First off, I have to say I adore Peter Paige. I loved him as Emmett in QAF. If I lived in Portland, I'd be trying to date him. That is, if he were single. I saw this film out of curiosity. I was wanting to see him stretch. Even cast off the QAF persona. And that was done. I did not see him as Emmett here. But the film was hard to sit through. I knew the content was going to be difficult, and that is not what I mean. Throughout the film, I kept thinking "No one is that naive! Not in this day and age." Nor can anyone afford to be, no matter how idealistic you are. So, ultimately, FOR ME, the film was a far-fetched unfolding about a dead-serious and scary issue. Worthy of exploration, undoubtedly, but this film missed the mark. Please please keep working, Peter! You are a man of much talent.
28 Reviews
When the clueless collide
CIMC1 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
As if religion-based intolerance wasn't enough, the gay community has another reason to dislike Catholicism. The past several years have seen a distressing number of Catholic priests exposed as perpetrators of sexual abuse against minors. That many of the victims were young men or boys allows room for the public to confuse abusive priests with gay men instead of recognizing them as predators who had same-sex victims. It's this confusion and the homophobic panic that can arise from it that Peter Paige has on his mind in his directorial debut Say Uncle.
Paul Johnson (Paige) is a completely self-absorbed cubicle slave. His world revolves around his godson Morgan with light romantic and artistic interests on the periphery. That world experiences a drastic change in gravity though when his friend and Morgan's mother Sarah (Lisa Edelstein) tells him that they are moving to Japan. Paul is so much a helpless child that Sarah worries what he will do without them. After finding the new tenants (Gabrielle Union & Marc Anthony Samuel) in Sarah's old house to be less accommodating about him letting himself in, Peter tries to find a new direction in his life. The answer becomes obvious to Peter, find other kids to play with.
That some folks find a lone weirdo male showing up at parks to play with kids a little disturbing isn't too surprising. One mother, Maggie (Kathy Najimy), is so frightened by Paul that she starts a public campaign to have him arrested before he victimizes one of the children in the community. She first tries the police but she is brushed off as a lunatic, appropriately. Saying that, "We need our 'Just Say No'", Kathy rouses some other parents to the cause. This all leads to rumors galore and very public accusations.
The problems with this film are largely unrelated to its technical aspects. It's well shot and a strong cast performs adequately. The film though, doesn't make any sense. Though seemingly meant to be a warning about the perils of homophobia Paul is kind of creepy. His total unawareness of his surroundings and other people make him seem to not have it all together upstairs. Maggie's quest is certainly an awful hysterical pursuit but shouldn't she be worried, at least initially, about some space cadet hanging around children at a park? After all the press over an unresponsive system of order not protecting children from abusive men it should come as no surprise that she, a mentally unbalanced person to begin with, begins an ill-conceived exercise in vigilantism. All this seems to be offered with a sense of satire but it generally misses the mark. One of the characters needs to be a sympathetic, and reasonably sane person to satirize the actions of the other. Without that, it's a screwball story.
In the film Paul's defining characteristic isn't that he's gay, or that he's a painter. Paul, more than anything else, seems to be a guy who only wants to hang out with kids (not that anybody finds Michael Jackson creepy...). That undermines significantly the reaction Maggie gets to the "linchpin" in her case, Paul's homosexuality. Maggie being a nut case herself doesn't help strengthen the commentary the film offers. What we end up with is a situation that, though unfortunate, isn't exactly unexpected. When two totally clueless and unstable people cross paths, it should be no surprise that something bad happens.
Paul Johnson (Paige) is a completely self-absorbed cubicle slave. His world revolves around his godson Morgan with light romantic and artistic interests on the periphery. That world experiences a drastic change in gravity though when his friend and Morgan's mother Sarah (Lisa Edelstein) tells him that they are moving to Japan. Paul is so much a helpless child that Sarah worries what he will do without them. After finding the new tenants (Gabrielle Union & Marc Anthony Samuel) in Sarah's old house to be less accommodating about him letting himself in, Peter tries to find a new direction in his life. The answer becomes obvious to Peter, find other kids to play with.
That some folks find a lone weirdo male showing up at parks to play with kids a little disturbing isn't too surprising. One mother, Maggie (Kathy Najimy), is so frightened by Paul that she starts a public campaign to have him arrested before he victimizes one of the children in the community. She first tries the police but she is brushed off as a lunatic, appropriately. Saying that, "We need our 'Just Say No'", Kathy rouses some other parents to the cause. This all leads to rumors galore and very public accusations.
The problems with this film are largely unrelated to its technical aspects. It's well shot and a strong cast performs adequately. The film though, doesn't make any sense. Though seemingly meant to be a warning about the perils of homophobia Paul is kind of creepy. His total unawareness of his surroundings and other people make him seem to not have it all together upstairs. Maggie's quest is certainly an awful hysterical pursuit but shouldn't she be worried, at least initially, about some space cadet hanging around children at a park? After all the press over an unresponsive system of order not protecting children from abusive men it should come as no surprise that she, a mentally unbalanced person to begin with, begins an ill-conceived exercise in vigilantism. All this seems to be offered with a sense of satire but it generally misses the mark. One of the characters needs to be a sympathetic, and reasonably sane person to satirize the actions of the other. Without that, it's a screwball story.
