Wonderful character development!

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

I usually stay well away from religiously biased films. In this case the film title, The Seminarian, piqued my curiosity as I thought it may either be a unwatchable, cliché ridden, full-on, sex and insensibility, gay scene romp or a philosophical exploration of religious hypocrisy and the oppression it creates for humanity. Thankfully, this film dishes up few of those socio-sexual clichés.The script is intelligently written, with good, if not great, accompanying cinematography. As the subject matter is of a personal, inner nature, no Lean or Powell majesty was required. The claustrophobic atmosphere of a Seminary was suited to the predominantly fixed angle shots.The only weakness of The Seminarian was the actors (especially Ryan, the protagonist). His gentle, considerate and emasculated, though, not effeminate, personality would have been better cast by using a less gay mannered man. Ryan's best male friend, also a seminarist, seemed to have not a clue about his sexuality even though his best friends' girlfriend/fiancée appears to have suspected...all along.I thought Bradley, the focus of Ryan's seemingly wasted affections, was a great character; deeply damaged, Bradley is cruising through a pot-holed life perpetually in the wrong gear and selecting anguish, self-pity, evasiveness, neediness and self-avoiding nymphomania for fuel. Though viewers only get to see him for several seconds throughout the entire film, his actions (don't blink, you'll miss them) are crucial to The Seminarian's thesis.The cast of seminarist's, armed only with their own delusional focus of belief, has certain of them playing right into the hand of another of their God's vile and cheap tricks. The result being natural humanism conflated with a perverse supernatural Abrahamism.I gave it 8/10 purely because the protagonist is so well endowed... No I didn't, silly! Score is because I thought it was a unique and intelligent take on self-oppression coupled with religious dogma.P.S. Nose aside, I hazard Ryan's not a grower, more a shower.

I'd not read the reviews, or indeed anything about this before downloading it to watch, I thought it could be an interesting storyline - although one we've heard before.The opening ten minutes was enough to prove that one should not bother with this sort of content. I turned it off and went and watched some paint dry which was more interesting than this stinker.Two days later I'd run out of paint so I thought i'd try again, being tenacious and all. What I was rewarded with was the most awful acting, and complete clichés everywhere in terms of the 'gay' storyline. This mixed with an awful presence of religious judgments was enough to do my head in.I didn't really find anything original in this at all, the stories have been told better by plenty of film makers. I'm not surprised I've never heard of or seen these 'actors' elsewhere - their only real expertise was how to remain wooden and expressionless throughout, even in the occasional moments that might otherwise elicit a response.Ultimately this is a good 90 mins of my life I'll never get back, I cannot for the life of me think of any aspect of this movie that redeems it.Oh one last comment, I think the film maker threw in several penis shots just to create interest (or enthusiasm), all it served to do was highlight that this movie wasn't the only flaccid thing going on on my TV screen.I would say if you have 90 mins up your sleeve, and you can't find any drying paint or grass growing to watch, then you could bore yourself with this debacle of a movie.

I found this to be a refreshing film and very satisfying. I watch many gay movies and find many to be mindless. I am forgiving of many flaws, but not poor writing. This film delivers excellent writing. I wondered for a while whether this was originally a play. Material starting life in another medium has usually been well thought out. I read one of the other reviewers who found the action too slow. Perhaps like many people, that reviewer is too impatient. They cannot wait around for character development and their impatience is their loss. I did not find this slow-moving at all.I found the relationship between Ryan and his mother believable. There was one scene where Ryan is ending his visit with his mother that I wished the camera had lingered just a little longer on his mother's face as she watches Ryan leave. We could have read in our own thoughts. No doubt some would have complained, though. Perhaps some were put off by the fact that the majority of characters were Evangelical Christians who were not easy cardboard targets.This film does not pretend to be anything but what it is and I found it to be immensely satisfying. This is one for repeat viewing.

The trailer portrayed the film very promising but as I sat at its premiere I could not wait to get out of the theater. The audience agrees as you can hear and see their reaction to its slow paced development that lead to nothing and/or the awkward script. I am not sure why a lot of people are raving about this film. Perhaps it's production quality is slightly better than other homosexual-base films, or maybe just certain viewers only enjoyed its male frontal scenes? PRODUCTION: Above-average, simple sets. ACTING: Unimpressive and most of the actors did not commit to their characters. Therefore, it's harder for the audience to connectDIRECTING: See all above. Enough said.