Picture this: Unhappily single gay professor Brad Jenkins (J. Andrew Keitsch) is approaching the big 4-0 and is going through some serious inner self-evaluation. He is not only single, but also lonely. His best friend Julie (Joan Lauckner), who married his brother, convinces him to attend his parents' wedding anniversary. After a bad night, Brad gets drunk and wounds up in a car accident. When he wakes up, he finds himself back in high school as a young man. However, the big shocker is this: homosexuality is the 'normal' way of living. To solve reproduction, parental partners are set up, otherwise it's all guy with guy, gal with gal.
At first Brad finds himself in heaven, and makes his ultimate teen dream come true by dating Roland (Tim Hammer). However, after meeting the unsuspecting young Julie, Brad finds himself more attracted to her. The two soon start to have an affair and thus become "breeders", that is a heterosexual couple, subject to discrimination.
This latter part is what I personally found a tad problematic. The movie implies that homosexual chose their sexual orientation rather than being born that way. Up until Brad and Julie's affair, I thought this was an excellent movie that showed what it is like to be the minority all of a sudden; it had great potential to grasp the audience, regardless of their sexuality. The sudden heterosexual twist came as an unpleasant surprise for me, as I found the storyline could have been much more interesting if it would have focused on Brad's homosexuality and how his experiences from the 'past' could change him when he went 'back to the future'.
It was also startling to watch the Blue Jean Ball scene when all of a sudden heterosexual couples formed even though moments earlier most of them were convinced that being gay was the only way. It just didn't make sense and from then on it was hard to take the movie seriously.
Then of course, in the end Brad does meet his love, Roland, when they go hiking as 40-year-olds. I was unsure about this movie's message. Did it mean to say that gender is insignificant when it comes to finding true love? Or that who we are attracted to solely depends on our environment? Perhaps that we are mere products of our environment? It is unclear.
Overall this was definitely an interesting movie to watch, as it showed a new take on homosexuality, and (at least for the first half) provided a unique way of portraying an if-you-were-in-my-shoes situation. The fact that it was a low budget production cannot be overlooked, nonetheless it is worth a watch. Maybe someone can decipher the message.
At first Brad finds himself in heaven, and makes his ultimate teen dream come true by dating Roland (Tim Hammer). However, after meeting the unsuspecting young Julie, Brad finds himself more attracted to her. The two soon start to have an affair and thus become "breeders", that is a heterosexual couple, subject to discrimination.
This latter part is what I personally found a tad problematic. The movie implies that homosexual chose their sexual orientation rather than being born that way. Up until Brad and Julie's affair, I thought this was an excellent movie that showed what it is like to be the minority all of a sudden; it had great potential to grasp the audience, regardless of their sexuality. The sudden heterosexual twist came as an unpleasant surprise for me, as I found the storyline could have been much more interesting if it would have focused on Brad's homosexuality and how his experiences from the 'past' could change him when he went 'back to the future'.
It was also startling to watch the Blue Jean Ball scene when all of a sudden heterosexual couples formed even though moments earlier most of them were convinced that being gay was the only way. It just didn't make sense and from then on it was hard to take the movie seriously.
Then of course, in the end Brad does meet his love, Roland, when they go hiking as 40-year-olds. I was unsure about this movie's message. Did it mean to say that gender is insignificant when it comes to finding true love? Or that who we are attracted to solely depends on our environment? Perhaps that we are mere products of our environment? It is unclear.
Overall this was definitely an interesting movie to watch, as it showed a new take on homosexuality, and (at least for the first half) provided a unique way of portraying an if-you-were-in-my-shoes situation. The fact that it was a low budget production cannot be overlooked, nonetheless it is worth a watch. Maybe someone can decipher the message.