Everyone (2004) User Reviews

Altman Lite

[roedyg · 7/10 · 20 August 2006]

This movie is a bit like an Altman movie with a giant cast of characters where you hop from person to person to track what is happening as they prepare for and attend a gay wedding. The plot intricately weaves the lives and the themes of death and bearing children.

Brendan Fletcher as Dylan, the manipulative, sexy street kid mom invites just to stir things up steals the show.

Many times in the movie I screamed out "no gay person would ever say that". It was clearly written by a sympathetic clever straight person imagining what gay folk would say. Much of the dialog is far too bitchy to come out of the mouths of today's young gays, and certainly not from a couple about to marry.

Lots of nudity and sex. The sex scenes were quite convincing.

It was shot on location in Vancouver. It spooked me several times when the set looked so much like the house I used to live in with the love of my life on East 27th Avenue.

The film is an odd mix of comedy and tragedy. Some of the co-incidences in the plot seem out of character unless you treat the movie as comedy.

The photography and sound is fully professional, something you don't expect from local film.

The film contains a scene, the most honest I have seen in film, about what is like to be male and horny. On the other hand, characters often do things for motives I cannot fathom.

Drama at a Gay Union Ceremony in Vancouver

[sf_fred · 7/10 · 17 May 2005]

Today is the day Ryan (Matt Fentiman) and Grant (Mark Hildreth) will host their civil union at home. Their collective brothers, step-sister, and Ryan's mother all show up, most with spouses. Ryan's mother (Katherine Billings), needing help carrying a box of decorations, enlists the help of a street urchin, Dylan (Brendan Fletcher). Let the party begin.

The audience becomes aware of problems the guests have, many revolving around children or the lack thereof. Attitudes toward each other and toward the thought of a gay civil union raise tension levels within and between the participants.

Homeless Dylan has a sense of the dramatic and of the inner workings of the people around him. He can nudge some people toward happiness, but it is hard to keep matters in balance.

There are a variety of outcomes, but I was very pleased at the choices made in resolving the most damaging situations. The movie as a whole makes a good impression.

The lighting, sets, and direction were all right. There were skin shots of all the males and two of the females.

Although some of the acting may routine and some of the dialog may be unlikely, special mention must be made of the performance of Brendan Fletcher as Dylan. He was able to keep his emotional intelligence on view as he dealt with the characters and combinations of characters he faced. Even when he had no lines, as when he listened to the motor-mouthed party planner Rena (Carly Pope), he was able to stand in the background and indicate he knew exactly what was going on. His performance towered over everyone else's.

Side comment: I first noticed Brendan Fletcher in the short film "Touch" in the "Boy's Briefs 2" collection. He was terrific there too. I think a film that could show a plausible arc of his life from "Touch" to "Everyone" would be spectacular.

Everyone is a bit weird in Canada, and that's fine

[m67165 · 7/10 · 30 November 2005]

This movie is a little strange. When it started, I was a little worried it would turn out to be a drama instead of a comedy. And not a very good drama. Then it started getting better and better, and soon I was laughing out loud at some scenes. Be sure to watch the final credits, for there is a hidden last scene.

This movie tries to deal with some serious stuff, mainly relationships, be them gay or not. I don't know if the director wanted it to happen that way, but it did feel a bit weird, like I wasn't sure if some scenes were supposed to be sad or funny. Maybe he went for the REALISM effect, as in life it often does happen that you don't know if you want to cry or laugh. Anyway, this film was mostly funny, and I'm glad I saw it. I seems to say that everyone is a bit weird, but then again things CAN work out fine. I want to see this director's next movie.

Better than that

[Shuggy · 7/10 · 4 August 2009]

I wasn't going to review this but there were so many negatives, I feel compelled to add a positive.

This is a sweet little movie, that goes from downbeat to downbeat but ends on an upbeat. The delivery is occasionally a bit clunky (some of the cast still in film school?), but on the whole the notes it strikes are true. Everyone in "Everyone"'s a bit dysfunctional, but everyone has their moments - just like real life.

It is, basically, a comedy. Sometimes the comedy of cringe, and you're saying "Don't go there" or "Don't go in there!" or "Oh no!' but nothing is so stoopid as to suspend your belief. ("Meet the Fockers" this is not.) It takes a little unfunny while to set the scene. Dead babies and children figure rather too prominently for a comedy.

None of the characters is clear-cut; all have light and shade, as in real life, from the mother who seems at first to be a street person herself, to the punk she picks up on the way, to the celebrant whose priestly smoothness is ruffled by a guest who assumes she's lesbian.

Perhaps the funniest moment is the one we don't see. The whole movie looks forward to a big event. Suddenly we're past it and we know exactly what happened, what didn't happen, and why.

Above all this is a Canadian comedy, which is a euphemism for "not a US comedy". As a New Zealander I can relate to its understatement: don't expect too much and you'll love it.

