Phoenix (I) (2006) User Reviews

Decent little indie film

[DSTgar · 6/10 · 20 February 2007]

This is a short film (90 min), and could have been even a little shorter, that has the feel of a polished film school project. Ack. I didn't mean that to sound so disparaging. Most significantly, the writing and the characters have an honest feeling; I was never surprised that the characters acted the way they did (not always the case for little films like this), there were no whopping plot holes, and nothing seemed too cliché. For example, I can imagine the temptation to make the older gay couple (in 2 scenes) into the "wise sages," but here they're much more the bitchy queens (but not quite to the point of being grating; you still kind of like them). Plot basics: Kenneth arrives from Phoenix (hence the title) to celebrate bf Dylan's birthday, and pledges that when this business deal is wrapped up, he'll move to LA for good. Flies back to Phoenix to fix the broken business deal, but when Dylan shows up to surprise him, he is nowhere to be found. The surprise is when Kenneth's Phoenix-based bf Demetrius shows up, and the two discover the deception as they also discover they've both been left behind. The rest is basically a little 2-character movie. Does true love rise from the ashes? Watch and see. Sweet and sexy love scene, if that matters to you; both of these actors are quite appealing.

Love, Relationships, and Trials

[gradyharp · 5/10 · 6 March 2007]

PHOENIX is the third feature by Michael D. Akers as a director and writer (here sharing the credits with Sandon Berg) and as with his other two features 'Matrimonium' and 'Gone, But Not Forgotten' there is a sense that Akers knows how to tell a good story, a story based on universal themes but just happening to be using gay characters to explain a similarity in all manners of love whether they be straight or gay.

LVN Dylan (Chad Bartley) is celebrating his 23rd birthday by setting his apartment with flowers and dinner, expecting his love of one year to arrive for the surprise. The love is Ken (Gaetano Jones) who arrives late and barely notices the setting, giving Dylan a clay vase as a gift and then telling him he must dash off to Phoenix for a failing real estate deal. Dylan is hurt then angry and breaks his gift, sending Ken off to Phoenix in a miff. Sorry for his behavior Dylan takes the money enclosed in a Birthday card from his folks and flies to Phoenix to apologize to Ken. But surprises arise in Phoenix: Ken is missing, Dylan traces the broken vase to discover chef/ceramist Demetrius (Jeff Castle) and learns that Ken and Demetrius have been partnered for seven years! Neither Dylan nor Demetrius is pleased with Ken's lying and cheating but they gradually admit to finding solace with each other and spend time together, including a physical encounter that leads to others as the two prolong Dylan's stay. How the love triangle is broken but remains influential is the resolution of the story.

Akers has the sensitivity to not make the story have the happy-wappy Hollywood ending: he also has the talent to capture love encounters in a very sensual way. The actors are all attractive men and given the lack of prior experience each has had, they offer fairly strong performances - especially Chad Bartley. The film is desperately in need of editing as there are extraneous scenes galore (the landscape scenes are far to brightly sun drenched for the desert locales captured. But in the end the film is successful in that it does present the joys, trials, and disappointments in love relationships in the gay community that could have easily been in a straight character movie - and that is refreshing! Grady Harp

Three ways

[earl-rose · 6/10 · 23 August 2019]

A lover disappears and is found to have another lover in Phoenix. The two bereft partners have a chance to help each other and so they do. I liked this a lot. It is in black and white. It has all the hallmarks of a film noir. Actually filmed near where I live, it was nice to see familiar landmarks standing in for the state to the east of us. Just sayin'. I am just dealing a little with an ending I wasn't hoping for. Poor me. In any case, it was still very nice getting there. Great sex scenes on the way. They didn't have that in all those classic noir films.

His movies are getting better!

[reeves2002 · 17 July 2007]

I saw Phoenix because I like independent films and because I was interested in it after seeing the trailer.I also just watched Mike Acker's first film Gone but not forgotten.It got really bad reviews.Obviously not the best movie but I didn't mind it. Yes the movie was very low budget and amateur and came across sort of like a daytime soap opera, but the acting was real and believable.It moved a bit slow but it did keep me interested and I did like the ending.I grew up in a small town so I could really relate to the movie gone but not forgotten. Phoenix was a little better.It is a very simple film with again very good believable acting.It could have had a larger cast though and been a little more fast paced,but maybe that's not what they wanted for this movie.One part I really liked in Phoenix was when Dylan was waiting for Demetrius to get home from work and was sitting outside his house during a thunderstorm.I loved the lightning shots and the rain.It added nice atmosphere but I wish that scene was longer. This movie had a sad ending but a believable one.

