starting point of other gay movies, who still seem stuck desperately trying to peddle a "Gay is Okay" agenda. The acting in this movie is also good, especially the main character, and the editing and cinematography keep the viewing experience tense and exciting.

I did not enjoy watching this movie, the way one enjoys, say, "Godzilla 2000." It's a harrowing and difficult film. But it's wonderful to see a movie like this coming out; one that is challenging and unsentimental, a real, thought-provoking work of film that happens to take gay men and their issues as its topic. It's a big step forward for gay film, and makes almost all other gay-themed films look as horribly amateurish, or just plain horrible, as they are.

--- Check out website devoted to bad, cheesy and gay movies: www.cinemademerde.com

A true gem.

[veestar614 · 10/10 · 10 July 2002]

I recently saw this movie and let me say this, WOW. I was blown away by the whole thing! I was shocked at the end especially. Director Jon Shear did a terrific job, and i am appauled that he recieved little or no recognition for this movie. It was powerful, totally redeeming the silly and love-stricken gay films of recent memory, (Beautiful Thing, Get Real and the like,). It gave the gay film industry and not to mention society a new face. Dan Futterman, (Bless him,) did an about-face on his career with this movie, as did Samuel Ball, Matt Keeslar, and Alan Cumming. If i could, id award ALL of those in this film. The depth, power and heat of Urbania are its real stunning feats. It plays as a hetero-flick, (at the beginning, i thought Charlie was straight,) and engulfs us in heart-warming and loving flash-backs. But towards the climax, the film reveals its true colors. Gay characters have never been played with such villanous or sinister-esque qualities. It is a slap in the face for those who think the homosexual community is weak and "sissified." Futterman's brilliance for villany upheld the main idea and the motive behind Charlie's actions. I was shaken when the movie was over, shaken in a good way. If this movie had gone through mainstream release,(which it should have,) homosexuals would be seen in another light. A more darker light which would bring heterosexuals closer to accepting the gay community as the people they are. ****, (four stars out of four) -a shocking, brilliant, and redeeming work of art-

Spooky, engrossing movie with great cinematography

[alanjj · 9/10 · 16 June 2000]

I loved this movie. I can't say too much about it, because it is filled with flashbacks, leading to the revelation of the true reason why the lead character (Charlie?) is pursuing a handsome, homophobic cretin, who he eventually picks up at a bar in New York. The movie keeps you guessing, and it treads on the intersection between sex and violence. Charlie is disturbed, but you don't quite know why until the end of the film. The film has a jittery quality, like Pi, with disparate and dissonant music heightening the tension. I found myself quite satisfied when I left the theatre. The movie sticks to your ribs.

Tense but worthwhile

[Pal_Joey · 8/10 · 18 September 2002]

Dark. At times gruesome. Strange and surreal. Well-acted, especially by the lead, Dan Futterman, but also most of the supporting cast does a good job. This is a dense film that requires patience and intelligent viewing. The subject matter of grieving, loneliness and gay-bashing, is not easy material. Still, if you can handle it, a very satisfying and well-written film.

Obtuse, Vague Mess that got Good Reviews

[rddj05 · 3/10 · 7 May 2006]

So I found the VHS tape of this film (with a discount sticker from Blockbuster on it) outside a dumpster with a bunch of other videos. Being up on my films and what is released, it caught my interest since I'd never recalled hearing about it.

I watched it. Painful. Pretty much from the get-go. The primary thing that makes any film painful to sit through, whether it's a "realist" or "surrealist" drama, is the absence of anything that would resemble truthfulness (truthfulness in behavior, truthfulness in dialogue, etc.) A filmmaker can make the most bizarre, esoteric film ever, provided there's some kind of human truth in it. If there is, the audience will be drawn in. I could not find it here. It is reminiscent of another film dealing with the seamier side of the gay nightlife scene of NYC's Village, 1980's "Cruising", but at least that film had Pacino to liven it up, and more skilled direction by Exorcist & French Connection director, William Friedkin.

This film is painfully vague and obtuse, making a David Lynch film seem like Sesame Street, and the dialogue is written in a way that is hard to imagine that anyone actually speaks. The actors struggle through a sub-par script, however the script may not appear so sub-par if it had better direction. But there is obvious miscasting, including the bartender and the homeless man. I've never encountered a NY bartender quite that timid or blundering, or a homeless guy that could've just as easily been cast in a Wendy's commercial (of course, he also has to stutter and be mentally challenged, though that is far from representative of a true NY homeless person). I would say if you're going to make something up, that doesn't reflect the reality of time & place, make it more interesting.

