There be spoilers ahead! When I first saw this movie at the age of 12 or 13 I fell in love with Perry King - a love which has lasted as these years. He seemed more beautiful than Paul Newman and Gary Cooper rolled into one, and he's still looking mighty fine in his 60's in my opinion. But I wish they had had the courage to avoid forcing an unbelievable hetero "happy ending" onto this film. Why not have them realize that they were both still gay and their (platonic) love for each other could help them find other people to love? That would have made much more sense than the candy colored mess that we're given. That said, the LA time capsule aspect is stupendous - but alas, this is not a great movie or even a very good movie. Perry King in cutoff shorts for me is worth the price of admission, but that's probably not true for most people.
Add a Review
-
qopus198816 March 2011
-
Hey_Sweden21 April 2021Filmmaker Paul Aaron ("A Force of One", "Deadly Force") began his career with this odd spin on the romantic formula. Written by Henry Olek, the premise has a gay female real estate agent, Stella (Meg Foster), and a gay male designer, Albert (Perry King), living as housemates. He turns out to be an illegal alien, and she gets the bright idea to marry him so he won't be faced with deportation. One night, after some drunken birthday celebrations, they end up in bed together and thereafter develop romantic feelings for each other.
This certainly had the potential to be a total misfire, and could still easily be seen as problematic to a number of viewers. But it actually works fairly well, at least in its first half, before succumbing to corniness and predictability in its second half. Some audience members could probably do without the character of Stellas' previous lover Phyllis (Valerie Curtin, '9 to 5'), who's clearly unbalanced. But the characters of Stella and Albert are treated as healthy, happy, balanced individuals. This admittedly wouldn't be as successful if King and especially Foster weren't so good in their respective roles. You really do like these two, despite everything.
Available now on Blu-ray in its original R-rated form (with some brief profanity and nudity), this was unsurprisingly quite controversial 43 years ago. Even today, it's not going to be to all (or very many) tastes. But curious movie watchers may still want to give this a look, if only for the performances (including Peter Donat ("The China Syndrome"), as a prominent orchestra conductor who was Alberts' previous romantic partner).
Seven out of 10. -
cockezville3 December 2021What idiot wrote this preposterous piece of insanity. Two professed homosexuals are not going to fall out of their lifestyle and fall in love. This sounds like it was written by a conversion therapy recruit who has a pocket full of wishful thinking.
In spite of the stupidity of the project Meg Foster and Perry King entertained, and Valerie Curtin as well. -
baker-930 April 2001Since this film was made in the 70's when people understood very little about homosexuality, I suppose someone was bound to come up with this absurd scenario. A gay man winds up playing house with a lesbian, then they get married to prevent his being deported.
After discovering each other sexually after a drunken birthday party, they are magically turned into full-fledged heterosexuals, becoming parents in the process. Once the guy begins working for a gay designer, we're setup to think he's going to go back to his old ways. (Spoiler Alert!) Well, he's having an affair all right, but with a female model. But all is well in the end.
This film is written and acted with complete sincerity, making the whole thing look truly clueless by today's standards. Gay life is represented by our hero's largely sexual attachments to wealthy men and trips to a bathhouse, while the heroine has a relationship with a pathologically insecure closeted lesbian who threatens suicide. In other words, the film makes being gay look like a truly depressing dead end existence - one that you can choose to give up when the right person of the opposite sex shows up.
I suppose the bogus "ex-gay" movement could use this film as a recruiting device, except that it's pretty dull. -
ejhorne25 March 2023A sort of 1978 "Will & Grace" without a Jack. Witty. Zany. Funny. Real. Clumsy. Heartfelt. I actually thought this would be one of the many maudlin, tragic stories of the late 70s, but I was pleasantly surprised to find myself viewing something completely believable, interesting and really kind of a normal situation. I wish I'd seen this as a late teen when it was released.
It was thought provoking in that it dealt openly and honestly with the issue of gender and sexuality fluidity in a situation where both parties were aware that the other was more inclined towards same sex attraction. Thus is a story that's still relevant. -
A time capsule of a certain L. A. circa '77/'78 in which Meg Foster and Perry King are believable in their roles. The script and the film's direction are what make it hard to swallow.
