爱若此时

这是我继《天佑鲍比》后，第二部哭得痛彻心扉的电影。

我被Rudy和Paul给予Marco无私而全身心的爱而打动，被他们为了让Marco有一个正常的家而拼尽全力的追求而打动，被他们一家三口曾经的美好时光而打动。

然而，就是这份为了孩子的倾心付出，却因为社会对同性恋的歧视而不得不被迫终止。

能给我讲个故事吗，我喜欢幸福的结局他是一个可爱、聪明、有趣的孩子，他的笑容可以照亮整个房间，他喜欢垃圾食品，巧克力甜甜圈是他最喜欢的东西，他是全世界最好的迪斯科舞者，他总爱抱着那个叫Ashley的洋娃娃，他喜欢每晚听一个故事，只要故事有幸福的结局。

这就是Marco，一个唐氏综合征孩子。

不幸的是，这个孩子的母亲是一个毒瘾极大的女人，她疯狂吸毒，带陌生人回家，对Marco从来都不管不顾。

直到有一天她被警察带走，留下Marco孤身在家，住在隔壁的Rudy发现了这个孩子。

他们是很棒的家长，有他们的地方才是Marco的家Marco被带到收养院，并且将一直在那个收养院待下去，因为没人会收养他，没人想收养一个矮矮胖胖、心智受损的孩子，整个世界没人想要他，除了Rudy和Paul。

Rudy发现这件事后，在Paul的帮助下，他们得到了Marco的临时监护权。

他们把Marco带回了自己的家，并将Marco视为己出，送Marco上学，辅导Marco学习，给Marco过生日。

可以明显的看出，他们投入了自己全部的爱给Marco，而这也Marco第一次感受到了家的温暖，让Marco第一次感受到到一个孩子应得的快乐与幸福。

愿Marco回家的路，不再有阻碍当Rudy与Paul的关系被曝光后，他们也失去了收养Marco的权利，因为在当时，在70年代的美国加州，法律不允许同性恋伴侣收养孩子。

但让人不可忍受的是，加州却允许有滥用药物和家庭暴力前科的人收养小孩。

可见当时社会对同性恋的歧视真的太大太深。

故事的最后，Marco的母亲提前保释出狱，要回了Marco的监护权，却仍然不知悔改，继续吸毒，不管Marco的生活。

Marco踏上了寻找家的道路，他想回到有Rudy与Paul的地方，回到能真的给他温暖和爱的地方。

不幸的是，他为找到回家的路一直走了三天，最终在一座桥下孤单地死去。

两个最爱Marco的人，那唯一知道他喜欢吃甜甜圈，喜欢听有幸福结尾故事，能看到Marco身上的光芒的人，却因为社会对同性恋的歧视而得不到对一个没有人会再关心他的唐氏综合征孩子的抚养权。

Marco想要回家，想要回到唯一能给予他平等的爱和对待的家，是这些令人发指的歧视，一次又一次阻挡了他回家的路。

愿Marco能记住这份无时无刻的爱，愿Marco离开的路不孤单。

他们说，一切都可以被取代他们说，一切距离都不相近我记得每一张脸每一个置我于此情此景的人我看到我的光芒开始闪亮从西方照到东方任何一刻，若是此时我将被释放他们说，他们说每个人都该保护好自己他们说，他们说每个人都会沦陷我发誓，我发誓看到了我的投影远远不只这些墙壁没错，我看到我的光芒在闪亮，在闪亮从西方照到东方我的天任何一刻，若是此时我将被释放是的，我看到我的光芒闪亮从西方照到东方我发誓，我发誓我发誓，我的爱我们会得到释放关于电影对应的真实故事电影编剧布卢姆（Bloom）透露：“ 《爱若此时》的电影剧本灵感来自真实故事，并非基于真实故事。