In the film Paul's defining characteristic isn't that he's gay, or that he's a painter. Paul, more than anything else, seems to be a guy who only wants to hang out with kids (not that anybody finds Michael Jackson creepy...). That undermines significantly the reaction Maggie gets to the "linchpin" in her case, Paul's homosexuality. Maggie being a nut case herself doesn't help strengthen the commentary the film offers. What we end up with is a situation that, though unfortunate, isn't exactly unexpected. When two totally clueless and unstable people cross paths, it should be no surprise that something bad happens.
Not bad for a first movie!
lonnietr15 October 2005
Peter Paige's enthusiasm for his film is contagious only there are parts of the film that are uneven. There is good pacing , but at times the pace moves so fast that some of the storyline seems forced. The general premise is already addressed in the tag line and so there is a constant sense of uneasiness. The main character is believable but the denouement feels saccharin sweet and that minimizes the seriousness of the threat to the main character.
If you are a fan of Emmett on QAF, then you'll find that Paige is quite a talented actor. In the end, not bad for a first movie. The premise is original and touching and even with all its faults is capable of conveying the state of American culture of fear.
If you are a fan of Emmett on QAF, then you'll find that Paige is quite a talented actor. In the end, not bad for a first movie. The premise is original and touching and even with all its faults is capable of conveying the state of American culture of fear.
Say Uncle - An exceptional film
Barbara200111 October 2005
Re: Peter's movie debut This is a wonderful film about a horrific subject , ( eerily topical at the time of screening at the Los Angeles Outfest film festival. ) and one that very few would dare to tackle.. Peter Paige takes on that challenge and in doing so creates a moving and stunning film.
In his first feature, Peter as the writer, director and lead actor, takes us on a kaleidoscopic ride with a young gay man who by attempting to process grief crawls into denial and reverts to the safety and innocence of childhood. And in his naiveté unknowingly generates false accusations of pedophilia.
It would seem impossible to find comedic elements in such a film but Peter manages to do it masterfully and with great finesse while still voicing a profound statement of his own.
Kathy Najimi provides much of the vehicle for that humor in the unlikely role of a homophobic housewife and does it skillfully as if by second nature. The rest of the cast with each of their own unique talents create credibility to a film that beats with wildly with emotion, pathos and ultimate triumph.
In his first feature, Peter as the writer, director and lead actor, takes us on a kaleidoscopic ride with a young gay man who by attempting to process grief crawls into denial and reverts to the safety and innocence of childhood. And in his naiveté unknowingly generates false accusations of pedophilia.
It would seem impossible to find comedic elements in such a film but Peter manages to do it masterfully and with great finesse while still voicing a profound statement of his own.
Kathy Najimi provides much of the vehicle for that humor in the unlikely role of a homophobic housewife and does it skillfully as if by second nature. The rest of the cast with each of their own unique talents create credibility to a film that beats with wildly with emotion, pathos and ultimate triumph.
Say Uncle (2005)
MartinTeller6 January 2012
A gay man with a love for children gets accused of pedophilia. There's a couple of problems here. One is that if Peter Paige (writer/director/star) is trying to make a point, he's doing a poor job of it. The message is rather unclear. At one point he seems to be saying that parents shouldn't be so uptight about letting men play with their kids, and later seems to be emphasizing that it's gay men in particular who are demonized, and then he compounds the issue by making the protagonist unbearably stupid and naive (adding hints of mental disturbance didn't help one bit). He tries to mitigate it by saying "I know I made some mistakes" at the end, but that only ends up confusing the message more. I did appreciate that there was some complexity to it, but it was just too muddled. Also, the second act involves a lot of repeating the same points over and over again and feels sluggish. I think the largest problem is the Kathy Najimy character. Paige paints her (this is an extremely clever pun if you've seen the movie) with a very broad brush: she has knee-jerk reactions, blows things way out of proportion, tells lies to whip up hysteria, has mechanical sex with her husband, isn't a very good parent. This is a character who belongs in a much more satirical comedy, something like CITIZEN RUTH. She doesn't match the quieter (and not terribly funny) humor of the rest of the film. However, it's not all bad. Despite a low-budget production (right here in Portland) it feels pretty professional, and the performances are good, even when the characters aren't very well written. The film is somewhat pleasant to watch, despite the subject matter. And I really did enjoy the complexity and that it wasn't as broad as it could have been, if only the Najimy character had been toned down. Overall, though, it's a near miss.