(Chromatic abberation - colour-casting at edges - is sometimes visible near the sides of the screen. Cheap lenses?)

Much better than expected

[jm10701 · 4 January 2012]

I'm glad I paid attention to the few positive reviews of this movie instead of the many negative reviews, because I really enjoyed it. I disagree with at least one other positive review, however, in not loving the ending. In my opinion, its moral - that yoga heals all wounds, or something like that - is the only trite moment in the movie. UNLESS that is where the "comedy" mentioned in some official descriptions suddenly appears, in which case it flew right over my head. But until then, this is an amazingly intelligent and complex movie, which manages to present thirteen major characters without a single caricature or stereotype - except the mother, who is a painfully and teeth-gratingly annoying caricature of The Gay Man's Tasteless Wedding-and-Grandchildren-Obsessed Faghag Mother.

Among the other twelve characters, not one is predictable or familiar from countless other gay and straight dysfunctional-family movies. Although few are likable, each one is interesting and unpredictable, with substance and more than one dimension.

That may be why so few reviewers like this movie: it is NOT predictable, it is NOT full of familiar, predigested, easily pigeonholed stereotypical movie characters. Except for the mother, there is not a single familiar character in this movie; each one (and twelve is a LOT) must be looked at individually and with attention and care, and that is not what movie audiences are used to. This very intelligent movie challenges the viewer to pay attention, and evidently most do not want to. Maybe they are thrown for a loop by the abundance of riches this movie offers.

Not what I expected to see or what I wanted to see

[joshuastephen4 · 4/10 · 6 December 2005]

I rented this movie with no prior knowledge of it. I simply saw Carly Pope in the cast list and thought, "How fun. I remember her from 'Popular'." I thought this was going to be a funny movie, not a depressing flick about depressing people and their depressing lives. I love movies in which families get together for holidays or events (ie. 'Eulogy' or 'Home For The Holidays') and you witness their personal insanities and eccentricities. But I like them because they portray these families in a light that reminds us of our own relatives and allows us to remember that families are insane yet normal. This movie does not do that. It simply removes any faith you may have about commitment, fidelity, love or happiness. I am not a hopeless romantic or blind optimist, but the problems in these peoples' lives did not warrant the amount of infidelity and self-pity that was portrayed. The only characters I enjoyed were the mom, Carly Pope's caterer/bartender and Dylan (only for his quirkiness, his home-wrecker side really bothered me). Basically, this movie is not funny and would have more success if it presented itself as a drama.

Tried too hard

[Gopforlife · 1/10 · 11 August 2005]

I realized when I rented this movie that it was a drama and not a comedy. That became apparent about 15 minutes into this drabfest. Everyone in this movie was so depressing (except Dylan, the homeless, druggie, homewrecking, but cute boy). I would love to know where these morons live so I can avoid running into them. In reflecting about any good things to comment on "Everyone", I was thinking how all these losers made no contribution to each other or anyone trying to stay awake through it.

I could go on for hours about this dreary yawnfest, but trust me, stay away at all costs.

Terrific, Clever Film

[bgray31 · 9/10 · 7 February 2007]

I would seem to be in the minority of user commenters -- I had this film from Netflix and liked it so much that I've subsequently bought it for my DVD library. Unlike other people who commented, I've known people who talk like these characters and, despite the seriousness and depression experienced by some of the cast I for one (and only one, apparently) find much that is amusing in the film. The director (and author) and his cast are to be commended. I love this film. I'm not a cinema scholar but, unlike many independent films, the technical aspects are also very good. One does not come away with the impression that it was done on a minimal budget. Excellent sound, editing, scoring and everything else. Bouquets all round!

Getting married?

[dawh1 · 4/10 · 12 May 2005]

These guys have problems right from the beginning. Not only can't they agree on what to call the event they are having, they also can't agree on whether to have it or not, they can't agree on what they want to wear for it, and if I understood correctly, they think they're going to do it twice, this time for family, and later on for friends. Who ever does that? Nobody should go into a committed relationship this confused. This is what premarital counseling is for, and do they ever need it. How long have they been together so far? They are so on different wavelengths that one would think they just met the night before. Parts of this film are funny, parts of it drag, and very little of it is believable. I probably know about a dozen same-sex couples who have had a formal commitment ceremony, and none of them ever went about it this way. By the way, my favorite character is Dylan.

An emotionally disturbing movie

[kimbistrups · 8/10 · 4 May 2007]

"Everyone" is a very good movie, with great performances by most of the cast. It's got a rather simple plot, it's not hard to figure out what is going to happen, but that is not the nerve of the film. This film is really about people. People in love, people in doubt, people in denial, people in grief.

The story revolves around the gay couple who are getting married on their three years anniversary that also happens to be the day that one of the grooms brothers lost his son, three years earlier. They are preparing a rather informal ceremony and celebration and we follow them and their guests all through the day.