I did notice that Alan Cumming was in the movie, so I waited for his (albeit brief) appearance, to see what a truly talented actor could do with a bad script. Though his scene was one of the few that was not badly written, it was still pleasantly surprising to see what a fine job he did with it. His behavior was completely believable and made for one of the few bright spots in the film.

However, even though there's a painful pretentiousness to this film, (and very little honesty), I was quite surprised when I checked out rottentomatoes.com that it had gained some decent reviews, especially from Stephen Holden in the NY Times. He must've seen something I clearly missed.

Requires Re-Viewing for Fullest Appreciation

[youngdadli · 10/10 · 9 October 2005]

This is a complex, layered film that appeals most to those looking for something beyond mindless fluff. That having been said, by the time one reaches the film's conclusion, one feels exhausted, vindicated, furious, empowered, blown-away, or some combination thereof. But to fully appreciate the script and its many intricacies, a re-viewing is required -- it simply gets better the second go 'round.

Director John Shear is to be applauded, as are so many of the supporting cast members. Dan Futterman's performance, however, is nothing short of superb. His character's range of emotions could easily be overplayed; Mr. Futterman's delivery is so dead-on that one easily gets lost in his character - we become him - even if we don't fully understand him. This is clearly an example of acting done so well, we forget he's acting.

Do yourself a favor: set two hours aside during which you cannot be interrupted, forget your DVD player has a pause button, and climb aboard for the ride.

Gay man struggles to come to terms with tragedy

[Libretio · 5/10 · 2 May 2005]

URBANIA

Aspect ratio: 1.85:1

Sound format: Dolby Digital

Haunted by recent tragedy, a young gay man (Dan Futterman) encounters various wild characters whilst pursuing a stranger (Samuel Ball) whose life is inextricably bound with his own.

Aside from a fragmented opening montage which annoys more than it informs, there's much to admire in Jon Shear's study of sadness, alienation and urban mythology, based on the stageplay 'Urban Folk Tales' by Daniel Reitz (who co-wrote the film's screenplay). Futterman is terrific as a man torn apart by grief, seeking closure through his pursuit of a rough stranger (Ball), though the reason for his odd behavior is kept back from the audience until the climax, when quarry and prey are brought together by a series of dramatic revelations. The gorgeous Matt Keeslar (SPLENDOR) plays Futterman's boyfriend with loving grace - their scenes together are warm, tender and more than a little sexy - and Shear makes the most of a fine supporting cast, including Alan Cumming (as a former party animal, now dying from an AIDS-related illness), Lothaire Bluteau (JESUS OF MONTREAL), Josh Hamilton (ALIVE), Paige Turco (TV's "The Agency") and Christopher Bradley (hunky co-star of David DeCoteau's LEATHER JACKET LOVE STORY). Quirky, dramatic and heartfelt, URBANIA is an unusual entry in recent gay cinema, and worth a look.

NB. Samuel Ball plays the mugger whose life takes a radical turn for the worst following a late night encounter with Joey Potter (Katie Holmes) in 'Downtown Crossing', a memorable stand-alone episode of TV's "Dawson's Creek" which first aired in 2002.

The real tragedy of "Urbania".

[paulcreeden · 8/10 · 25 September 2000]

The real tragedy of this film is not found in its plot. The tragedy is that the film is likely to be unappreciated for its brilliant portrayal of the effects of serious trauma on its victim(s). I fear that it will be trivialized by viewers who may simply equate the events in the film with the minor daily harrassments and indignities, suffered by anyone who is perceived as different by bullies. That would be a shame. I admire the film's makers for tackling this very heavy subject matter in a way that did not sensationalize its ugliness and pain. I think they did a great job. I thought the acting was generally on target. I am recommending this film to others with my voiced opinion that it is not just a gay film, in the way that "Shindler's List" is not just a Jewish film.

"Who Knew....this surprise is a IDF feature. Bravo Everybody"

[victorsargeant · 10/10 · 14 July 2005]

They should warn you before putting this kind of film on at 2 am? Did not even know who Dan Fetterman was. And this little soft bomb is slid under my door on a cold winter night.

"What in the Hell is this...?" But it was too late and they had hooked me, and the roller coaster began to move a real unreal mind f--- as they say...you had to pay attention for dear life....

Velvet dynamite with a kiss? I will never be the same, thank Goodness

My collection of great films, moved over one after this film finished, me off that night. Whew.

Dan Fetterman, director, screen play all deserved an Oscar, instantly. Fellini and Bergman should have seen this film...it is like what they made in their early film careers...that powerful.

Shockingly Fabulous

[calboy2 · 8/10 · 21 September 2000]

I would have personally gutted the gay-basher, but then again, I'm not a nice guy.

Cudos to the filmmakers, I loved it!

And let's see more of that microwaved poochie.