Just Plain Awful
legallyblond769 September 2006
I am a gay man in the South, and while I have spent a good part of my life working with children as a camp counselor, daycare worker, and therapist, I STILL don't think I can empathize with the character Peter Paige portrays in this movie. For one, is he retarded? I don't think any grown, single, childless man who isn't just at least a little mentally challenged would think it was appropriate to spend that much time with strangers' children without good reason. Also, this character seems REALLY mentally unbalanced. He blacks out, lies about his background, cannot form a stable romantic attachment, becomes detached from reality, can only relate to children, and has what can only be described as a hyper-obsession with his godchild. I'm thinking Kathy Najimy's character in the film is right...he DOES fit the profile of a pedophile.
I don't know where Peter Paige was going with this movie, but I think he missed his mark. I rented this film, hoping for something that would break down the stereotype that gay men are freaks and pedophiles. Instead, this movie just made my skin crawl. I would NEVER, EVER let my child near a man like Paul Johnson.
Ick.
-s-
I don't know where Peter Paige was going with this movie, but I think he missed his mark. I rented this film, hoping for something that would break down the stereotype that gay men are freaks and pedophiles. Instead, this movie just made my skin crawl. I would NEVER, EVER let my child near a man like Paul Johnson.
Ick.
-s-
I don't know
cwilson-4610 October 2007
This movie kind of peeved me off for a while. Any man gay or straight should know now that whatever you do around child nowadays is considered to be wrong.
People who grew up in the 60's and the 70's didn't have to deal with these kid issues because back then people minded their own business. If you saw a mother or father beating their child - you kept walking and minded your own business and let that parent handle THEIR OWN CHILD. Now, everybody is calling child services and report child abuse if you raise a hand TO YOUR OWN CHILD. And the kids know this and that's why the kids today are getting away with murder and calling their parents all kinds of names and getting into stuff they shouldn't.
The same thing in this movie takes place, Kathy N. starting something about nothing and it snowballs right into hell. She just assumed and it turned out wrong. But then again, the guy was doing something he should not have been doing - but then again he didn't realize what he was doing until it was too late.
Anyway, great movie and I didn't know this guy could direct also, great movie.
People who grew up in the 60's and the 70's didn't have to deal with these kid issues because back then people minded their own business. If you saw a mother or father beating their child - you kept walking and minded your own business and let that parent handle THEIR OWN CHILD. Now, everybody is calling child services and report child abuse if you raise a hand TO YOUR OWN CHILD. And the kids know this and that's why the kids today are getting away with murder and calling their parents all kinds of names and getting into stuff they shouldn't.
The same thing in this movie takes place, Kathy N. starting something about nothing and it snowballs right into hell. She just assumed and it turned out wrong. But then again, the guy was doing something he should not have been doing - but then again he didn't realize what he was doing until it was too late.
Anyway, great movie and I didn't know this guy could direct also, great movie.
Not a very good movie
jrgtampa13 October 2005
While well intentioned, this movie is self-indulgent in the treatment of the writer/actor/director's main character. Is the young man actually mentally disturbed? Do we ultimately care? I did not. Other characters seemed more interesting yet no ones real motivations were made at all that clear or noteworthy. I know this was a "black comedy," but character arc is still necessary in order to feel invested. I saw it at the International Gay and Lesbian Film Festival in Tampa, where the actor and the producer were not able to shed any real light on the subject. This is a great venue for gay and lesbian films and while I was happy to see the film, I will be very surprised if it does any box office outside of the festival circuit.
Big naive kid misunderstood
socallr12 July 2005
I just saw the the world premiere of "Say Uncle" last night at LA's Outfest. Peter Paige, Kathy Najimy, and other cast members were there. A couple of QAF cast were also present to support Peter, including Scott Lowell and Robert Gant.
The response by the audience seemed very positive. The movie was well done. Paige demonstrates his chops not only as an actor, but as a writer/director. "Say Uncle" is a smart movie that explores the idea of alienation on a number of levels in our society. Paige effectively blends humor with the contemplation of serious issues (as exhibited by both laughter and tears of the audience).
Paige's character (Paul) functions with the naive perceptions of a child among adults. Najimy's character shows her own naivity when she forms different assumptions about Paul during the course of the movie and subsequently targets him. Najimy portrays an sympathetic antagonist. It was easy to laugh at her character, become disgusted, and yet feel sorry for her, because she embodied what we often see in society.
This is one of those movies that had me thinking about it long after I left the theater. I found myself contemplating my own thoughts and feelings regarding the issues presented and societal expectations. I do hope that Paige is able to find a distributor for this film so that it may be seen and recognized by a larger audience.
The response by the audience seemed very positive. The movie was well done. Paige demonstrates his chops not only as an actor, but as a writer/director. "Say Uncle" is a smart movie that explores the idea of alienation on a number of levels in our society. Paige effectively blends humor with the contemplation of serious issues (as exhibited by both laughter and tears of the audience).