-
moonspinner5510 August 2017Lesbian marries a Belgian gay man to keep him in the States; they fall in love for real, but he cheats on her--with a woman. Gay leading characters (male or female) in a mainstream motion picture hadn't been in vogue for a number of years--you'd have to go back to "The Fox" or "The Killing of Sister George" in 1968, "The Boys in the Band" in 1970 and "Sunday Bloody Sunday" in 1971--which makes screenwriter Henry Olek's efforts here doubly disappointing. He has the brave notion to introduce homosexual people in a bland, middle-of-the-road setting (no camp attributes), and then drops the ball (or, perhaps, the ball was taken and dropped for him). You can't blame the actors--Meg Foster or Perry King--they are doing what they were assigned to do, to push forward a false plot. But they are pawns in a heterosexual's fantasy, that the gay lifestyle can be "corrected" with the "right partner." The agenda here is obviously unbalanced, and yet director Paul Aaron forges on with Olek's romantic clichés as if the only audience for their picture were straight, upper-class men and women who want to be able to say when it's over, "I always knew it was a choice." * from ****
-
wmschoell8 October 2019This heavily unbalanced movie presents two gay people -- a man and a woman -- who are trapped in negative relationships with unappealing partners, thus stacking the deck against the gay lifestyle. It does not present gay relationships as being normal and healthy. The two gay characters -- they are never referred to as bisexual -- get married to each other. Do they eventually recognize that they are basically gay and embark upon healthy homosexual relationships? No, instead they supposedly fall in love. The old stereotype that "you're only gay until you meet the right man -- or woman."
Honestly, I can't imagine who this would appeal to besides homophobes or self-hating homos. Its negative view of gay life, and its need to "straighten out" the gay characters to make more them palatable to mainstream audiences, makes this anti-gay flick a dated, stupid and unfunny travesty. The fact that there may be gay men and lesbians married to each other in real life -- quite pathetic in these days of gay marriage -- doesn't make this picture any less fantastic or more believable. -
reginaBithyniae3 September 2022The movie starts and remains until its half by doing a good representation of a gay man and a lesbian woman. The relationship they form is nice and despite having some stereotype, it's not so bad. They then proceed into a marriage by convenience that ends in "love", but at that point the movie seems to be taken by a whole other direction.
Here are the problems the second half brings to everything:
-They "fall in love" immediately. There's no real building into that and the friendship seemed to be used as the development, which didn't make sense in the contest. Also, BOTH of the characters are homosexuals, but they don't give a single thought about that from the moment they have sex forwards.
-After the sudden "real relationship", the script insinuates that they "gave that life" as if homosexuality is a lifestyle, which is NOT.
-One could think: "Maybe they are both bisexuals", but that clearly is not what the movie is showing. It becomes very obvious when you see they way they are stereotyped.
--First, he's then clean and orderly gay that cooks and takes care of the house (there's even a comedic scene where she considers him "the lady of the house"), and she's the unclean manly lesbian woman that can't cook.
--After they get their baby they reverse their roles, where she takes care of the house and he's the insensitive working man of the house.
-Their sexuality is so disposable in the movie. That if you watch from the scene she gets pregnant onward, THERE IS NO REFERENCE whatsoever about before, even his AFFAIR is with another woman.
-Lastly, the ending scene, she indicates that she doesn't want to see him anymore (since she wants space but he doesn't leave her alone), but they magically reverse that in their heads and run back to each other!?
This "Different Story" is more for people that believe gays "just didn't find the right woman" and analogously for lesbians and men. People who say it's "realistic" and it comes from "a real story" need to understand that this movie is not a good portrayal on the subject at all. -
Goodmovielover8 June 2005In order to stop her homosexual friend Albert (Perry King) from being deported back to Belgium, Stella (Meg Foster) decides to marry him. The only other problem with that is that Stella herself is a lesbian. The two have their separate lives when one night after Albert's birthday party, they fall into bed and then into love. Later in the film after falling in love, Stella suspects Albert of cheating and shows up at his job one night late after closing. What she finds will leave the viewer stunned. This is a great film, very original. Perry King and Meg Foster are so good in their roles that it is amazing that they were not better recognized for their work here. Very controversial upon its release in 1978, the "R" rated film is now "PG" in this much more liberal time.
Recently released on DVD, the disc contains a "Making Of" segment on the special features and in it it's stated that the film was based on an actual story so the viewers who say the film is not "real" are mistaken. Everyone is an individual and different people fall in love for different reasons-these are the issues explored in this wonderful film for everyone who has ever loved! -
A movie that Christian Gay conversion therapy fans everywhere will approve of.
