I first watched this film on March 18, 2020, during the NYC lockdown of the Covid-19 pandemic. It became the first of a larger project, where I ended up watching over 800 queer films, with 340 of them in 2020 alone! If I was awake I was watching a movie. It wasn’t healthy, but it did keep me sane. And it was fun. I was entertained and engaged. But, when I started, I just wanted to watch a movie and this was what I watched.
I decided the other day that I should revisit some of these titles that I never really reviewed, and give them some more attention. I remembered that this was the first I’d watched and that I hadn’t loved it, but I couldn’t remember why. So here we are.
“Geography Club” is a 2013 American comedy drama film directed by Gary Entin from a screenplay by Edmund Entin, based on the 2003 novel of the same name by openly gay American author Brent Hartinger. And yes, I know that some people object to the term “openly gay”, but for me, it’s still a sign of the progress we’ve made, and is something to note. YMMV. The novel has at least 6 sequels.
The film centers on Russell Middlebrook (Cameron Deane Stewart), who falls for his high school’s football quarterback, Kevin Land (Justin Deeley) which leads him to the school’s Geography Club, which is actually a group of queer kids, leading to the creation of a Gay Straight Alliance. Sounds good right? And it features Alex Newell and reliable ally Scott Bakula…so why don’t I like it? Well, I wondered the same thing as I was watching. Not all of the acting is great, but there are movies with worse acting that I adore, so that’s not it. What I can say is that my problems with the movie have less to do what is there, than what is not. The movie feels rushed, and like either a lot was cut from it, or like maybe they ran out of money and just never filmed everything they needed? Sometimes the plot just jumps forward in a way that seems unjustified, nonsensical and / or totally random. Less annoying, but still problematic, there are some humor elements that just don’t work. Whole sections that I’m aware the movie wants me to laugh, but they just aren’t funny. And I wish there was more to discuss, but there isn’t. And if this was the only film to cover this kind of story, that would be fine, but it’s not, and so it just feels tired and, incomplete. That’s the word I’d use for the movie if I was asked. It’s an incomplete experience, despite watching the entire film twice.
Before it was a movie, the novel was adapted as a play. I wonder if that’s better? Speaking of which, maybe the novel is better? The novel has at least 6 sequels and assorted spin-offs, so even if the movie is exactly like the book, you get more time with the main characters for sure. Watching the movie I wasn’t tempted to read the book, which isn’t like me. Maybe I will someday? I’m just not sure it would be worth my time. But I’m also probably not the target audience either…because I’m old! lol
