Watch Love and Death on Long Island For Free

I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Love and Death on the Long Island Pathe chain of movies screen more than 50 films every 2 months of different genre, and I knew that they are going to screen this "gay classic" in one of their night shows. I read the reviews on IMDb and was keen to have a go at the movie. I had several motivations – first, it was called a "classic", second, I had never been to a night show alone in Amsterdam (so wanted to venture out and feel the city) and third, with curiosity I wanted to know more about the gay people of Amsterdam – who this people are? How do they behave? Are there any peculiarity / characteristic they possess? The movie is about a widower - who falls in love with a film icon while watching a movie, meets him, builds a contact, discloses his true love for the hero, and gets rejected.Does not it sound familiar? So many times in our lives we have adored and loved our film icon. The premise was good. Sometimes the adulation turns into devotion and obsession. I know about physical and sexual fantasies one has around these film icons – mostly of hetero-sexual nature. But this film provides a new premise of love and sexual longing within the same sex. That concept is interesting, and the liberal mind of mine was able to empathies and accepts such story-line.But the movie was badly made. The script was weak. It looked like a stage drama. The screenplay was also staged and over expressive. John Hurt seems to be a good actor but in this movie he was in wrong hands – the director, Richard Kwietniowski, who is famous for making short gay movies (and most of them are very poorly rated). Richard was lucky that he got John Hurt for this role.The direction was poor. The movie looked like a "B" grade movie. Only saving grace was – at times – very good visual shots by cinematographer Oliver Curtis.The dialogues were funny – but suitable for a stage drama. I heard some laughs during the movie and I could not make out whether it was because the scenes were funny or ridiculous.Just a trivia, that the movie hall was 80% packed – with mostly middle aged and old men who came in couples or gangs. There were very few lonely riders like me. I guess there were only three women in the show – because those persons had long hair.I give some grace for the concept and give 2.5 stars out of 10.(Stars 2.5 out of 10)

What a wonderful piece of acting John Hurt gives us as Giles a naive English writer visiting Long Isalnd for the first time. Completely obsessed with the discovery of all the modern electronic gadgetry, he purchases TV and video equipment, shuts himself away and enters a new and exciting world.He becomes besotted with the image of a handsome young actor Ronnie Bostock (Jason Priestley) a favourite among teen-age movie-goers. It's as if he is starting a completely new life with a new warmth he has never known before.The urge to help Ronnie in his career so that he will always be close to him is the predominant theme of the film. John Hurt's performance as the older man restraining his true feelings for a handsome young man of another generation is faultless and truly absorbing. Conversations between the two men are the highlights of the film and the confession scene extremely moving.Ronnie Bostock's girl friend Audrey ( Fiona Loewi) is both charming and beautiful and adds a sweet touch to the story. She is responsible for bringing the writer and actor together. The story is punctuated with little episodes of wry humour brought about by people who live entirely different lives.Altogether a very satisfying film that shows how some of us live in a cocoon unaware of the extreme joy and subsequent disappointment that lies beyond.

*POSSIBLE SPOILERS IN THE SECOND HALF*This was a film I was looking very much forward to, as I had just seen "Death in Venice" the day before, of which this is supposed to be a pastiche/parody. (Well, I think it is, in a way...)I must say that I was a bit disappointed by the film itself, I wouldn't say it is really exceptional filmmaking - especially the dialogue and the general look of the movie could have been more spirited. But nevertheless it is a nice, entertaining film - with a stellar performance by John Hurt.I didn't think about "Gods and Monsters" (one of my all-time favorites!) while watching this, though John Hurt's face constantly reminded me of Ian McKellen's (they even resemble each other physically in my view). But as so many people mentioned it here, now I think there are definitely some similarities in the storylines and characters of the two movies. The "confession scene" at the end was the best and most moving of it all, wonderfully played by Hurt - and proving at last that Jason Priestley is a better actor than he has been given credit for. His facial reaction to the confession was most impressive and would have honored even an actor of higher reputation.As for the interpretation of De'Ath's motives: I think this confession is indeed exactly the moment when he - under the pressure of never seeing Ronnie again as the teen flick star has to go to Vermont and then to L. A. - finally realizes that he is in fact in love with the young man and also desires him on the corporal level, not merely "admires his beauty without interest". (Otherwise he wouldn't mention explicitely to Ronnie that Verlaine and Rimbaud were lovers - even at the risk of losing him.) One can see during the conversation how De'Ath becomes more and more desperate as Ronnie seem more and more reluctant to listen to him - till he at last makes his fully revealing confession.Ronnie's girlfriend (very nicely and naturally played by Fiona Loewi) seems to discover the truth about De'Ath earlier than her boyfriend - I think this happens in the scene where she proposes to Gilles to call his non-existing "god-daughter" (who is supposedly a fan of Ronnie's) and the older man gets embarrassed by this. I think it is also she who wants to take away Ronnie from De'Ath as soon as possible by taking him to Vermont and then to L.A. ("He doesn't know [about going to L.A.] yet", she tells De'Ath during the baseball match). However, I may be misinterpreting something here. But no matter - the look on De'Ath's face after Ronnie has made the homerun reveals about everything he feels for the young man...I give it 7/10 (5/10 for the film, 10/10 for Hurt).

John Hurt is a great actor, and his performance in this film shows just how great. There have been plenty of reviews here that detail the plot and the essential characteristics of Giles De'Ath. What struck me even more on seeing the film a second time is what an extraordinary balancing act Hurt pulls off. De'Ath could so easily have been a caricature, a bumbling old fogey; Hurt shows that, while he is indeed out of touch, he is also highly intelligent and unapologetic about his fusty ways - and he also has the imagination to broaden his horizons. There were some lovely scenes showing other people's amused reactions to his naivety about modern ways, particularly those with his agent.I've never seen Jason Priestley in anything else (hey, does that mean I'm like De'Ath, an old fuddy-duddy?), but he certainly holds his own in the face of an acting titan, just as Brendan Fraser did in Gods & Monsters - and yes, there are a LOT of similarities between the two films. And I really enjoyed Fiona Loewi's performance as his girlfriend - what else has she done? The smaller roles were extremely well cast (as others have noted, Maury Chaykin is a treat), even De'Ath's sister-in-law, who is only in one brief scene, but conveys a lot about how highbrow and inaccessible his novels are considered to be.I'm also not the only one who has noticed echoes of Death in Venice, not only in the title and the storyline, but also, I'll swear at one point there was a Mahler symphony playing on the soundtrack - was that another nod? Then there is the artistic convention of the older mentor and the younger muse, which is explicitly raised in the film. There are a lot of interesting ideas about the nature of love, and about how even the most set in their ways can suddenly find a new lease of life.This is a film that rewards more than one viewing. See it if only for a truly majestic performance from John Hurt, a masterclass in subtlety, defiance and thwarted passion.