It sounded a good premise, gay illegal immigrant is left high, dry and homeless by his famous lover, meets lesbian slobby career woman who lets him stay over for a night that runs into him becoming her room mate. Feds turn up and you begin to think that Albert and Stella have become great friends and agree to a marriage of convenience for him to stay in the US, but, the Feds come snooping wanting proof...or at least that was what you thought was going to happen. Sadly it just turned into a soapy run of the mill drama, the fact that he is an illegal alien who marries a woman he barely knows does't mean that we see any mention of the authorities ever again, everything is just hunky dory. However, the worst part of this is that after a night of sex they are both suddenly straight and madly in love and we just have a hum drum domestic drama of hubby with a job taking up all his time and a dissatisfied housewife at home taking care of the baby. Then we have the wife discovering hubby having shower sex with another woman! Yep, he's definitely bating for the opposite team now.Then there is the happy ending, a predictable happy ending, yawn.
It could have been so much better, the lead actors were the only thing that kept me watching this second half drivel. Sorry, but, it took the soap opera easy way out and was extremely disappointing after a great first half which is why I only gave it five stars.
Only recommended for those who think being homosexual is a disease that can be cured, otherwise don't bother. -
This is a film for entertainment; I did not think the world made social commentary from one small film. I personally find this film funny, audacious, and memorable. It is a fantasy not unlike a cinder girl becoming a Princess. This film was done very well I might add, in the 70's a time of the best experiments in film with being able to mention a person's sexuality. This movie is not about a person being homosexual or not, it is however about love, in all it's strange forms. This film does show some of the realities of being gay in the 70's in Hollywood, or in California. Pretty boys being looked after by older not so pretty men. Women who had to stay deeply locked in the emotional closet or risk not having a career. Bathhouses were an integral part of the gay community.
THEN the fantasy begins!! Let us mix a lesbian with a gay and add some liquor and what do we have? Well this movie, which in ANY way was better than that dismal redo "The Next Big Thing". Perhaps someone should have asked the entire crew to see this movie and then try to do better.
I enjoyed this movie when I saw it in the 70's and it still brings a smile to my lips now. I heartily advise anyone who wants a funny, tender movie- to curl up with some popcorn and have some fun. Some people need to lighten up!!! And this is the film you should do it with! -
micoder11 December 2006This film was seen by my wife and I when it came out in 1978. It was a revelation to us. We actually thought that we were the only gay and lesbian couple who had ever married and had children. Obviously we were wrong. Love may come from where you don't expect it and maybe don't want it. But we both chose that love anyway.
And no, it never changed our sexual orientation. That kind of stuff is for the Christian wackos.
When we were young we both had affairs, but never with the opposite sex. As we aged we stopped having extramarital affairs.
This story is not far fetched. However, the suggestion that they became heterosexuals seems pretty unrealistic to me. My wife and I have been sleeping together for the last 40 years. We are still gay. End of story. -
BERGDORF21 February 2006This movie is as unique as it is overlooked......A Different Story is just that, it shows how out of the need to survive or maintain, one can find the capacity to love if you have an open heart as well as an open mind. I first saw this on cable in the late 70's and it truly depicted the limitations of the gay community at the time. I believe this movie was ahead of its time in depicting a little slice of an obscure way of life. It is truly a classic in the sense that it was a precursor to what is now depicted as the extended family. This film should be available on DVD/VHS so that not only the extra ordinary performances of Meg Foster & Perry King can be acknowledged, but to show how far we have come & still have to go where relationships are concerned.
-
johnstonjames30 October 2012as a gay male i don't like being pigeon holed into any particular category. it's funny how the gay community loves to claim alternative lifestyle status but very rarely likes any one in their own community to step out of the prescribed mold. if you are gay, that's it, bottom line, and any diversity of your sexuality is discarded or questioned. if you're heterosexual you're allowed to be Bi or experiment. it often seems that in the gay community experimenting outside of your gay sexuality is frowned on.
that's why 'A Different Story' still remains a breath of something different decades later. it explores sexual themes that a lot of gay movies don't like to touch on. i mean if you can be latently gay you can probably be latently heterosexual too. and contrary to criticism of the movie, lots of gay people have been married or attracted to the opposite sex.
at the time of release in 1978, a lot of people thought this film wasn't daring enough or too afraid to break convention and be a "all gay" movie. now with the gay network Logo and gay movies more common, the outlook of this movie now seems to be less conventional and breaks a standard mold. the two main character seem very unconventional by current gay standards.
it's very easy to relate to the main protagonist in this story thanks to to very fine performances by Perry King and Meg foster who are both excellent and radiate warmth and depth which helps to make their characters seem human and very fallible.