Paige's character (Paul) functions with the naive perceptions of a child among adults. Najimy's character shows her own naivity when she forms different assumptions about Paul during the course of the movie and subsequently targets him. Najimy portrays an sympathetic antagonist. It was easy to laugh at her character, become disgusted, and yet feel sorry for her, because she embodied what we often see in society.
This is one of those movies that had me thinking about it long after I left the theater. I found myself contemplating my own thoughts and feelings regarding the issues presented and societal expectations. I do hope that Paige is able to find a distributor for this film so that it may be seen and recognized by a larger audience.
entertaining but many core flaws
moionfire-259-46862918 February 2013
The movie is entertaining, but too short and underdeveloped. It also could use more humor. It is about a gay man that enjoys the company of children. After his grandson moves away, he starts hanging out with children at the playground.
The major problem with the movie is that it is hard to believe that a man could be so naive on how many people would perceive him. Even his friend tells him that he should stop hanging around kids, but Paul(the main character) doesn't listen. In addition the movie tries playing the "gay card"(and male card too-- There is a scene when a mother says it was weird that a babysitter she knew was a french male) in order to imply that had he been straight and female, no one would care. That is absolutely false. Gay or straight- male or female, his behavior was creepy. Plus the movie is only 91 minutes. It should have been longer to explain why Paul is so emotionally stunted.
The major problem with the movie is that it is hard to believe that a man could be so naive on how many people would perceive him. Even his friend tells him that he should stop hanging around kids, but Paul(the main character) doesn't listen. In addition the movie tries playing the "gay card"(and male card too-- There is a scene when a mother says it was weird that a babysitter she knew was a french male) in order to imply that had he been straight and female, no one would care. That is absolutely false. Gay or straight- male or female, his behavior was creepy. Plus the movie is only 91 minutes. It should have been longer to explain why Paul is so emotionally stunted.
Creepy movie about a very sensitive topic
airdrieguy12 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
What the hell was this guy (the writer/director/actor) thinking? A gay man who likes to play with children in a park, in stores, and every where else he can? He is unable to maintain an adult relationship of any depth and becomes catatonic every time he is confronted with life?! And we wonder why the world thinks the queer community is full of pedophiles! I am gay but I am not a parent and I would think this man's behaviours indicate he is a pedophile. I know he would be no place near my nieces and nephews-ever. I kept thinking "Oh my God. Where I have heard this before? Oh, yes every time Michael Jackson is caught in bed with a child." No adult could that naive without something seriously being emotional wrong with them. I am so disappointed in TLA for having anything to do with this movie.
brave as hell, amazing performances, funny and moving
ksherida3 June 2006
i don't know where this guy got the balls to do something like this. to tackle suburbia, fear, profiling, gays, children - in a comedy. i love how they never tell you what to think or how to feel. everybody's screwed up, just like in real life. there's not one bad performance in it. kathy najimy is awesome - totally different than the way you think of her. peter paige is great - sad and funny and weird. and gabrielle union and anthony clark are great, too. oh, and melanie lynskey is freakin' hilarious. it's worth taking a chance on - seriously. it won't be everybody's thing, but if you're tired of movies where everybody's perfect and you already know how it's going to end, check this out. i loved it.
Unintentionally creepy and unfunny
Rooster916 January 2007
Picture the Robin Williams movie "One Hour Photo." It's the creepy movie in which he plays a lonely, photo department employee who becomes obsessed with a young boy and his perfect, little family. Now try to imagine Williams playing the role for comedy (unsuccessfully, of course, because the movie is creepy). Remember when you finally felt sorry for him at the end because he was such a tragic character? Pretend you don't because he's not even remotely likable.
THAT is "Say Uncle." It's a movie that asks you to like and laugh along with a character who is too creepy to like and laugh along with. I kept wishing John Waters would have stormed the set and taken over the production. How amazing would THAT be?
THAT is "Say Uncle." It's a movie that asks you to like and laugh along with a character who is too creepy to like and laugh along with. I kept wishing John Waters would have stormed the set and taken over the production. How amazing would THAT be?
A very touching film
Gordon-1110 November 2006
This film is about a gay man who likes interacting with children, and hence being mistaken for a paedophile.
I find this film very impressive. The cinematography is excellent, the set designs are very well composed and visually attractive. The most important thing is that the plot is outstanding.
It deals with many social issues. It looks at how one person jumping into conclusions can cause so much bias and distorted viewpoints. It looks at how one vocal and persuasive person can influence the crowd, creating a herd effect not dissimilar to what Hitler was able to do. It examines how people are protective of children in such a way that they would rather accuse the good than to miss one bad guy. It also looks at how gay men are robbed of their rights to adopt, or to be near children because of the mistaken idea of "homosexuals have to be paedophiles".
I am immensely impressed by this film. It touches me and I am sure it will touch you too.
I find this film very impressive. The cinematography is excellent, the set designs are very well composed and visually attractive. The most important thing is that the plot is outstanding.