”他在30年前写了原始剧本。

当时，他在纽约的一个朋友向他介绍了一个叫Rudy的男同性恋。

Rudy住在一个小公寓里，几乎没有钱。

他结识了一个居住在几个街区之外的12岁男孩。

这个男孩已经被他的吸毒/妓女母亲遗弃，并与他的祖母住在一起。

祖母没有为这个不说话的男孩做多少事情。

他猜这个孩子是自闭症，但没有钱做任何事情。

于是Rudy把男孩带到他的公寓，确保他已经穿好衣服并被喂饱了，他竭尽所能让他上学。

最后，他把他养大了。

值得高兴的是，至少在现实生活中，这个故事是一个幸福的结局。

Alan Cumming Has Never Been BetterThe story of Any Day Now may take place in the past, but the discrimination against same-sex families it depicts is unfortunately still all too real.BY DIANE ANDERSON-MINSHALL JANUARY 04 2013 5:00 AM ET George Arthur Bloom lived in Brooklyn in the late 1970s, back when it was a rough-and-tumble area. He was inspired by a larger-than-life character everyone seemed to know, Rudy, who developed a fatherly relationship with, as filmmaker Travis Fine puts it, a “kid who was terribly handicapped, both mentally and physically” and whose mother was a drug addict. Bloom turned Rudy’s real-life experience into a screenplay, which almost got filmed several times during the ensuing years (at one point Tommy Lee Jones and Sylvester Stallone were attached to it). Then it went nowhere, Bloom gave up, and it sat in a drawer until his son, an old high school friend of Fine’s, showed the director the script.The movie that came of it, Any Day Now, which hit theaters this winter and garnered awards on the festival circuit, follows The Good Wife’s Alan Cumming as Rudy, Raising Hope’s Garret Dillahunt as Paul, the closeted attorney who becomes his partner, and Isaac Leyva as Marco, a teen with Down syndrome who’s abandoned by his mother and taken in by the men. They all must fight a biased legal system so the couple can adopt Isaac, a heart-wrenching storyline that will resonate with many of the 2 to 6 million LGBT people who say they’d like to adopt.“The story of Any Day Now may take place in the past, but the discrimination against same-sex families it depicts is unfortunately still all too real in some parts of our country,” says GLAAD president Herndon Graddick.It’s real too for kids like Marco. As of 2011 there were 104,236 children in foster care awaiting adoption, many of them considered special-needs children because they are black or Latino, are older than infants, or have some form of mental or physical disability. “What the film’s remarkable performances and eloquent script reveal, though, is how unjust and hurtful to same-sex couples and children that discrimination really is,” Graddick adds.Cumming, whose performance is riveting and one of his most inspired, talks about making the film.I found Any Day Now just completely absorbing and really moving. And I notice people just seem to really have a gut reaction to the film. Why do you think it reaches people that way? I think that we see the story of people who are damaged and devastated by bigotry and prejudice and ignorance. And we understand how wrong that is because we’ve invested in these characters and we want them to be together. And then I think in a larger way, we know that the reason that happened is because that bigotry and that prejudice still exist in our society. And I think we are so moved by it because we know that we are complicit in that because we are all members of that society.This is a story about many things — about family, the foster care system, and coming out, but at the heart of it, it’s a love story between your free-spirited Rudy and Garret’s buttoned-down, closeted Paul. How did you develop the sort of chemistry that viewers see between you and Garret on-screen? We just had to fake it, because we didn’t know each other. It was very well-written. and obviously Garret is a really brilliant actor and we luckily felt very comfortable with each other and got on. And I think that’s half of it. Once you feel comfortable with someone you can just dive in. But you’d imagine we’d have lots of time to talk and get comfortable with each other. No, we were practically in bed on the first day.One of the other parts of the film that we don’t see a lot of — but is so true — is that there’s so much difficulty over same-sex couples trying to adopt. But the reality is there are a ton of children and teenagers, especially with physical or mental disabilities, that will just languish in the system.Absolutely right. And that to me is the biggest idea—because everyone falls in love with Isaac. Garret says at one point, “I’m just hoping that this child doesn’t slip through the cracks in the system,” and sadly he does.Tell me about working with Isaac. Oh, it was great. I loved it. I mean people think…you’re going to make a movie with someone who has a learning disability, what’s that going to mean? I had no idea. But I just went into it…with an open heart. And he was just an absolute darling and so lovely.… He’s got kind of openness to him and…he’s not at all jaded. Everything there’s pure, and it kind of reminded me of what acting should be like. Everything’s really on the surface and completely authentic.That's great. You have some scenes of just real heartbreak and anguish. Was there anything in your own life that you could call on to sort of nail those scenes? To inspire?Well, yes. I have had heartbreak and anguish in my life. That's not difficult for me to access.So, ten years ago, we used to ask straight actors if they had any hesitation about playing a gay role. Now it's more common to ask gay actors if they worry about being pigeonholed. This is certainly not your first gay role, but do you ever worry about that?No, I actually don't. I mean, [I'm] playing a straight man on TV every Monday. I just don't deal with that. I mean, I've played gay people, but I don't know the percentage. I just I don't think much in that way, you know. I don't correlate it in that way. But I'm drawn to the stories and the character's heart, you know. And perhaps because… I'm comfortable with it, I'm likely to be offered things, I could see people know that I would be more ready to be comfortable with doing it. But I don't worry at all. I'm not really a worrier. I refuse.That's great. So assuming they met somehow, what would Rudy think about Eli, your character on Good Wife?I think… in terms of the story, I think he'd probably try to see what he could do to help his situation. I think probably they might lock horns a little bit initially because they're both quite sensitive types. But I imagine that, you know, they might get on eventually because they look so alike. That was a joke.What’s the most critical thing for you to get across with this film? What do you want people to take away from it? I want people to…have a real emotional experience and an emotional connection. But really…I want people to go away and think, Wow, look at the effect of prejudice and ignorance and bigotry, and look at how much our society is still engendering and encouraging that. Speaking of, you and your husband, Grant, got married earlier this year in New York. What are your thoughts on the recent marriage equality successes? I think it’s great that we have a president who is very vocal in his support of equality and gay rights. I think the last election is really exciting in that it showed that the country was rejecting all that sort of prejudice and fear-based prejudice. We’re still the second-class citizens. And people still can be fired for being gay and people are gay-bashed.