smfishe2
Where to start? Like Scrabble, all the pieces are there! Thomas Dekker. Thomas Dekker looks like what Michael Jackson might have hoped for with his 23rd plastic surgery. Thomas Dekker could don a long hair wig and play a female role without any further assistance from the make up department. Am I supposed to believe that this guys is a rugged outdoorsman? Jeremy Piven should have played the lead role! You dragged him out the way up to Canada for his short role! The producer should have kicked out the extra dough to cast Piven as the lead! You might have made your money back! The fact is, any male actor in this film would have been better in the lead role than Dekker. Dekker's luscious eye lashes and gentle features are a huge distraction! He is a pretty boy cast for a role that requires someone a bit more rugged, to put it lightly! This story is excellent and could have been knocked out of the park with some better casting decisions!
Mustang92
OMG, where do I begin on this mess of a so-called "movie"? This film is so bad, I wanted to kill myself too when it was over.Story problems:1) The script is horrible. It's boring, mundane, and there's very little conflict in it. Yes, a father loses his son at the beginning, but the "inner conflict" of this father is missing. The director was horrible here, apparently not able to really show the pain/struggle this father was going through (until his first "suicide attempt" near the end). Actually, I have to blame three people for the lack of effective performance by Thomas Dekker: The writer for a bad script, the director who couldn't elicit even a semblance of a father in turmoil, and Dekker himself for not having the chops to pull this role off. I actually heard just a few minutes of some interview the director did, who explained that the father killing himself at the end was not out of guilt, but out of a desire to be with his dead son in the afterlife. What???? We never saw that; we never saw or heard any conversation about the afterlife, we don't even know if the father thought an afterlife existed. I mean, come on, Herr Director, WTF are you thinking? Inventing some reasoning that isn't EVEN in the story, for what happens at the end? Are you nuts? If this is what you wanted in reasoning, then frickin' have the writer do a re-write. Frankly, it's movies like this that give indie films a bad name. And turn people off from seeking out non-studio, non-formulaic films.2) There are a lot of characters in this film. All of them are boring. We don't know who any of these people are, either. You keep thinking, expecting, that somewhere along the way, we'll know how people relate to one another and their connections with each other. No. Never happens. And of course we have a lesbian couple (no sex) because the writer and/or director wanted a lesbian couple as two characters in the film. Puuullleeeease.3) Many story point issues, or story logic issues too. Here's an example: The 3 year old boy who leaves the vehicle in the snow (who subsequently dies) is eventually found. But the 20- 25 people in the search party couldn't find him (it was daylight), and the father couldn't find him. Yet, we learn late in the movie that the boy only died a quarter mile from the vehicle. (That's 2.5 city blocks long, for reference.) So you're telling me, that with the father screaming for his son, his son never heard him? Or, presuming a 3 year old would cry out for help at some point, no one would hear him 2.5 "blocks" away? Or that the search dogs couldn't track a person's scent for 2.5 "blocks"? Or that the 25 search party people would miss someone 2.5 "blocks" from what became their base camp? Or -- and this is the best one yet -- the father who saw the boy's tracks in the snow, couldn't follow these for 2.5 "blocks"?? Puuullleeeease. (And despite references to it being a blizzard later in the film... sorry, it wasn't a blizzard when the father left the vehicle to walk around, and it wasn't a blizzard when he came back to the vehicle to find his son missing.)Performance problems:There's some talent available, in the cast that was chosen. And it was all wasted, because these characters are all the SAME at the end of the film as they were at the beginning. No change, no growth, nothing interesting to watch. And by and large, all the performances were flat. I think this director just doesn't know how to direct actors and elicit compelling performances out of them. Well... she could get them to cry, because there must have been at least 10 instances where someone cries in the film. By the 6th time, you're reaching for the razor blades.Directing problems:Well, I've already trashed the director thus far, who at least deserves it for this piece of garbage. Look, the storyline had potential. (And I'm sure it did since it was based on a book.) But that potential was not realized in the screenplay, and certainly not via the direction. Drama and conflict is not attained by having all your characters be flat, with a few of them crying a bunch of times. Also, the pacing is really, REALLY bad. How bad? Someone walks out of a room (after an uneventful scene), but we hold on the empty room now for a couple of beats. I mean, that's ridiculous.This movie is not worth your time. Unless you want to seriously torture yourself.
taclark
The power of this film depends on your perspective. Have you raised a 3-year old? Have you experienced the death of a child? Most importantly, is the story believable and can you put yourself in to it?Unfortunately, few watching this film know it mirrors the real life story of Paul Wayment and his son Gage: The following are excerpts (Spoilers) from the real story found on pulitzer.org: "Six inches of snow covered the small body. Gage lay in a fetal position, his hands clenched, his eyes wide open. His pajama legs were up to knees; his feet had worn through his thin booties. His throat was blue. In his eyes were frozen tears." Paul Wayment's statement to the court: "If I could change places with my son, I would give up my life without question. But I can't. The life that I now live in is the hell that I alone created. The pain is incomprehensible. . . . The word 'sorry' does not even begin to express the feelings I now live with. . . . I admit full responsibility for my actions and will accept whatever punishment you deem appropriate." "They found his body (the father) on a sloping ridge next to a pair of binoculars, a Pepsi Big Gulp and a Winchester .243 hunting rifle. He'd picked a spot, surrounded by quaking aspens, that provided a view of the hills where they'd searched for Gage. Julie George imagined his final afternoon. He'd sat with the binoculars, surveying where Gage died. At sunset--he would have waited for his beloved dusk--he'd put down the binoculars and picked up the rifle." "At the courthouse that afternoon, (Judge) Hilder sat dazed in his chambers. Tears filled his eyes."http://www.pulitzer.org/works/2002-Feature-Writing Knowing the real story makes this film, Angel's Crest, much, much more powerful. It's too bad Angel's Crest wasn't made to be a true story with a follow up explanation at the end telling of the ongoing lives of the people involved.Those that have rated this film poorly or written unflattering reviews might want to watch it again after reading the true-life story.
RocknRollPt2
All the great vistas and quality cinematography, can't make up for the lackluster production and direction of this film. Thomas Dekker looks more like he should be playing Gerard Way in the "My Chemical Romance" story, than a grease monkey in a hillbilly town. Then you have the textbook lesbian couple seen in almost all movies made in the past 10 years. Juxtaposed with the overtly religious mother with the alcoholic daughter, this story seems more like it's trying to please a film school students liberal teacher. No heroes, no anti-heroes. No moral, no point. Everyone seems to be in a rut here. No rhyme or reason. A better name for this would be "Shit Happens". Nice to see Mira Sorvino. I can't understand why she did this though. No opportunities for her to shine in this, but she plays her role well. Same goes for Jeremy Piven, though in his case he should fire his agent. He's a great actor, and plays his part well, but seems constrained by the script and/or director. Not bad, but not good either.
