[ Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: NoAccident
Date: 21 Dec 2004
Time: 01:49:29
Remote Name: dialup-162.14.220.203.acc10-dryb-mel.comindico.com.au
I have seen Don's Plum, more than once(I own it on DVD) and it is far from awful. The concept was kinky and obscure, but it worked. So much of the actors own personalities were there, that it was difficult at times to remember it was a movie, not just a home video. However, I can understand why Leo in particular did not want it released, if it shows even half of who he was, then he had a very ugly side to him, I guess we all have, and I can imagine why he wasn't willing to expose that side of himself to his fans in the USA. Not great for business. On the other hand, I'm not to sure why Tobey would have brought the lawsuit to court, I can only assume it was more to back his buddy, which is admirable in itself. For a movie that it mostly improvised, I think it still remained uncaotic, which is a tribute to the actors and makers alike. I loved it, I found it very real... just real! It may not have been the most flattering performances for the actors involved, but I dont think it was ever meant to be. It is rare to brush aside the hollywood makeover and get a glimpse of the real person. If you want to see something real, then this is it. It was ofcourse filmed a long time ago, and I would imagine the actors have changed a lot since then too, so now is a good time to look back and hold no judgements on what sort of people they were. We all have a past, and if we steer down the right road we all change things about ourselves for the better. I think it was a gutsy move to even try to make a film like Don's Plum, whether Tobey and Leo want it seen or not. It's art, it's out there, why hide it now?