… So, you know, I don’t mean to be ungrateful but I don’t see why I should be so grateful for my rights. I think that’s what we should all remember.I have one last question. You have a book coming out in 2013: May the Foreskin Be With You. I read a little excerpt from it and it made me want to ask, what made you want to talk so intimately about your penis and other people's penises?Because I was shocked when I first came to America, [and] I realized that the people who were seeing my penis were so utterly ignorant of what a real penis — a normal, intact penis —looks like. I thought, God, I'm here, I'm in New York City, this progressive, cultural, melting-pot of the world, and these people don't realize that they are genitally mutilated as children. And that was really what got me going, I was like, this is how it's supposed to be. And then I've [found] out more about it, and saw all the things about lack of sensation that people have, and I became aware of that because you just are aware that people with their circumcised penises are less sensitive. And so it just became a cause for me, really. And then of course you find out all these things about how the circumcisions can go so horribly wrong, and how these poor kids have terrible, terrible things happen. I've been in situations where I've been in a car, and me and an interviewer are talking about the book or other things, and the driver will go, "I heard you speaking and you know, my circumcision went wrong and I… pee out of two holes."And I think it's this unspoken thing, of men, that don't want to talk about it and they certainly don't want to be told something that irretrievable, irreversible. It's so wrong and they're losing so much. Also, it's fighting the medical system that [doesn't want to] admit they're wrong, and they don't want to lose the money that every circumcision brings them. To me, it seems to me this huge conspiracy. And actually … if it was girl circumcision, I mean female genital mutilation, we would be horrified about it. And we are, when it happens.Yes, [female circumcision] is illegal here, yeah.Yes, so why is it? If anything happens to thousands of little boys and we think that's okay.Yeah. And there always seems to be the excuse that a boy's penis should look like his father's. I hear that again and again. To which I think, do you go home get your cocker in front of your dad? I didn't. Is that an American custom? Because I don't think that's right, if it is. -Dillahunt, who plays the often clueless but nonetheless progressive and lovable Burt Chance on Raising Hope, isn't new to playing gay and bisexual characters. But this film, he says, is special. He tells us why.I found Any Day Now completely absorbing and really moving and viewers seem to have a real, visceral reaction to the film. Why do you think that is?I guess, hopefully, they find it honest and relatable. I think, despite the specific circumstances these characters are going through, there's a lot of common ground.This is a story about family, the foster care system, disability, coming out and so on. But at the heart it’s a love story between your button down closeted character, Paul, and Alan Cumming’s free-spirited drag performer, Rudy. What was most critical to you to get across in the film?That these were living, breathing human beings. The whole thing will fall apart, obviously, if the audience doesn't believe the love between these two, seemingly, opposites.Ten years ago, we used to ask straight actors if they had any hesitation about playing a gay role but not so much any more. So I’m wondering what made you want to take on this role?I just thought it was a challenge. I like mixing it up as much as I can, and Paul was much different from the previous character I'd played, and I thought it would be fun to tackle. The icing on the cake is that it's a beautiful story with themes that are, sadly, still resonant today. Who wouldn't want to be a part of that?I love that while Paul is really navigating new territory as a gay or bisexual man, the film certainly isn’t just a traditional coming out narrative. There’s no big “I am gay” scene, for example. Was there sort of awareness that Paul’s coming out was almost secondary to what was happening with Marco?Yes. I think the center of this story is Marco. Rudy is an incredibly tough guy — he's a drag queen in the '70s, for Christ's sake. It is almost unsurprising that he would take Marco under his wing. I think his comfort as a gay man is something Paul envies. Probably one of the things that attracts him to Rudy, this unapologetic "gayness" and willingness to fight — it brings out Paul's quieter strength. And the catalyst is this boy.It’s hard not to think this film as a modern Kramer vs Kramer. Dustin Hoffman’s character loses his job to care for the kid; Rudy does the same. Hoffman and Streep go to court to battle for custody; Paul and Rudy do the same. Though it’s set in the 1970s, the storyline feels particularly timely as Kramer did when it came out. What do you think of comparisons like that?I don't mind them. I suppose they're going to happen however I feel about it.My sister-in-law has Down syndrome so it was lovely to see a storyline about a teen with Down syndrome. Tell me about working with Isaac, who plans Marco in the film.Isaac was terrific. He was excited and joyful, prepared, and serious. He'd shush Alan and I if we were too goofy when Travis was about to call "action." He gives great hugs and listens — which makes him a great actor. He really reminded me why I do this, and how I should do this. He shamed me, truthfully. And I am so grateful.What about working with Alan. How did you develop enough trust to connect so easily in the film? You have great chemistry.We got on well, didn't we? We seem like a couple. I wish I had a great story to tell you — some incredible bonding experience or conversation we had prior to filming that clicked everything into place. But we didn't have time for that. We met at the wig fitting and got to work. I guess we're professionals! Sometimes it's easy, though. Alan is real easy to act with. We share a belief, I think, that if you're not having fun, why do it? And it is fun, no matter how harrowing the scene, when it works. And with Alan, it works every time. Heh, he'll love that quote.http://www.advocate.com/print-issue/current-issue/2013/01/04/alan-cumming-has-never-been-betterhttp://www.advocate.com/arts-entertainment/film/2012/12/13/garret-dillahunt-tackles-gay-adoption-any-day-now