This Phoenix had no opportunity to rise

[thesar-2 · 1/10 · 28 December 2008]

I was biased enough to rent this clichéd, dull and laughably acted movie due to the fact that the cover contained good eye-candy and finally a film based in Phoenix, AZ – where I live. There's so few films based in my city. ('Psycho' and its remake don't count, as there were about 15 minutes combined between the two in the Valley of the Sun.) The sad truth is that most of what was filmed in Phoenix was presented in all-but stock footage, and even when you wanted to look out the actor's cars, the filming was so bad, it was just a blur of brightness. (Heck, even the credits shows that most of the locations used in the film where nowhere close to Phoenix – such as that extremely cheap "resort" (Mod) Ken was to stay at was in Palm Desert, CA.) The acting was so bad that some of my favorite and unintentionally hilarious scenes involved any of the leads attempting to cry. Sure, their faces crunched up, but no tears flowed. Couldn't someone just throw water on their faces for "special effects"? And, I'm sorry, I just have to throw this in, what was it with that hideous, I suppose "going-green" house Demetrius lived in? Yeah, this was an extremely independent/film student project, so no offense to one of the film makers or friend/family that actually lived in that wannabe retro 60s home. Word to future film students, especially when making gay-themed features: Please aim higher. The only way gay-themed films can go main-stream, is with respect; respect to character depth, respect to strong and original scripts and respect to the audience.

Waaaaay out of their league

[Coralknight · 2/10 · 4 October 2016]

The premise of a gay version of "L'avventura" seemed like it could be a very interesting twist on a classic...until you remember most gay movies suck terribly and do more harm than good. Yes, "Phoenix" is no exception. Gone is the stylish cinematography, the passionate dialogue...and the passion behind the silence. Phoenix is just the typical, linear schlock that doesn't do a shred of justice to the original. The pace is slow, the direction awful and the script cringe-worthy. I'm not sure if the director was merely stuck with bad actors or if he seriously is so bad at making films that he doesn't even recognize bad acting (my guess is it's probably the latter). The absolute WORST in a cast of bad actors is the character of Demitrius played by Jeff Castle, who in the climactic moment cannot even seem to cry believably (the way he contorted his face made it look like he was passing an ice-berg). The ONLY positive to this ENTIRE mess is the lead played by Chad Bartley: he was obviously type-cast because he was cute, young and had a boyish innocence about him...THIS WAS THE ONLY THING THAT WORKED. In other words, I'm not saying Chad is necessarily a great actor, but he did an awesome job in this role, despite the ridiculousness of this film. In fact, I sincerely wish him well and hope he gets work (if he still wants to and hasn't been soured from that experience) as I almost feel sorry for him for participating in this.

There are soap operas better than ths...

[stuartho-67386 · 3/10 · 21 October 2021]

IMDb lists the film as colour but I viewed in black and white. The film opening in black and white looked promising and intriguing. In the end, what a stupid film it is after all. A young guy, Dylan, celebrates birthday with his older boyfriend with hopes of being his forever boyfriend. Boyfriend disappears so Dylan decides to look for him in Phoenix. Turns out boyfriend is married to a guy. Young guy and married guy are a bit distraught but end up hooking up. Married guy has a meltdown, young guy decides to leave. The whole premise is just ridiculous, and the film ends like a real bad soap opera. The acting was equally bad, a little over dramatic in parts, and they throw in a gay couple, old married geezers in an open relationship. The film ends with young guy driving away with a hint of smile, I guess to show he learned a life lesson, the married guy is left feeling tormented. Can it be any worst than this. Watch the film only if you are curious or bored.

cutsy film to watch...