It deals with many social issues. It looks at how one person jumping into conclusions can cause so much bias and distorted viewpoints. It looks at how one vocal and persuasive person can influence the crowd, creating a herd effect not dissimilar to what Hitler was able to do. It examines how people are protective of children in such a way that they would rather accuse the good than to miss one bad guy. It also looks at how gay men are robbed of their rights to adopt, or to be near children because of the mistaken idea of "homosexuals have to be paedophiles".
I am immensely impressed by this film. It touches me and I am sure it will touch you too.
"It's Boys 'n Girls...like Boysenberry."
moonspinner5523 November 2008
Some funny lines and smart commentary in this low-budget comedy about a young gay man--an overgrown kid in an adult's body--who is left rudderless after his best friends move to Japan with his beloved godson; totally enamored of and devoted to children in general, our hero starts hanging around the playground, where a single man with no kids causes red flags to wave in front of the resident moms. Writer-director-co-producer-star Peter Paige has some interesting things to say about unmarried men in our society who adore--and can relate to--the innocence of childhood yet no have little ones of their own. Unfortunately, the film's second-half is pretty much consumed by the rampant paranoia of the playground flock; this material is all too real for a little comedy to handle, and one tends to recoil from it even though the satiric points Paige makes are thorough and justified. ** from ****
Failure on Every Level
philip-130 August 2009
I liked Peter Paige in QAF, but sorry to say, he is no director and he shouldn't be directing himself.
The movie has no consistent tone.. it tries to actually take a light hearted approach to a very touchy subject and in the process only succeeds in really making one feel creepy about the main character and the topic of supposed pedophilia.
Paige simply can't bring off this character. There are too many inconsistencies and after a while you start talking back to the screen frustrated with the guy's entire approach to life. I'm sure there are naive people like this, but Paige simply makes this character depressing and unattractive. A third of the way through the film you wish he would just go away or that his friends would have a major intervention!!
That being said, the core problem with the film is Paige, the director. The movie drags; badly. The musical score doesn't go with the tone of the film and becomes annoying. The other actors and characters are bland and one dimensional. Paige cannot elicit a single interesting performance. A wonderful character actress like Kathy Najimy gives a dull, lifeless performance as Paige's adversary. The other moms are equally pedestrian as are Paige's boyfriend and boss at work. Add to that, the screenplay by Paige has no wit or cleverness which was certainly needed to make such a difficult subject even work on film.
For all it's "good intentions" the movie from a purely dramatic standpoint is a mess. The big climax doesn't really work and adds to the film's generally depressing contour. Perhaps a better writer and director could have made an engaging film out of this story. As it stands, save yourself the frustration and skip this!
The movie has no consistent tone.. it tries to actually take a light hearted approach to a very touchy subject and in the process only succeeds in really making one feel creepy about the main character and the topic of supposed pedophilia.
Paige simply can't bring off this character. There are too many inconsistencies and after a while you start talking back to the screen frustrated with the guy's entire approach to life. I'm sure there are naive people like this, but Paige simply makes this character depressing and unattractive. A third of the way through the film you wish he would just go away or that his friends would have a major intervention!!
That being said, the core problem with the film is Paige, the director. The movie drags; badly. The musical score doesn't go with the tone of the film and becomes annoying. The other actors and characters are bland and one dimensional. Paige cannot elicit a single interesting performance. A wonderful character actress like Kathy Najimy gives a dull, lifeless performance as Paige's adversary. The other moms are equally pedestrian as are Paige's boyfriend and boss at work. Add to that, the screenplay by Paige has no wit or cleverness which was certainly needed to make such a difficult subject even work on film.
For all it's "good intentions" the movie from a purely dramatic standpoint is a mess. The big climax doesn't really work and adds to the film's generally depressing contour. Perhaps a better writer and director could have made an engaging film out of this story. As it stands, save yourself the frustration and skip this!
Flawed but Engaging
sign5437 September 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I might not be a reliable source of critique on this film because I am a big Peter Paige fan, regarding him as a fantastic actor and wonderful person. I also think that this film is a worthy debut from him and shows great potential for his future behind and in front of the camera. Having said that, I must admit the film was flawed in some critical ways.
1. Nobody needs any justification for being overly-cautious with one's children. It's better to be overly cautious...than careless and each parent should decide for him/herself where that line is.
2. Combine these factors: (a) Paul is single, (b) Paul has no children, (c) Paul spends in inordinate amount of time around children, (d) Paul resists romantic advances from a co-worker and seems to have few, if any, adult relationships, (e) He seeks out jobs that place him around children....when you combine these factors, even though it may be wrong, it does follow the profile of what many would consider as a high risk of being a pedophile. NOT PROOF...just suspicion. Honestly, I would be very cautious of him. Let's be honest...these factors almost entirely describe Michael Jackson, whom MANY think is guilty of child molestation, whether acquitted or not.
3. A few actions were not believable. Taking the little girl INTO the bathroom? Come on, where was the mother? Why didn't he LOOK FOR the mother? How could any man in this day and age, who is obviously over 30...NOT know this was a bad thing to do? Just didn't play believably.