该电影是反映同性恋的一部情感影片。

影片单身流浪汉主人公鲁迪和离婚的弗雷格在酒吧认识后陷入同性恋之中，而鲁迪的邻居马可是个唐氏综合症患者，其母亲吸毒后被送入监狱，而鲁迪不愿意弱智的马可被带到社会福利抚养院，他设法打动身为律师的弗雷格一同与他取得了马可的监护权。

但由于他们的同性恋关系被法庭知道，虽然他们三人一直过着幸福的生活，但经过多次的法律官司，最终马可离开了他们，又过上了类似流浪的生活……影片成功之处在于两个男同性恋主人公的社会正义感，以及对弱智少年的关怀令人感动，演员的演技也尚可。

不足之处在于支持并宣扬一个同性恋的家庭，多少出人意外。

如果真正地将在酒吧反串演技的鲁迪换作一个女人，那么加上爱情的真挚，可能影片会感动更多的人。

但这将失去现存影片的主题。

午饭时间打开了这个电影，一无所知的打开一开始不太感冒，两位男主的颜实在嗑不起来，好吧，这并不是一个偶像电影，他纪实看完后，最触动人心的是这份死亡的遗憾或许永远都弥补不过来了对于两男之间的感情线太快，仿佛一下就定了终身大量的内容用来表述他们为了领养一个孩子的艰难去抗争一个社会、乃至法律对同性关系的歧视这种歧视甚至可以忽略一个孩子的健康和生命那么，看完这个电影，你怕吗？

