Thank you for reaction ! I agree, Matthew Lopez bet on an efficient and low-risk production, and that's ok. There are some good shots (the french café, the making love scene.) I'm also fine with the no drama part and the comic part, and especially Zahra . I miss some scene of contextualization for Henry, his family & his friend Percy. The point I really love the way he adds quietly queer elements in a straight women targeted fim, by the cast (Stephen Fry as the homophobic king is a joke, Rachel Hilson (Nora),...), some heavy coded banters and visuals (condoms on nightstand, Rainbow flag on the window reflection in the king scene) The "erotic" scene is also made with this logic. I also appreciate that the reporter who outed them is openly gay. Regarding the leads, I mostly disagree with you for their performance as for their chemistry. I found them excellent for both, especally Nicholas Galitzine and his intense, wounded, romantic, condescending prince. He gives me an 'Oscar Wilde De Profoundis era' vibe that I really love (sorry for the awfull english, I'm french...)
The book was wrote by a queer non-binary author and the director is a gay man. The target audience was gays in the book and the movie. The fact that the book and movie caught on with straight women and teen girls is because of the romance between two leads who just happened to be men. The chemistry was insane between the two actors and that's the majority consensus of people who seen the book.
@@kekwayblaze3176 I think you're wrong about the target audience of the film. The fact they cast 2 men who don't want to be labeled as lead is intentional. Their couple in the film is clearly heteronormative, with Alex mostly "male" and Henry mostly "female." It's obvious in the intimate scene. That's also why Alex initiate the danse in the museum, instead of Henry in the book. Don't get me wrong, I think it's a wise choice. Thanks to that direction, this production gets a better budget, the support of Amazon, and become a popular succes. If you compare with 'Bros', which is a reference of LGBT targeted Rom Com (and a better film IMHO), the difference is huge
@@satireskeptic6787 Between two attractive men. These two certainly have it. Kudos to the actors for the sizzling chemistry that they displayed with these characters.
This is my comfort movie
It is quite fun
They have amazing chemistry.
More like just good
@@satireskeptic6787 More like amazing
@@satireskeptic6787no
Once he got to the no chemistry nonsense i checked out!!
@@xanadude22Funny because there is no part of the video with that so you must have watched the whole thing thank you for the support 😊
Thank you for reaction ! I agree, Matthew Lopez bet on an efficient and low-risk production, and that's ok. There are some good shots (the french café, the making love scene.) I'm also fine with the no drama part and the comic part, and especially Zahra . I miss some scene of contextualization for Henry, his family & his friend Percy.
The point I really love the way he adds quietly queer elements in a straight women targeted fim, by the cast (Stephen Fry as the homophobic king is a joke, Rachel Hilson (Nora),...), some heavy coded banters and visuals (condoms on nightstand, Rainbow flag on the window reflection in the king scene) The "erotic" scene is also made with this logic. I also appreciate that the reporter who outed them is openly gay.
Regarding the leads, I mostly disagree with you for their performance as for their chemistry. I found them excellent for both, especally Nicholas Galitzine and his intense, wounded, romantic, condescending prince. He gives me an 'Oscar Wilde De Profoundis era' vibe that I really love (sorry for the awfull english, I'm french...)
Your analysis is very good. Ya maybe it's just not my type of chemistry 🧪
The book was wrote by a queer non-binary author and the director is a gay man. The target audience was gays in the book and the movie. The fact that the book and movie caught on with straight women and teen girls is because of the romance between two leads who just happened to be men. The chemistry was insane between the two actors and that's the majority consensus of people who seen the book.
@@kekwayblaze3176 I think you're wrong about the target audience of the film. The fact they cast 2 men who don't want to be labeled as lead is intentional. Their couple in the film is clearly heteronormative, with Alex mostly "male" and Henry mostly "female." It's obvious in the intimate scene. That's also why Alex initiate the danse in the museum, instead of Henry in the book. Don't get me wrong, I think it's a wise choice. Thanks to that direction, this production gets a better budget, the support of Amazon, and become a popular succes. If you compare with 'Bros', which is a reference of LGBT targeted Rom Com (and a better film IMHO), the difference is huge
@@kekwayblaze3176 then they haven't seen what real insane chemistry is then
@@satireskeptic6787 Between two attractive men. These two certainly have it. Kudos to the actors for the sizzling chemistry that they displayed with these characters.
That is right.