4. The film almost seems to be saying that we owe men like this...or any men, when it comes to our children, the benefit of the doubt. We do not. I don't need a reason for never letting my young son be around a grown man alone. It's just a good, safe practice to disallow it. Even avowed heterosexual men. Gay or straight, no man would be with my son alone. There's just no reason to allow it.
Having said all of that, I did enjoy the film...the story was cute in places, the acting was good, and the cinematography and music was engaging. I would recommend it to friends, but would then want to debate the points I brought up.
1. Nobody needs any justification for being overly-cautious with one's children. It's better to be overly cautious...than careless and each parent should decide for him/herself where that line is.
2. Combine these factors: (a) Paul is single, (b) Paul has no children, (c) Paul spends in inordinate amount of time around children, (d) Paul resists romantic advances from a co-worker and seems to have few, if any, adult relationships, (e) He seeks out jobs that place him around children....when you combine these factors, even though it may be wrong, it does follow the profile of what many would consider as a high risk of being a pedophile. NOT PROOF...just suspicion. Honestly, I would be very cautious of him. Let's be honest...these factors almost entirely describe Michael Jackson, whom MANY think is guilty of child molestation, whether acquitted or not.
3. A few actions were not believable. Taking the little girl INTO the bathroom? Come on, where was the mother? Why didn't he LOOK FOR the mother? How could any man in this day and age, who is obviously over 30...NOT know this was a bad thing to do? Just didn't play believably.
4. The film almost seems to be saying that we owe men like this...or any men, when it comes to our children, the benefit of the doubt. We do not. I don't need a reason for never letting my young son be around a grown man alone. It's just a good, safe practice to disallow it. Even avowed heterosexual men. Gay or straight, no man would be with my son alone. There's just no reason to allow it.
Having said all of that, I did enjoy the film...the story was cute in places, the acting was good, and the cinematography and music was engaging. I would recommend it to friends, but would then want to debate the points I brought up.
Wrong Messages from Both Sides
gradyharp14 September 2006
Another of those 'written, directed, starring' movies that should have been filtered through a careful producing team, SAY UNCLE will probably get an audience because of Peter Paige's fans from QUEER AS FOLK (it looks like the entire cast and team put up the money for the production!). The theme of the story is an important one - single gay men who love children are targets for homophobic people to label as sexual predators - but the film fails to engage us on both sides of the fence.
Paul Johnson (Peter Paige) is bonded to his godson and in every way seems the perfect godfather - if a bit too much on the infantile side of maturity. His world collapses when his friends move with his godson to Japan and Paul realizes he has nothing. He loses his job, grazes on donuts, and finally begins to seek employment in kids' stores, baby-sitting, and other kid related projects (even trying to adopt a child while jobless), all the while playing with kids in the park. The mothers in the park all love the fact that he appears to be a stay-at-home dad who entertains their own children, until one mother (Kathy Najimy) becomes suspect that he is a pedophile and organizes the city against him. The ending is predictable and phony and doesn't say much that is good about either Paul's manner of adapting to his life needs nor the mothers' taking responsibility for their misjudging: it just ends.
Paige is a talented guy but he needs a good director to give him some insights on how to step out of clichés and stereotypes and become at least a facsimile of a real human being. Oddly enough we are left with a feeling that his 'Paul' is a man who behaves like a child and will probably never cross the line into adulthood. The supporting cast is satisfactory but the production values are weak. The redeeming factor is the sense that everyone had a good idea to explore: the journey just doesn't compel us.
Paul Johnson (Peter Paige) is bonded to his godson and in every way seems the perfect godfather - if a bit too much on the infantile side of maturity. His world collapses when his friends move with his godson to Japan and Paul realizes he has nothing. He loses his job, grazes on donuts, and finally begins to seek employment in kids' stores, baby-sitting, and other kid related projects (even trying to adopt a child while jobless), all the while playing with kids in the park. The mothers in the park all love the fact that he appears to be a stay-at-home dad who entertains their own children, until one mother (Kathy Najimy) becomes suspect that he is a pedophile and organizes the city against him. The ending is predictable and phony and doesn't say much that is good about either Paul's manner of adapting to his life needs nor the mothers' taking responsibility for their misjudging: it just ends.
Paige is a talented guy but he needs a good director to give him some insights on how to step out of clichés and stereotypes and become at least a facsimile of a real human being. Oddly enough we are left with a feeling that his 'Paul' is a man who behaves like a child and will probably never cross the line into adulthood. The supporting cast is satisfactory but the production values are weak. The redeeming factor is the sense that everyone had a good idea to explore: the journey just doesn't compel us.