这可能是国外几十年前的故事，真实故事但是，在现今的国内，若有这样的两个人我想，我信，他们的遭遇会很相似吧工作、生活中的人，指指点点，横加阻挠怎么才能幸福的过下去呢？

更何况，还想要一个孩子，抚养一个孩子坚持自己的想法生活不算，还要去支撑一个孩子的生活，一个孩子的一辈子之前，在布鲁迪上看到好几对领养了孩子的同志他们晒得是他们的美好尽管仍有很多恶意的评论出现至少让我看到了一份希望和美好可是，现实呢？

最终呢？

谁又敢说他们一定会顺利的完成父父的这份重任在这个世界上最传统的国家回到自己回到还在偶尔幻想的自己真是不知道该说自己天真还是太天真你没有遭受到，不代表这个世界没有恶意如果你暴露了所有的恶意会在第一时间倾倒向你若有那一天想过该怎么办嘛不寒而栗是不是勇敢的人，我祝福你们而我呢，我就在这个深暗的柜子里守住自己的心过好自己的生活不打扰别人，爱惜自己这才对吧

影片开头是一个抱着娃娃的肥胖的落寞的身影缓慢盲目的在街头行走，转而是声色犬马喧闹非凡的易装酒吧，一群妖娆妩媚的男人在台上放肆的表演，当中最出挑的就是我们的主角rudy，瞥见角落里目不转睛望向他的paul，爱情在这时萌生。

停车场里rudy给paul BJ后警察的盘问和奚落清楚的交代了那个时代社会对于gay鄙视排斥的态度，而临别时paul留下姓名和联系方式的行为也预示着这不是一场冲动的419，这在rudy的意料之外。

而就在这夜他见到了瘾君子邻居的残障儿子marco，开始了一个关于人性、亲情、爱情的故事。

向大多数根据真实事件改编的电影一样，此片也一样几乎没有太多情节的起伏，但不得不提的是rudy几场独唱扣人心弦令人印象深刻，一场酒吧里即兴的向paul进行自我介绍，一场两人和marco一起生活拍的家庭video配唱，一场失去抚养权后的发泄，最后一场得知marco离世后悲痛的吟唱，我想这四个片段多年后我仍然会记得，如同费城故事中汤姆汉克斯的歌剧唱段一样，永远植根于我的记忆深处。

作为一个纯粹的同性恋者，rudy的激情、才华和反叛是自然的充满力量的，他像个艺术家一样热爱自己的事业，不被世俗左右，仗义执言率性而为，但为了争取marco的抚养权，他听取了生活在主流社会更有经验的paul的意见穿起西装打起领带，收敛了脾气，面对律师一次次充满羞辱性的质问默默忍受，但这些努力始终改变不了权威人士对于同性恋者的偏见，可怜的marco就这样湮灭在冰冷的街头。

电影到这里结束了，我们都知道rudy和paul会继续维持着他们的relationship，继续过着属于他们的生活，这是爱情故事的happy ending

看电影的时候总希望一个好的结尾，就像Marco总是希望the boy with magic可以有一个happy ending一样。

这是1979年的加州，但这依然是现在的社会。

There’s no true justice, but we still have to fight for what we consider right.看上去越痞的人也许心底越善良，拥有光鲜亮丽职业的人也许最不敢去斗争。

悲哀的不是逝去的生命，悲哀的是苟且活在世上的人们。

电影源自生活而高于生活，这是根据真人真事改编的，那么又有多少我们看不见的这样的故事在发生与上演？

This is not discrimination. This is reality.也许听到这句话的时候我们就应该预见结局。

和妈妈一起看的这部电影，她也为之动容，却依旧不能理解同性恋人。

然而我依然相信每个孩子都是上天赐予人间的礼物，他们不应该受到如此责罚，他们却用自己的笑容点亮人心，用自己的离去留下教训。

Rest in peace, dear Marco. Hope you can hear the singing from papa in heaven.