[myonge-72119 · 4/10 · 15 January 2021]

No academy performance that's for sure. Interesting and actually intriguing story line which could have been developed better, like have Ken actually show up again and be confronted by Dylan and Demetrius. I have to agree with some of the other reviewers that there was a lot of what I called dead air... scenes that really had no bearing on the story. I clearly missed the intent of the last several minutes of the movie with Dylan driving home, the scenes, the earth-movers, him smiling ,,, what was that all about? Lost on me, didn't make any sense. The older couple and the exchange between them and Dylan... to me not well done. They were too..too... and Dylan who is a visitor was downright rude... not well written for my taste. But all in all I liked the story will probably watch it again, and be annoyed again with the stuff that didn't work for me.

Brilliance in simplicity and yet just shy of perfection.

[nyghtweaver · 8/10 · 21 February 2009]

I'd like to start by saying this movie is excellent. The characters are VERY real, and the story is one we all have been through in some form, gay or straight. The cinematography was wonderful, although at times you could tell that inexpensive film was used. The actors are all good looking, but flawed enough to make them seem even more real. The title is a double meaning. Not only does most of it take place in Phoenix, but the journey is one of rebirth. You follow these characters on a sweet and sensual journey as their passion and relationship builds. There is real spark and heat between them, and it translates well to the characters. But as the end grows nearer and nearer, it almost becomes nail biting. When Dylan is told that there are no feelings for him, it made me want to slap the actor in the face. The movie shows very clearly that there is passion and love between them. And I kept thinking something will happen in the few moments left... And yet it just drifted further toward silence with the gentle soundtrack (terrific throughout the film) and the final fading shot (of which many others in the film were superb as well). This movie was fantastic almost all the way through. It led you towards the inevitable and predictable love, the phoenix rising from the ashes of two dead entangled relationships... And then it did the exact opposite. I felt cheated, as if the two belonged together. Cheated that they weren't even given a chance. And so, deprived of my happy ending, this movie fell slightly to a solid 8, or an A on the school grading scale (which is the one I use for my personal collection). It would have been damn near a perfect 10, a 9.5 (because sometimes you just need a half) until the ending. And though it didn't deliver what I wanted, that doesn't mean you can't enjoy it. It was a great movie, and my being slightly perturbed doesn't change that. Kudos to the actors who did a wonderful job, and to the directer for truly knowing the meaning of restraint and casual elegance. But most especially, to the writer for a fantastic job (minus my happy ending!). In some parallel movie universe, this movie ended the way I wanted. Give it a try, I don't think you'll be disappointed.

This work of a mature artist, indie Phoenix bookends Philadelphia

[anachreon · 10/10 · 16 November 2007]

A mature style in any art form is marked by restraint, clarity of vision, objective taste, trust in the storyline presented. All of these criteria are met handsomely in Phoenix, an aptly named film of emotional loss and renewal. With none of the firepower of a Hollywood blockbuster like Philadelphia, this film captures the very essence of the gay gestalt of two distinct generations: youth and early middle age. These come together in the unexpected relationship of the two protagonists, young Dylan and Demetrius, who is in his late-thirties. I have seldom seen more poised gay performances than those by the two leads: Chad Bartley (Dylan) and John Castle (Demetrius). The script is realistic with no bows to the bothersome bad habit of most gay productions these days: insistent multi-culturism. There are no bitchy, but good-hearted queens; there are no oracular African-Americans; there are no effeminate agony aunts. (There is an older, more experienced couple who appear briefly, but they are not obtrusive)...just the two men, working from an excellent script which panders to no value except fidelity to its subject. All of the production values are excellent, including the photography. If you're in the biz, watch this film and learn. If not,just sit back and admire one the best gay films ever made. Obviously, I loved it. BTW, I have no connection whatsoever to the makers of this film.

For Silhouette Romance Fans - Contains MAJOR SPOILERS

[fordraff · 12 March 2008]

Do the publishers of the Silhouette Romance novels have a line of romance novels for gay men? If so, the script for "Phoenix" would fit right in, for this is just a trifling romantic soap opera.

Dylan Wells, a twinkie in his early 20s, is seeing Kenneth Sparks, a traveling real estate agent whenever Sparks comes into L.A. for the weekend. Their "relationship" is nothing more than weekend sex sessions whenever Sparks is available. Sparks has been stringing Wells along by saying that he will meet his friends and that he will soon move in to live with Wells. A person doesn't need a three-digit IQ to know that Sparks is lying, and Wells should not have hung any expectations for a future with Sparks on what Sparks told him.

