Soft Lad is a (very) low-budget indie movie that dreams big and sadly falls short, mostly due to an over-reliance on melodrama and an unwillingness to let its characters breathe and grow.
The story follows David (Jonny Labey), a young man about to start a promising career in dance, and the fallout of his doomed affair with Jules, his sister's husband (Daniel Brocklebank), culminating in news that will devastate an entire family.
Labey gives a committed performance as the naive David, but there just isn't a lot of depth to it, and the often atrociously weak and clunky script limits things still further, displaying writer/director/producer Leon Lopez's tendency to restrict his characters to very well worn territory. The backstory of David's two-year "drunken mistake" with his brother-in-law is revealed via a massive and rather unbelievable info dump delivered to Stacey the Convenient Friend (Laura Ainsworth), whose friendship with David - strained by unresolved feelings - is a small glimpse of a more multi-faceted story, but still ends up as a predictable and tired detail.
The other characters fare little better, with Daniel Brocklebank's Jules coming across more as a smarmy classist caricature than a villain anyone could sympathise with or truly care about, and the movie jangles with missed opportunities. There are moments where it almost seems like it will turn into a neat psychological drama, but be prepared to wave at those moments as they pass by, because sadly the story never embraces its dark side, neither fully exploring Jules' capacity for callousness or manipulation, or the selfishness that can motivate people in the name of love.
There is a brave performance from Suzanne Collins as Jane, David's sister, though again she's let down by a poor script and very little support in the movie's climactic scenes, which descend into awkward melodrama. Craig Stein as Sam, David's new boyfriend, also makes a valiant effort, and choreographed the one dance scene we get to see: another symptom of the movie's disconnection with itself. Dance is presented as David's dream, but there's a massive missed opportunity in actually using it to convey the enormity of his struggle, or anything of his passion and individuality. The supposedly positive ending (pun totally intended) feels like a tacked on afterthought, and the whole movie feels unbalanced in the time devoted to aspects of different characters' struggles.
Structurally and technically, Soft Lad is trying to be an indie movie punching above its weight, but its reliance on two dimensional characters and tired "gay issue" themes - closeted married men, HIV, poppers and hookups - that feel neither fresh nor original just results in a dull, clichéd experience... and I say that as someone who will generally overlook poor direction, writing, performances, or camera work in a low budget movie that honestly has something to say.
Probably what I dislike most about this movie, though, is its erasure of bisexuality. Jules is presented as a married MSM, and for a few moments it almost looks like the movie will dedicate a little time to exploring his emotional conflict over his sexuality and identity (he claims to develop feelings for David; the first time he's fallen for a man), perhaps showing something of the delicate balance - and differences - between sexual and emotional attraction.
Unfortunately, the only labels that ever get mentioned by any character are "gay" and "straight", and I was left with the feeling that, if the word "bi" had been whispered at all, it would have been in yet another cliché about predatory promiscuity. It's sad to see yet another opportunity wasted in this film, but it appears to be part of a pattern, and that's disappointing.
Bottom line: if you're a soap fan who enjoys emotional drama and can overlook technical limitations, this might be up your street. It's certainly nice to see more British drama from the North that doesn't focus on a fetishistic view of "northern-ness", and a lot was certainly made of the tiny budget. Ultimately, though, there are so many more gay dramas out there that are just better in every way.
The story follows David (Jonny Labey), a young man about to start a promising career in dance, and the fallout of his doomed affair with Jules, his sister's husband (Daniel Brocklebank), culminating in news that will devastate an entire family.
Labey gives a committed performance as the naive David, but there just isn't a lot of depth to it, and the often atrociously weak and clunky script limits things still further, displaying writer/director/producer Leon Lopez's tendency to restrict his characters to very well worn territory. The backstory of David's two-year "drunken mistake" with his brother-in-law is revealed via a massive and rather unbelievable info dump delivered to Stacey the Convenient Friend (Laura Ainsworth), whose friendship with David - strained by unresolved feelings - is a small glimpse of a more multi-faceted story, but still ends up as a predictable and tired detail.
The other characters fare little better, with Daniel Brocklebank's Jules coming across more as a smarmy classist caricature than a villain anyone could sympathise with or truly care about, and the movie jangles with missed opportunities. There are moments where it almost seems like it will turn into a neat psychological drama, but be prepared to wave at those moments as they pass by, because sadly the story never embraces its dark side, neither fully exploring Jules' capacity for callousness or manipulation, or the selfishness that can motivate people in the name of love.
There is a brave performance from Suzanne Collins as Jane, David's sister, though again she's let down by a poor script and very little support in the movie's climactic scenes, which descend into awkward melodrama. Craig Stein as Sam, David's new boyfriend, also makes a valiant effort, and choreographed the one dance scene we get to see: another symptom of the movie's disconnection with itself. Dance is presented as David's dream, but there's a massive missed opportunity in actually using it to convey the enormity of his struggle, or anything of his passion and individuality. The supposedly positive ending (pun totally intended) feels like a tacked on afterthought, and the whole movie feels unbalanced in the time devoted to aspects of different characters' struggles.
Structurally and technically, Soft Lad is trying to be an indie movie punching above its weight, but its reliance on two dimensional characters and tired "gay issue" themes - closeted married men, HIV, poppers and hookups - that feel neither fresh nor original just results in a dull, clichéd experience... and I say that as someone who will generally overlook poor direction, writing, performances, or camera work in a low budget movie that honestly has something to say.
Probably what I dislike most about this movie, though, is its erasure of bisexuality. Jules is presented as a married MSM, and for a few moments it almost looks like the movie will dedicate a little time to exploring his emotional conflict over his sexuality and identity (he claims to develop feelings for David; the first time he's fallen for a man), perhaps showing something of the delicate balance - and differences - between sexual and emotional attraction.
Unfortunately, the only labels that ever get mentioned by any character are "gay" and "straight", and I was left with the feeling that, if the word "bi" had been whispered at all, it would have been in yet another cliché about predatory promiscuity. It's sad to see yet another opportunity wasted in this film, but it appears to be part of a pattern, and that's disappointing.
Bottom line: if you're a soap fan who enjoys emotional drama and can overlook technical limitations, this might be up your street. It's certainly nice to see more British drama from the North that doesn't focus on a fetishistic view of "northern-ness", and a lot was certainly made of the tiny budget. Ultimately, though, there are so many more gay dramas out there that are just better in every way.