當我在看完預告的時候，就已經確信這是部非常棒的電影這是由一個真實故事改編的電影。

故事發生在70年代的美國，圍繞著一個患有唐氏綜合癥14歲的男孩Marco DeLeon展開。

故事的背景在同性戀者愛情的烘托下異常成功(注：70年代的美國對於同性戀相當歧視)。

因為這是一個炙手可熱、奪人眼眸的商業亮點，是曾加票房收入且吸人眾人的一個堅固題材，且能很好的達到讓觀眾產生共鳴并體會到他們在爭取撫養權時所受到不公平審判地痛苦、無奈。

但導演並沒有過度深入描寫同性戀的戀情，因這個亮點的背景是可被取代的，可以是從監獄出來的人，也可以是有複雜背景的人等等......電影在一開始就已Marco孤獨的背影展開，明確告訴觀眾這部電影的第一主角與主線就是Marco。

這個擁有燦爛笑容禮貌的男孩，天真可愛。

他用自己的方式安靜小巧的生存在這複雜的社會，雖然在智力方面不如正常人，但是也如常人那般渴望能擁有一個幸福溫暖的家，有真正疼愛他為他睡前講故事的人。

導演所刻畫的第二主角Rudy Donatello是個鮮明討人喜愛的人物，在導演一步步把Ruby對於Marco的愛緩緩帶出後，讓觀眾更能投入到Ruby那份對Marco的真摯愛中。

Ruby在影片里親自演唱的3首歌曲"Come to Me" " Love Don't live Here Anymore" "I Shall Be Released" 貫穿整部電影。

導演在歌曲方面的安排不僅純粹只是電影插曲，而是以Ruby的方式更好的帶出他對Marco深厚的愛。

歌曲成為電影重要的一部份完全融入其中，很是難得。

檢察官Paul Fleiger，雖然導演並沒有過多深入述說他的背景，但依舊成功讓觀眾對Paul有一種難以言說的敬佩之情。

我想大家都會記得這個畫面，Paul一臉認真的教導Marco做功課，從他眼中就可以感受到他對Marco滿滿的真摯的愛。

當然還有他在法庭堅定不移的言語，字字入人心。

他是個絕對成功且不用過多刻畫的第三主角。

但整部影片最讓我感覺驚喜的是，導演用了一個如此平靜的方式來宣洩他對於這個社會不公義現象的哀歎。

影片最後，Paul在信裏告訴每一個反對他們爭取Marco撫養權的人，認真描述給他們聽Marco是一個怎樣惹人喜愛的善良孩子。

他並不是寫信指責他們做錯了什麽，而是嘗試讓他們瞭解Marco是一個怎樣的孩子，因為他們從來都沒有機會認識Marco。

Paul所希望的是，當他們真的瞭解後可以明白Marco所真正需要的是什麽。

雖已然沒有什麽能再為Marco做的了，但至少在以後，當再次出現類似的Case，能請寬容對待。

這就是導演的魅力之處，也是最最成功之處。

那些反面的角色不是叫人來憎恨的，而是叫人來反思的。

我很感激導演在這部電影上花的所有一切心血，雖然身為商業片但導演非常成功傳遞了他所想要帶給觀眾們明確的信息。

最後，我想分享一下對「And Day Now」 這個名字的看法："Any Day" 在我們平凡生活里的每一天，都會有無數向Marco這樣的人身處在我們彼此的身邊。

而"Now"，此刻的你能為他們做的或許看似微小，但對於他們卻是最大的，最為珍貴的。

台詞精髓：At the court， Paul say：『This hearing is about Marco. who at this very moment is sitting in some foster home. and who will sit in some foster home forever. because no one want to adopt him. No one wants to adopt some short, fat, mentally handicapped kid. No one in this entire world wants him...except us. We want him. We love him. We'll take care of him and educate him, keep him safe and raise him to be a good man. Isn't that what he deserves? Isn't that what every child deserves?』http://blog.qooza.hk/chenfeng

我看到众豆友的评论时，也忍不住发表一下自己的看法。

这是一部很好的电影，在我心中，好电影就是看完之后，总能给你留下点感觉，那种感觉或许是美好的，忧伤的，快乐的，失落的.......但是总是有一种感觉，改变了你对某些事物的看法。