As shown here, Sparks is a short-tempered man arguing with his business associates. (He smokes, a sure sign this guy is the villain.) Although Sparks gives Dylan a small jug handmade from ClayMakers in Phoenix and tells Dylan it's a work of art, we later learn this was a gift that had earlier been given to Sparks and is not an expensive work of art at all.

On this particular weekend, Sparks leaves Dylan within hours after arriving, pleading business. The day after they part, Dylan impulsively decides to go to Phoenix, where Sparks told him he was going to deal with business. But when Dylan goes to the Mod Resort, where Sparks is staying, he does not find Sparks in residence, though Sparks has a room there. Posing as Sparks, Dylan manages to con a trainee at the front desk into giving him a key to the room. He finds none of Sparks' personal effects in the room.

Dylan phones the police, reporting Sparks as a missing person, and, quite improbably, Detective Smith comes around to interview Dylan, who is still occupying Sparks' room (improbable also). The police would not have responded to Dylan's call since Sparks was not a relative, nor were Sparks and Dylan legally married. Besides, Sparks hadn't been gone more than a day or two. But let's not quibble over small plausibility matters.

After his discussion with Detective Smith, Dylan searches out ClayMakers, where his jar was produced, and discovers that it is a one-man operation in the garage of the owner's home. The owner is Demetrius Stone, a chef in his mid- to late 30s, and, in short order, Dylan discovers that Demetrius and Kenneth Sparks have been partners for more than seven years.

So now, we have two betrayed men. What next? Well, what do you expect in a Silhouette Novel type plot? Demetrius and Dylan have sex, the two consoling each other in their betrayal. Over the next few days, Dylan falls in love with Demetrius, the speed of this emotional entanglement with Demetrius showing Dylan's' immaturity. Nonetheless, Demetrius and Dylan want the same things. As Demetrius says, "All I ever wanted was a husband, a house, and a kid I like." The plot promotes the current thinking in the gay world--become like a heterosexual couple! A few scenes between Demetrius and Dylan make it obvious to the viewer that the two are mismatched. To the film's credit, it doesn't give Demetrius and Dylan a happy ending. The two part as friends, and Dylan goes back to L.A., supposedly a wiser person The movie's tag line is "Every broken heart is a chance for a new beginning," so I assume that--phoenix-like--Dylan will arise anew from the ashes of his two broken "relationships" with Sparks and Demetrius. And, I'm sure, Demetrius will recover, too.

There is some obvious symbolism here in the title, the waves crashing on the shore, phallic rock formations, that anyone who has had an introduction to literature course in college will easily interpret.

The film has decent production values that belie its low budget. However, the sets look like displays of model rooms in a furniture store--all new and all impersonal. The same goes for details like dishes, sheets, wall decorations, kitchen appliances. However, some shots in Demetrius's home reveal it to be a real house-- mismatched kitchen cabinet doors, an older stove, and inexpensive dining room furniture.

The technical quality of the film (lighting, editing) is fine, as is the photography. There is nothing distinguished here, just quality work of the kind that often doesn't appear in low-budget indie films. The film's pace is slow in a few places, which had me looking at the décor in the background rather than the actors in the foreground.

The three leading men are all attractive in a generically handsome way. They're rather like the sets--nice looking and impersonal. Gaelano Jones as Kenneth Sparks does display a mean look that is appropriate to his character. Jeff Castle bears an uncanny resemblance to Cliff Robertson. Chad Bartley looks like the kind of guy who turns up regularly in gay porn films. He is the weakest actor here, but then he only has two IMDb credits, his other being a bit part.

Two older characters, Lewis and Gunther, unnecessary to the film, appear briefly in two scenes as lovers who've been together for about twenty years. They're stereotypes: have an open relationship, trade barbs with each other, and so on.

There is no frontal nudity here, though Bartley does some bare butt scenes. Jones keeps his underpants on throughout, and, although one scene has a naked Jeff Castle in bed, Chad Bartley is positioned in such a way that you don't ever see Castle's bare butt.

Finally, according to the IMDb, this film was Akers' attempt to remake Antonioni's "L'Avventura." Let's not even go there.