this is a excellent movie for everyone as long as prejudice doesn't interfere with your viewing. prejudice from both sides, straight and gay which this movie is vulnerable to, unfortunately. -
Poseidon-331 May 2007Considered somewhat daring at the time, but tamer now from years of subsequent film and television projects that further explored the topic of homosexuality, this romantic comedy-drama concerns an unlikely couple. King plays a sexy, gay Belgian (sans accent) who has lived as the plaything of several wealthy men, most recently symphony conductor Donat. When things go rotten in their arrangement, King finds himself staying with Donat's pretty, but sloppy, real estate agent. This kicks off a Felix vs Oscar sort of "Odd Couple" storyline until one day when circumstances lead to the pair standing before a judge in order to get married! The marriage is in name only for a long time, but eventually a real affection develops between the two and it turns physical. However, there may be a limit to how many new tricks an ol' dog like King can learn or re-learn, thus the relationship hits a road bump or two along the way. King is slim, toned, tan and blonde, strutting around in some very skimpy briefs and well-worn pants (and sometimes even less than that!) He gives a committed and heartfelt performance, though occasionally he is seen acting far more feminine than at other times, perhaps due to shifts in acting choices as the filming progressed. (Note the flaming way he acts in the scene with Donat following a party, though he doesn't behave this way again.) Foster is excellent, lending much feeling and passion to a difficult role. She also suffers a bit from inconsistency in her manner and mannerisms, going from chain-smoking slob to immaculately coiffed wife with little or no impetus. Sometimes both actors seem to have worked heavily on the outside of their characters in order to convey inner changes and it does come off a wee bit forced at times (King adopting a butch moustache and wearing three-piece suits is another example that comes to mind.) Still, the actors share great chemistry and clearly worked well together during this film. Curtain is excellent as a neurotic, fatalistic companion of Foster's. Bull and Collentine (spouses in real life as well) appear as Foster's fussy parents. The film had a divisive affect on the gay community then and now. Some saw it as an unrealistic sell-out while others were grateful to be represented at all. To the film's defense, both characters were always presented as having had sex beforehand with both sexes and it is purportedly based on a true story! (The author named Foster's character Stella, after his friend Stella Stevens, though he did not indicate that she was the inspiration for the scenario.) One of the film's flaws is the device of using tiny little episodic scenes, separated by blackouts. This gives the opening portion of the film a choppy feel. The film was made by people who specialized in TV commercials, so perhaps very lengthy sequences were not their forte and, in fact, some of the visuals and scenarios do resemble 1970's TV commercials at times. If one can accept the premise, without finding it unbelievable or offensive, this is a pretty easy and charming diversion featuring two appealing people.
-
angeladavis4919 March 2021I loved this movie. So original and sweet. It's one of the few movies I've seen in a long time to make me feel good. I have watched it at least three times. I felt like the characters were actually bi sexual and chose to be in a man woman relationship but could easily have chosen the man man or woman woman relationship instead. They just happened to fall in love with each other. I adore Perry King and have tried to see as many of his performances as I can find. He was absolutely the most gorgeous man I've ever seen. Just perfect. Meg Foster was very good too and they had terrific chemistry. I just loved it I wanted it to keep going and not end so soon. I never felt they were trying to say straight is best I just thought they fell in love and chose each other. They acting was great and seemed so effortless I guess due to their chemistry. I wish Perry would still act after his wonderful "Divide" and not only direct. He is so enthusiastic about his work and I want to see him in more things. I would recommend this movie to anyone who will enjoy the comedy, drama and love it shows.
-
jneill-517 May 2006I think it unfortunate that the leading comments on this movie include the words "Clueless and appalling nonsense." I think it is a very funny movie and excellent entertainment. One has to suspend one's disbelief that a homosexual man and a lesbian woman could fall in love, have a child and live together happily ever after. But it is always wonderful to see it played out in a movie and have one's heart warmed. Is it so impossible? There are far more implausible events described in other movies. The acting is good, the script is funny. The only negative comment is that the story could well have ended when the family drives away from its initial house instead of extending on to explore whether the man retains any residual homosexuality.
-
dpenna32808 February 2020Just a great flick, that I still love today!. Perry King was/is so handsome!
-
jamiemiller-0761112 July 2019In the 70's, there were few people as beautiful as Meg Foster and Perry King. The idea of them having sex and falling in love isn't terribly far fetched. The issue in A Different Story is that they both happen to be gay and have a one-time drunken fling and then Foster's character gets pregnant.
It seems more like the concept of a wacky comedy, but A Different Story plays it fairly (pardon the pun) straight throughout. It's completely unrealistic and even quite offensive, but Foster and King manage to make it seem entirely plausible. I actually found Foster's former lover so much more offensive with her creepy bipolar personality. At least Foster and King's gay characters were shown as decent, stable human beings.
I'm surprised that I wasn't more offended by this movie, but it's really enjoyable and sort of charming and sweet.