有人说这部影片在很多时候显得情节失控，导致目的不明。

其实我想说，应该说我相信，看完这部影片的人应该都会感觉到，同性恋有权利得到孩子的抚养权，因为他们就是普通人，甚至比一部分普通人更有爱。

当每个人都能产生有这种感觉，就说明这个电影已经成功的表达了它想表达的意思，传播了它的正能量。

电影中让我印象深刻的是黑人律师对鲁迪和保罗的一句话：在加利福利亚甚至允许有滥用药物和家庭暴力前科的人收养小孩，而你们不行。

看了一下电影资料，电影的背景设定在70年代，其实可想而知那时候人们对同性恋的不了解与深深的厌恶，无处不在。

电影中很多细节就反应了，如保罗丢了工作，他们其实找了很多律师却都没有人愿意帮他们，法官的一再刁难，与马可老师的担忧...让我始终感动的是他们的努力，他们没有放弃，他们的生活已经很艰难，他们知道他们要面对的，但是他们始终没有放弃...如果你懂得就好。

有人说鲁迪和保罗的感情发展的太快了，没有铺垫。

怎么说能，我曾经也喜欢过同性，只是她的突然回头对我的一个微笑，我就迷恋了她3年。

如果你也有过这种一见钟情的感觉，你就懂得。

其实鲁迪每次在台上唱歌时，都让我觉得惊艳，他的自信让我觉得那时的他比一个女人都美。

人很容易爱上与他自身性格相反的人，保罗严谨，善于克制自己，甚至可以看出他有点小内向，我相信他一看到自信，欢快，善良，执着，无时无刻可以展现自身才华的鲁迪时，他很容易一见钟情，并陪伴他做其实自己也想做而曾经没有勇气做的事情。

这个故事很简单，一切进行的很缓慢很自然，但是不是幸福的结局。

如果这个故事曾是真的，那30年后的今天，马可一样的孩子，遇到鲁迪和保罗一样的他们，这将是一段温馨的喜剧。

这个故事让我们知道，每段历史，都有一段时间的错误，但有像鲁迪和保罗他们那样的人，不断努力，终将改变这段错误。

就如我们现在的认知。

我也不觉得这片子有多好或者有多没有重点..但我的视觉就像一直就是处于男猪脚的视觉 去审视这个熟悉但又极度令人绝望 充满不甘的世界 那时候的同性恋都是自卑的.弱小的 无助的 律师男一直的逃避很好的印证着..我们不妨再想一下石墙 想一下鲍比 米尔克 差不多都是这个时代的吧.（记不太清楚） 可就因为这样对未知的恐惧 对无法预测的不放心和对所谓“平常人”不同的行事 就急着保护自己，从最开始的警官掏枪威吓到后来的贱人D.A和反方律师 完全就是要把同性恋往死里整..但最后失去的却是那个周旋在他们“斗争”下的孩子..一个唐氏综合征患者 一个只是想回家和吃最爱的甜甜圈而别无所求的小孩 那帮正常人失去的是作为人所必需的良心. 在这场斗争中 那些所谓的“正常人”变得连狗都不如 狗尚且会抉择谁对他好..他们连最起码的判断力都被歧视所吞没 我最记忆尤深的是女法官的陈词 那里面就是赤裸裸的歧视 我不明白什么叫做同性恋行为会影响孩子认为同性恋是正常的 那么一男一女在孩子面前吸毒做爱就应该是正常的 两个男人从心底里爱护着孩子 给他最好的 一直保护他照顾他 一起留下完美的记忆就是“不正常” 其实对于正常人来说那孩子也早就因为智障而被歧视 被归为“不正常”对待了吧..我还能说什么呢这世界真TM疯狂!!!