It's an emotional roller-coaster ride, and there is no rest; You go straight from one disaster to the next and there are only few truly happy moments on what was supposed to be the happiest day of their lives! I won't reveal the ending, but I will say, that it is a film that tends to haunt you for a while after watching it. Not just in a bad way, but you can't help but think about your own life after wards...

Confusing, slow, no development, pointless

[gravitations · 1/10 · 10 December 2005]

I tried to like this movie. I honestly tried. The setup sounded cute, and I really think that they could have made this movie work with a PLOT, a new script, a new cast, and a mind wipe for everyone who's seen it. Okay, this is harsh. If this is your movie and you're reading this, I appreciate the effort. Now here's some constructive criticism.

Most of your actors need help. The only ones I even remotely liked were the mother, the bottom in the proposed marriage, and the wife of the whiny doctor. I don't know any of their names, I didn't find myself caring enough about any of the characters to remember them. The acting got better as it went along, I'll give you that.

I can't blame the poor performance all on the actors. The dialogue was witless and uninspiring, insipid and boring all at the same time. All of the characters had the same voice, and it was a boring and pointless voice. I didn't get to know the characters because there were no characters. I could take the high road and say that this is some stroke of artistic prose here, that the movie was trying to express a single voice, that all of the characters were the mode of that voice, and that some unity of perspective is being charted here. Except I never found the voice of this movie in the first place, not even one voice in a cast of at least a dozen characters.

There may have been some point to the whole baby discussion. I looked for it--I figured that there must have been. The problem is, about halfway through the movie, I got so bored out of my mind I started fast forwarding. If I had to make a guess I'd have to say that it's some kind of reference to how funny it is that some people have everything that other people want, and yet it's the exact opposite of what they want themselves. Okay, sure, I can go along with that, but I don't see what this had to do with the point of the movie at all. I'm not even sure there was a point to this movie.

Whatever progression that there may have been in this movie was not only patently unrealistic, but boringly so. *SPOILER* The guy getting toked up in the hallway and then cheating on his partner right before their commitment ceremony could have been interesting I guess. Except he had no motivation--was he angry at his partner? Was he nervous about the wedding that he seemed to be the only one to care about? Was he so stoned out of his mind that he decided to screw the first little street bum that picked him up? That must have been some killer pot, if so.

The camera work was uninspiring and boring, it didn't do more than showcase the actors, like sticking a puppet show in a cardboard box. Sometimes that works--it ties into the gritty hopelessness of a movie--it underscores the harshness of reality, the lack of color. This wasn't one of these times.

The music was okay--it seemed to be appropriate, there could have been more of it.

The only thing I enjoyed about this movie was looking at the cute bottom in the tuxedo. No plot, no humor, no drama, no action, no intellect, no characters, no point, no voice, no soul. If the writer reads this review, you obviously have a passion for what you are trying to do--you couldn't have put all of this effort into something without a message to convey. I didn't get that message. I didn't even get a hint of that message. Keep working on it--it's out, it's on DVD, great. That doesn't mean you're done. Art is a reflection of the soul, and this movie had no soul. I'm sure you've seen plenty of crap out on DVD yourself. If you believe in this project, please do it again. I would love to see the movie that the synopsis told me I was going to see.

All in all, the 2004 version of Everyone is not worth your time, to anyone considering this movie. Look at the cover. Read the synopsis. They are by far the best parts of the movie. Don't waste your time or give yourself a headache trying to understand something that never goes anywhere and will ultimately leave you feeling disappointed and wishing that you'd rented something crass and commercial instead. At least there, you know what the point is--product placement dollars and the slight thrill of something big blowing up in a spectacular baroque display.

Depressing and disappointing

[lilly_mike · 1/10 · 25 June 2005]

A cast of depressive characters and disappointing gay stereotyping all wrapped in one film. A potentially wonderful plot device turns sour as a string of dark scenarios unfold. Few comic moments followed by repeated diatribes from unsympathetic characters. I was ready for a fresh approach to the subject matter, but was sorely disappointed by the contrived script which reduced both character and plot to depressing clichés. I had hoped the days were over when Hollywood viewed gay characters with such obvious disdain and stereotyping.The only standout performance is by the kooky mother whose love for her gay son was refreshing and funny.

Dysfunctional Movie About Dysfuctional People

[exvivre · 1/10 · 17 October 2005]

Within 15 minutes of beginning this film you will be overcome with the desire to press stop - go with this instinct. No rental fee is so high that you must continue slogging through this movie.

'Everyone' is centered around a Vancouver gay couple, their pending nuptials, and the onslaught of their myriad dysfunctional family members. The movie tries to take the idiosyncratic, neurotic personalities of the characters and to weave them into a cohesive storyline. Frankly, it fails miserably in the attempt.