Paige is a brilliant actor/director
lascorpio7530 June 2006
This film covers a variety of themes from cultural phobias to psychological disorders. The cinematography is outstanding, the comedy is consistent, the messages in the movie are mandatory to be addressed. I went to a showing with a Q&A session afterward and Paige humbly discussed his influences, his mission with the film, and details about the creative process. I have been teaching for 9 years and I have dealt with many of the issues in the film from fearing accusations to phobias about being a gay man interacting with homophobic parent's children. Go and see this film- you won't regret it! You'll instead leave afterward with a smile, contemplating what's really most important in your life and in our society.
Not a very good or realistic movie
jdohe200211 September 2009
First, this movie is described as being a dark comedy but there was nothing comedic about it. I would describe it as a lifestyle drama.
That said.. lets just forget about the lifestyle angle of this movie. The fact that the character is gay and without children really isn't relevant. Even if Paul was straight and had kids of his own, adults should avoid associating with other people's children who are not known to them. This is kind of the situation Michael Jackson was in. My brother and his wife decided not to have children, yet they have an obsession with seeking out preteen boys to be friends with. I am sure they would not sexually molest the boys, but still - it is not normal nor acceptable behavior in my book. Furthermore, even if everything is 100% innocent, the adults are taking a tremendous risk in having these kinds of relationships with children.
My advice to Peter Paige would be to concentrate more on his acting and directing and leave his unrealistic gay issues behind him.
Statistics show that 35% of people are either gay or bisexual, and of the remaining 65% there are lots of straight pedophiles, criminals, drunks, drug abusers, and people who are mentally ill. In fact, the vast majority of pedophiles are straight men pursuing underage girls.
This movie just obscured reality and exploited an issue for its own purposes.
That said.. lets just forget about the lifestyle angle of this movie. The fact that the character is gay and without children really isn't relevant. Even if Paul was straight and had kids of his own, adults should avoid associating with other people's children who are not known to them. This is kind of the situation Michael Jackson was in. My brother and his wife decided not to have children, yet they have an obsession with seeking out preteen boys to be friends with. I am sure they would not sexually molest the boys, but still - it is not normal nor acceptable behavior in my book. Furthermore, even if everything is 100% innocent, the adults are taking a tremendous risk in having these kinds of relationships with children.
My advice to Peter Paige would be to concentrate more on his acting and directing and leave his unrealistic gay issues behind him.
Statistics show that 35% of people are either gay or bisexual, and of the remaining 65% there are lots of straight pedophiles, criminals, drunks, drug abusers, and people who are mentally ill. In fact, the vast majority of pedophiles are straight men pursuing underage girls.
This movie just obscured reality and exploited an issue for its own purposes.
Ridiculous film that wants it "both ways"
Ripshin9 September 2006
Technically, this film is well done, avoiding the usual genre clichés of most first-time gay directors. However, overall it is an uncomfortable mess. What is it trying to say? We are supposed to feel sympathy for a lead character who performs one act of stupidity after another? Anger for a mother who has every right to assume this borderline-mentally-ill man could harm her child?
What grown man in his right mind would hang out in playgrounds with children, and not expect the inevitable results? The lead is just plain creepy.
Supporting roles are uneven. The co-worker/admirer goes from bitchy to "honey" in ONE week? Najimy portrays a concerned mother as a stereotypical gay-hating shrew. The "boss" is a cartoon character. Then we have the very grounded best female friend. (Well, not so grounded...she gives this borderline retarded man a NUDE picture of her own toddler - dressed up in cowboy gear??!!)
Paige is a talented actor, but I question his writing skills, and the actual intention of this film.
What grown man in his right mind would hang out in playgrounds with children, and not expect the inevitable results? The lead is just plain creepy.
Supporting roles are uneven. The co-worker/admirer goes from bitchy to "honey" in ONE week? Najimy portrays a concerned mother as a stereotypical gay-hating shrew. The "boss" is a cartoon character. Then we have the very grounded best female friend. (Well, not so grounded...she gives this borderline retarded man a NUDE picture of her own toddler - dressed up in cowboy gear??!!)
Paige is a talented actor, but I question his writing skills, and the actual intention of this film.
Props for Bravery . . . but
Franco-LA16 March 2008
Warning: Spoilers
This review is based on a DVD rental. The DVD indicates there is a director's commentary but there wasn't - which is unfortunate, because the behind the scenes feature was, frankly, useless other than as a promotional - and a very brief one at that.
That said, many of the comments I could make were made by other reviewers so I'll limit my comments as follows: the film is technically good, shows high proficiency. The music was interesting and varied. The performance, while limited by the written script and scenes, were generally polished. However, the pacing at times was off. There were some lulls that didn't help move the movie along, especially with such a trim running time. At other times (for example, the furious painting scenes) were so rapid they didn't make much sense.
The main fault with the script was the judgment exhibited by some of the main supporting characters (the female friend Sarah, in the presentation of the gift by Morgan), the co- worker, in not removing the personal items or insisting they be returned, the fellow mom, when she felt the Kathy Najimy character was lying about the bathroom incident in the toy store. Additionally, and as commented by other users, the lack of sophistication or understanding by the Paul Johnson was simply too much to be explained by any other than lack of mental capacity -- which was, unfortunately, not sufficiently explained by the donut store grease fire incident. Too much gets too neatly tied up at the end, if not really resolved (how does someone support themselves on a telemarketing salary for all that paint, etc.; how does one fly from Japan to California in less than half a day? and why does an employer keep a naked picture of a child from a fired employee around?)
