edwagreen Alfred Molina and his partner give bravura performances, but enough with the gay thing already.We see joy at the wedding of the couple, only to see one lose his job as a music teacher at a Catholic school for obvious reasons afterwards.As stated, the acting is excellent and Marisa Tomei steals every scene she is in as the aunt-by-marriage to one of the gay partners in the film.The story also points out the apartment crisis in the city once the couple loses their apartment and is forced to live separately while desperately searching for new digs. That part of the film reminded me of the great Make Way for Tomorrow, circa 1937 with Victor Moore and Beulah Bondi. Housing affects all people regardless of sexual orientation.

Rick James A lovely and touching film with some frustrations. The script is echt New York, right down to the reference to the Department of the Aging, the disdain for Poughkeepsie and the invocation of rent control. Never mind that the latter is regulated by the state not the city as the script states, or that you can't pass on a controlled apartment willy-nilly to a guy you met at a party. It's still pretty authentic, including the ugly interiors of the Brooklyn apartment and the stunning final scene in the West Village. True New Yorkers discern from the script that the elderly couple bought as renters when it converted to co-op 5 years earlier, presumably at an insider's price, so their net from the recent sale in 2013 is bound to be much greater than the 17,000-odd the script gives them. The longueurs on themes of Chopin add to the atmosphere. The acting is good if somewhat forced because this little film was probably shot over 2 weeks when Lithgow and Molina had the time. The political statement comes early, that a religious institution is exempt from civil-rights laws and can discriminate against someone based on their sexual orientation, which is otherwise forbidden in New York city and state; and that's why the church can fire George because the archbishop doesn't like him being gay. It seems gratuitous that George out of the blue writes to the parents of the school to affirm his faith despite having been wronged: that seems like an afterthought inserted to make the movie extend to 94 minutes. The black screen between Ben and George's discussion of Ben's art and the scene of Joey visiting George sans Ben in his new apartment is jarring, and the viewer is obliged to fill in the missing pieces unaided. Uncle Ben is not a particularly likable character, mostly insensitive to the dynamics of the relatives who have taken him in. Is his asking Joey late at night whether he's ever been in love another filler? Why in 2013 would a couple of high-school kids steal books from the library and what is the point in the story? Why George's reference to Ben's "pension" but none to Social Security, which he would have at age 71? Am I the only one who wondered if Joey's emotional reaction in the stairwell in the penultimate scene is regret at having given George the painting of Vlad, the guy he really loved? That would give the film more poignancy and impact. The film is well worth watching, with a solid message of devotion.

leonblackwood Review:  I wasn't a big fan of this film because it's really slow and there isn't that much going on. The acting is superb from Lithgow and Molina, who play a gay couple who are forced to leave there home after one of them loses his job. They end up living apart with different family members but there love is still strong and they meet up regularly. Molina lives in a lively party going house, which takes its toll after a while and Lithgow lives with a dysfunctional family, were he doesn't feel that welcome. The thing that made the film watchable was the relationship between Molina and Lithgow, which made the film seem very realistic. I was hoping for a bit more from the storyline but the director kept it very basic which made it drag after a while. The scenes with the loving couple were sweet and funny at times and I really felt sorry for them because they were living with inconsiderate family members who didn't acknowledge them at all. Anyway, it's a light hearted movie which has some touching moments but it isn't that amazing. Average!Round-Up: I really did think that John Lithgow was older than 69 because it's seems like he's been acting forever and his looks haven't changed that much. He recently starred in Interstellar, Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes, The Homesman and This Is 40 and he done a lot of TV work so he's still been taken seriously in Hollywood. He has a unique, no fuss approach to acting, which really worked well in this movie. Alfred Molina, whose is only 62 but also looks like he's been on screen forever, is mostly known for his role as Doc Ock in Spiderman 2 and he also starred in Boogie Nights as the crazy drug dealer, the Da Vinci Code and many TV series. He also has a unique style which made the chemistry between the two actors brilliant. Shame the script wasn't as good! The director, Ira Sachs, has only made 7 major movies which includes Married Life with Pierce Brosnan and Keep The Lights On which is another movie about a gay couple. I honestly think that he wasted the great cast in this film and I wasn't that impressed with the ending.Budget: N/A Worldwide Gross: $2.2millionI recommend this movie to people who are into their dramatic movies about a gay couple who are forced to live separately after loses there home because one of the loses his job. 3/10

peterjkh OK. We have Ben & George, two gay men in their late 60s/early 70s,who have been together for almost 40 years. So far, so good. Finally they get married and as a result, George is fired and they find themselves having financial trouble, which forces them to sell their apartment and to move in with some friends (George) and some relatives (Ben).The acting was OK, Ben and George really came across as a devoted couple, genuinely loving each other, and devoted to each other.The rest was a bunch of nonsense.Ben and George have been living together for almost 40 years. They do not seem to live the high life, or to be extremely extravagant. They have a nice apartment, comfortable, but not overly luxurious. Even their own wedding party is fairly simple: they did not even order a cab to the ceremony, but tried to find one on the streets. They did not throw a big party, or even have dinner with their friend and family in a restaurant, they just had some drinks at their own home. OK, they went on an expensive honeymoon, but if that is the only extravaganza they allowed themselves over all the years they were together, it is not over the top.So all in all, they come across like people who have a simple lifestyle, do not overspend and are content with simple things.Yet, when George is fired, they do not have a penny in the bank. Really? No savings, no insurances, nothing? That seems totally out of character.But pennyless, they have to resort to moving in with friends/relatives. They do not seem to do any effort to stay together, if even in a single room. Just like that, after 40 years together, they decide to separate. George moves in with some neighbors (young gays), Ben goes to live with relatives (a young couple with a teenage son), where he has to share the room with this boy. Really?Where did they leave all their stuff, their furniture, the paintings, the books? Did they just sell it all, or what?Ben lives with those relatives, who seem wealthy enough (he is a businessman, she is a novelist), they have a maid, but they are still living in an apartment the size of a shoebox. Somehow, the only son has bunk beds in his room (why?), where Ben has to sleep. This son also has a friend, Vlad, with whom he spends hours and hours in his room. Why? Nobody knows.Somehow, Ben, who is a painter, decides to make a picture of this Vlad on the roof top of the building. Why? He does not know this boy, he hardly has spoken to this boy, but somehow this boy Vlad agrees to pose for him. Does this make sense? No. Wouldn't it have made more sense for Ben to paint a picture of his nephew Joey on that roof top, which he than could have presented to the parents as a small "thank you" for taking him in?In the mean time, George is living with this young gay couple, who are partying all the time, and meets a young guy. They get along very well, and somehow they end up having dinner together and looking at his apartment, which is for rent, as he is leaving for Mexico. Although they seem to have some sort of connection, no sexual attempts are made (really?) while they are alone in that apartment. It is mentioned that the rent is 1400 dollars a month, and somehow George suddenly has the means to pay that amount of money (earlier in the movie, George and Ben where house hunting and could not even afford 600 dollars...).Than there is that whole issue about Joey and Vlad having stolen French literature books from the library. Really? Teen boys stealing Cyrano de Bergerac and other books like that? It is never explained why or how that ends, so what is the meaning of that?And there are more issues that made this movie in itself a strange thing, the love between the two main characters was the most logic thing in the whole movie... SO no "Love is strange" here. But the rest was strange as hell.