Marchant (director) introduces one-dimensional characters by the dozen, gives them each a handful of dialogue with other bland characters, cuts away to another scene of wooden acting and dialogue, then expects the audience to take away some deep appreciation for life's problems. All the audience really takes away is a case of indigestion. 'Gosford Park' this certainly is not.

They Think They Do

[kirkfurlotte · 8/10 · 17 February 2005]

This is a great story of two guys who want to get married (maybe?). Their families come together on the day of their commitment ceremony while our to-be-wed couple experiences some breakdowns and breakthroughs in their relationship.

The ensemble is made up of the various brothers and sisters (and their partners) of each of our two leads. The story quickly expands to display the entire family, focusing on the already married couples of the two grooms. Each couples struggles with the everyday (for the most part) challenges of "married" life. Whether it's dealing with professional difficulties, extramarital affairs or simple miscommunication this film shows that marriage can be rough for everyone.

Take Some Ideas, Put Them in Blender, Hit Pulse

[ekeby · 3/10 · 27 January 2008]

And you get an uneven script, uneven direction, uneven acting, uneven you name it. There are little flashes of quality, but they're too short and too few.

The framework of family members gathering for an upcoming gay commitment ceremony presents a grab bag of themes and story lines, some connected, some not. Like another reviewer here, I really wasn't entirely sure about the dead baby. Or were there two? And what did that have to do with anything except the insensitivity of scheduling the ceremony on the anniversary of a child's death? I'm not giving anything away here--that's revealed pretty early on.

This movie does aspire to the Altmanesque, but the material doesn't warrant that approach. In fact, it does a disservice to the various story elements, some of which I couldn't make any sense of. Everything in an Altman movie has a reason for being there. There was no reason in this movie, for example, to have a motor-mouth "humorous" caterer. It didn't add anything--certainly not comic relief. It was just annoying.

There was a lot about this movie that was annoying. Ironically, the actress who played an actress was the worst actor in the movie. Most of the others were just passable, but, admittedly they didn't have a lot to work with. The director plays a surgeon who seems to have devolved into insanity, but an insanity that is not just unconvincing, it's just plain silly. The pre-ceremony argument of the couple didn't ring true either.

Every once in a great while I'd hear a good bit of dialog, or think that a plot point was interesting. But that happened rarely, certainly not enough to recommend this film.

Not a gay wedding

[jromanbaker · 10/10 · 25 July 2019]

This could have been the usual predictable gay wedding with the usual stock characters of a director's idea of gay people. It is not. Most of the character's in this witty and enjoyable film are ' straight ' and to this viewer everyone gay and straight are in the same boat of relationship confusion. This makes for a really adult comedy drama and works for most of the duration. The Altman-like cross cutting of characters was confusing at first as there was a bit too much baby deaths, and not being able to have babies, which bordered on the boring ( no offence to those with this situation, but it nearly reached saturation in this film ). I do not want to give away any spoilers but the homeless man seemed like a 21st century version of Pasolini's young man in ' Theorem ' gutting everyone to act and think about their lives. What he does to one of the prospective gay husbands reminded me a lot of the sexual disturbance in ' Theorem '. If this Pasolini film is beyond history for most people in this century I would urge viewers to track it down. The internalization of gay self hatred as a sexual turn on for the gay couple was also possibly tasteless to some, and not politically correct which added a welcome transgressive spice to the proceedings. Also please do not turn off after the end credits as another gay aspect comes hilariously into view. All in all an off beat film that could offend both gays and straights, but that in itself is a plus. The minus side is that unlike the stereotypical gay themed film it will not please enough gay people with fixed views or bigoted straights who dislike gay films. But then the director must have known he could not please everyone. I think it a must see and just misses out because of confusion at the beginning of being a truly excellent film. And the colour was terrible! A really major fault this.

Unfunny ...turned off within ten minutes

[terryhall2 · 5/10 · 10 January 2007]

Good looking groom-to-be Gale is living with a dumpy arrogant twit of a boyfriend who is not looking forward to being 'married' on the very day of his 'wedding'. Seems a bit late to have left it and quite honestly he deserves not to be married. What Gale is doing with this guy is hard to fathom. Bad script, a dialogue of swear words and characters I couldn't care a fig for, meant that the DVD went straight back into the packet. A shame really because there was so much potential to the film. The families could have been made more sympathetic to the audience, their characters developed in the context of the wedding itself, rather than before the wedding, which didn't tell us who was who and where they fitted in. Bad acting added to the boredom.

They seem sweet but i can't see love between...

[tranngocthanhtu · 5/10 · 7 October 2020]

They don't look like lovers, do they even love each others??? they're so annoy... I'd to see gay weddings, it my fav part in every films, but this film ruin it, okay, i can guess the plot twist clearly, but still i can't bear it, it something too terrable for me!