All in all, interesting and noteworthy for tackling the main subject matter and the issues that natural flow from that perspective. However, the execution shows that the filmmaker exceeded his grasp.
That said, many of the comments I could make were made by other reviewers so I'll limit my comments as follows: the film is technically good, shows high proficiency. The music was interesting and varied. The performance, while limited by the written script and scenes, were generally polished. However, the pacing at times was off. There were some lulls that didn't help move the movie along, especially with such a trim running time. At other times (for example, the furious painting scenes) were so rapid they didn't make much sense.
The main fault with the script was the judgment exhibited by some of the main supporting characters (the female friend Sarah, in the presentation of the gift by Morgan), the co- worker, in not removing the personal items or insisting they be returned, the fellow mom, when she felt the Kathy Najimy character was lying about the bathroom incident in the toy store. Additionally, and as commented by other users, the lack of sophistication or understanding by the Paul Johnson was simply too much to be explained by any other than lack of mental capacity -- which was, unfortunately, not sufficiently explained by the donut store grease fire incident. Too much gets too neatly tied up at the end, if not really resolved (how does someone support themselves on a telemarketing salary for all that paint, etc.; how does one fly from Japan to California in less than half a day? and why does an employer keep a naked picture of a child from a fired employee around?)
All in all, interesting and noteworthy for tackling the main subject matter and the issues that natural flow from that perspective. However, the execution shows that the filmmaker exceeded his grasp.
Touchy subject...comedy?
michaelRokeefe24 May 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Paul(Peter Paige)is an artist with lack of confidence in his talent and ability. His world seems to crumble when his little godson's parents relocate out of the country. Paul's world for a couple of years has revolved around his relationship with the little boy. Paul's gay lover Russell(Anthony Clarke "Yes, Dear")advises against frequenting playgrounds to be close to small children. A neighborhood mom(Kathy Najimy)realizes Paul has no child of his own at the park and immediately suspects him of being a pedophile and starts a campaign to rid him of the area. You may also recognize Lisa Edelstein(House), who plays down her beauty in this role. And Melanie Lynskey(Two and a Half Men), who is a real hoot; love her. This movie could have really jumped the track and become a real sordid dark comedy; I honestly was hoping it would. Still a real daring subject to center a mild comedy around. As for Najimy, I've never seen her in a role I've liked. Clarke didn't surprise me any with his "liplock" on Paige.
interesting, engaging grey comedy
watcher-1412 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
this film reminds me of the early work of Alexander payne, especially citizen ruth. it is a smart, weird, funny, sad comedy about the way we're all afraid of each other. what i most liked about the film is how nobody is completely in the right - paul is a good guy, but he can't see the world going on around him, and maggie is a tough nut, but she does have her kid's best interest at heart. i was really involved watching these two lost souls collide.
i saw it at outfest in los angeles, and hope it makes it into theatres everywhere. i think at this moment in time this is an important film for people to see.
i saw it at outfest in los angeles, and hope it makes it into theatres everywhere. i think at this moment in time this is an important film for people to see.
It's surprising.
fabrizio-297-90599817 July 2023
I can't remember when, or if, I've been so embarrassed with a movie. This comedy is a complete failure, assumed that it didn't want to be a homophobic movie.
But the fact is, Paul suffers an abnormal attraction to children, he is seeking for child company at all time. He is ignoring, if it is good or not for a child to play with an adult who plays like a child.
A children rings at his door. He lets him in, without looking to reach his parents. This movie tries to say it is okay because he didn't do bad things. Crazy. And the story uses a gay guy to say that. Wow. A movie can't do better to feed hate.
I wondered what was the original plot line and how it ended up in such a horrible homophobic source material.
I can't believe it passed all the steps of production, financing and approval and such renowned actors as Lisa Edelstein (House) and Jim Ortlieb (Roswell) said yes. I guess the scenario was telling a story in a certain point of view, then the screenplay went wrong.
But the fact is, Paul suffers an abnormal attraction to children, he is seeking for child company at all time. He is ignoring, if it is good or not for a child to play with an adult who plays like a child.
A children rings at his door. He lets him in, without looking to reach his parents. This movie tries to say it is okay because he didn't do bad things. Crazy. And the story uses a gay guy to say that. Wow. A movie can't do better to feed hate.
I wondered what was the original plot line and how it ended up in such a horrible homophobic source material.
I can't believe it passed all the steps of production, financing and approval and such renowned actors as Lisa Edelstein (House) and Jim Ortlieb (Roswell) said yes. I guess the scenario was telling a story in a certain point of view, then the screenplay went wrong.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
