To me, this movie is perfection.

the audience applauded

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

OK i just watched the film. My first thoughts was that how stupid I was to waste 90 mins for this nonsense. Blank here blank there, I was annoyed that movie makers left so many story lines unfinished. And I felt like this was 2 hour movie cut in 1 and a half. And I think that you may have felt so too since you are here reading some reviews afterwards.But then happened something that I love in films. It got me thinking. Thinking, imagining and wondering. I started rethinking about those scenes that left a void in my mind and i realized that the answer still was there even if it wasn't shown in picture. There were so many symbolic stuff going on here and there that I probably also missed many, but still got some answers though.I suggest that you see the movie yourself if you still haven't for some reason. Amazing and elegant acting in every role. Especially the leads. But also the girl in the end which i learned was a panic replacement (from the street nearby filming the scene) for the first selected actress for the role, it was simply beautiful, beautiful in few seconds on the screen. Also have to mention Marisa Tomei, shes got the magic, my secret fantasy girl haha.Okay enough for me to be talking here but one last thing, if you want my opinion of those unfinished business that the movie probably left for you too. I think that you should pay attention to Cyrano de Bergerac and compare it in this film maybe it opens up something. And maybe some expert may know better but the classic music in the film gives you some clues too to digest the story line.What first felt like a lousy and loose directing, few minutes afterwards started to feel like a well thought and carefully put together and very delicate masterpiece. Have to respect.Love is strange! In many forms as shown in the film. Thank you for reading!

A modern day version of the 1937 Leo McCarey film "Make Way for Tomorrow," with a gay married couple in place of the elderly husband and wife who served as the focus of the earlier film. "Love Is Strange" has two wonderful actors at its center -- John Lithgow and Alfred Molina -- but they're not convincing as a gay couple, coming across instead like old college buddies crashing with one another. The film is too morose and dreary by far -- the saving grace of McCarey's film is the final third, when the elderly parents embark on one final day of being together before being separated indefinitely (perhaps forever), and they open a window for the viewer on to the rich history they share and which their selfish children have no knowledge of. The film is still tragic, but the tragedy is tempered a bit by the fact that these two people have enjoyed a life together and built a world of memories with each other that no one can take from them. No such message is conveyed in "Love Is Strange"; the result is more depressing than it is bittersweet."Love Is Strange" is yet one more cautionary tale for those who want to remake classics. Don't bother if you're going to make a film that is inferior in every way to the original.Grade: B-

Kevin's review of Love is Strange is overly critical and I wonder why it drips with anger about a movie, which while flawed in some parts, is overall a considered, well-acted and beautifully photographed piece of cinema. For once not only is it a delight to see positive representations of older people on the screen but it's refreshing to see the depiction of 2 older gay men in a celebrated way. Often older gay men and lesbians are absent not only in cinema but also in their respective communities, which seem obsessed with youthfulness. And if you don't understand why Uncle Ben's grand nephew, Joey, is crying towards the end then you've missed a key part of the movie, which in a mainstream Hollywood movie would be milked for every emotion from the audience. Here it is marked with subtlety. Rather than continue responding to Kevin's misrepresentation of the movie and lack of insight, let me express my own thoughts. Ben and George are older gay men who have been married for 39 years. They live comfortably in a New York apartment; Ben drawing a pension and painting and George teaching music at a local Catholic school. There trusting intimacy with each other comes from a long-term relationship which has weathered storms but remained honest. This is borne out several times during the movie and notably in a bar when they're having drinks together. In the opening moments of the movie they marry and celebrate with family and close friends. When George returns to school after the term break the headmaster, Father Raymond, dismisses George for his public declaration of his sexuality, even though the school community has been aware of George's relationship for the entirety of his employment (13 years). As a result, Ben and George can no longer afford to continue buying the apartment they're living in. They move out while they look for alternative accommodation thinking that it will be only a short time before they find somewhere. Consequently, they ask friends and family to accommodate them in the short-term; they agree and are more than willing to help out. Ben's niece, who lives upstate, assumes that it's her place to accommodate them because she has the room. However, the other friends and family, knowing George and Ben are urban Manhattanites and would hate a rural lifestyle, insist they should remain in the city, which they love and know. Consequently George is accommodated by the 2 gay cops in the downstairs apartment and Ben stays with his nephew and his partner and their son and bunks in with the son in his bedroom. The accommodation is hardly satisfactory for these 2 seniors; George sleeps on a couch but only when the 2 gay cops finish there entertaining after their shifts. The movie focuses on the relationships in the home of Ben's nephew and the difficulties experienced by Ben and George living apart in residences with vastly different house rules. Ben and George find it difficult to find accommodation and George discovers for various reasons that after they move from their apartment, the amount of money left over is miniscule because of taxes … etc. Eventually, at a party, George bumps into Ian, an Englishman, who is about to move out of his apartment and this is where the breakthrough occurs in resolving Ben and Georges accommodation problems. But is it too late? This movie is well crafted and beautifully acted not only by the 2 main characters Alfred Molina and John Lithgow but most of the supporting cast. It's a movie that suggests that the rights of gay men and lesbians haven't necessarily been addressed by the right for them to legally marry. In fact, it is clear that gay men and lesbians still have a long way to go to attain equal rights in some sections of society. It is a considered story that is lightly accessorised with moving music throughout and nothing more. The camera work captures New York City in the most amazing light at times and clearly demonstrates the reasons why Ben and George are at home here and love it so much. I was moved by this movie in a number of ways and most of the audience in the cinema seemed to be affected the same way. Hardly any left until the last credits had rolled, a rarity in most cinemas these days. I highly recommend this movie; go and see it and be pleasantly surprised!

"Life has its obstacles but I learnt early on they will be lessoned with honesty." Ira Sach's begins and ends his feature with the music of Frederic Chopin, it's an exquisite piece of music and sets the tone for the film.Love is Strange is a New York story about George and Ben played by Molina and Lithgow who decide to get married. George is a music teacher in a catholic school and Ben is an artist. They have been together for approximately forty years, they are comfortable, living in a spacious apartment in Manhattan, then suddenly George is sacked from his job as a music teacher at the Saint Grace Academy. The ageless John Corbett as the Head Priest represents the hypocrisy of the catholic church. "it's important that you don't question your faith" George a catholic is told. Suddenly their lives are in free-fall, close family and friends come on board to support what at first appears to be a temporary arrangement. The apartment with a mortgage and taxes attached is sold for a massive profit of 17,500 the couple begin looking for a new apartment to live in. This becomes progressively more problematic in a competitive market and a strict budget. Seventy-one year old Ben goes to live with his nephew Elliot and his writer wife Kate (Tomei). He sleeps on a bunk bed shared with the couples moody teenage son Joey (Charlie Tahan) whilst George stays with gay friends in the downstairs apartment, who happen to be cops and seem to have a party ever second night. Tensions begin to rise, as the impositions of time and personal space takeover. A conversation between the chatty Ben and the frustrated Kate ends when he tells the exasperated writer, "I can't really work if there is someone else around," which signifies the underlying tensions within this claustrophobic space.The film is simply shot, little camera flourishes are on display, shot largely inside the homes and the streets of Manhattan Sachs creates a rich tapestry of complex human characters, his camera lingers stationary on his performers, for long periods to ensure he captures what is going on inside their heads. The strength of the film is in the script and performances. It will be hard to find a more sharply observed and well written script this year. Molina and Lithgow are wonderful together, see their duet "You've got what it takes" but the whole ensemble are simply terrific, Charlie Tahan as Joey is a young actor to watch.