一对于美国的LGBT（同性恋，双性恋，及跨性别者）来说，本周是至关重要的一周。

加州第八号提案和DOMA（婚姻保护法案）被送交最高法庭。

平等的进程究竟会被推进还是推迟，取决于最后的裁定。

然而不可否认的是，LGBT群体在得到越来越多的支持。

人权运动组织发起了“更换你的Facebook头像”活动，鼓励网友将头像改成人权运动的标志，通常你看到的是蓝底黄条纹，然而，为了支持婚姻平等，人权运动组织特别设计了红底粉条纹的版本。

目前为止，活动响应很好，好到如果一个不知情者打开Facebook，八成以为电脑感染了最新的网络病毒。

二我支持LGBT，但从未在任何公开场合宣扬过立场。

不是因为害怕受到攻击，而是我实在脑力不足但又想得太多，关于LGBT的各种成因，关于大范围支持他们对社会的影响，诸如此类的问题想着想着就能把我绕进去。

对于我不能完全确定的事情的看法，我习惯将它设定为private。

三今晚跟美国朋友Sandra出去，我说到昨晚看的同性题材影片Any Day Now，Sandra开始对同性恋发表看法。

原话大致是，不支持同性恋，据她所知大部分同性恋者年幼时都受到过成年同性的侵犯，所以长大以后对性别困惑，这些人虽然可怜，但还是得改。

虽然这些话我没一个字同意，但也懒得跟她吵。

后来去超市购物，出来时我拎着半打啤酒，Sandra又说，不支持人喝酒，据她所知大部分喝酒的人都有醉酒的情况，醉酒会引发犯罪，所以，虽然圣经（此人基督徒）都没有说喝酒是一种原罪，但还是应该杜绝酒精。

我感到愤怒，不仅因为她对于饮酒者的推论毫无逻辑价值可言，更因为她试图改变我。

我相信没有哪个心智成熟的人喜欢别人干涉自己，尤其是那种根本无所谓对错，也丝毫不干涉他人的习惯或生活方式。

最后我们不欢而散。

回到家我突然意识到，Sandra对同性恋者和饮酒者的态度如出一辙——不了解，以道听途说来的反面特例当作主流，然后表明反对立场，声称这个群体需要改变。

而一切的起因，说白了不过是他们跟自己非同类，又不愿站在更高的角度，客观去了解这个异己群体而已。

所以我该庆幸饮酒无论在任何国家都是流行文化，我不会被大众排斥，个别人的看法可以忽略不计。

而同性恋者仍是少数群体，仍在经受主流群体的误解和非难。

说到底，我们所有关于平等的诉求，追求的都是不同群体的相互包容。

包容多数情况下是建立在了解的基础上，但其实我们不能要求每个人对异己者有深入的了解（对于同性恋者，就是因为我尚且没有深入的了解，所以依然有困惑），因为这需要的不仅是时间，还有眼界。

但我们至少该明白，这个不同于我们的群体（中的绝大多数）如果只是在用不同的（且并不危害社会的）方式在实现人类共通的价值或情感，那就该包容他们。

09年我看米尔克时写下的感想是：米尔克的意义不仅仅在于为同性恋者争取权益，他的斗争是为了所有的少数族群。

甚至可以说，是为了所有因为他人的无知与偏见而受到不公正待遇的人，当一个社会能坦然地听取各种声音，这才是一个有胸怀的健康社会。

时隔几年，我更加认同自己当时的说法。

那时并没有想真的效仿米尔克。

而今天因自己饮酒被朋友质疑之事，我突然意识到公开支持LGBT的意义，不仅是明理人帮助蒙昧者明理，更是有包容心的人教胸怀狭隘者学会包容。

四再说回周四看的影片，Any Day Now。

其实是在网上打印了四张免费电影票，四个人浩浩荡荡准备去看新版Evil Dead。

到电影院被告知满场，不过可以换成任意其他场次。

于是就换到了时间最近的Any Day Now。

进场后只有我们四个人，萧条地完成了观影。

Rudy是同志酒吧的异装舞者，他性感，热烈，活得洒脱有趣。

Paul让他讲述自己的故事，他用一首歌唱出自己的经历，如何生活艰辛，梦想被现实击碎。

Rudy像极了风月俏佳人里朱莉娅•罗伯茨饰演的女主角，如果他是个女人，一定追求者无数。

Paul是行迹于上层社会的律师。

他结过婚，拥有过自己的公司，但不甘于麻木不仁的生活。

于是离了婚，学习法律，他的梦想是改变世界。

Rudy和Paul一见钟情，他们彼此被对方的特质吸引，彼此深爱。

因为Rudy爱憎分明的一颗赤子之心，他们还意外得到了一个孩子——患有自闭症的男孩Marco。

Marco喜欢自己的芭比娃娃，喜欢吃垃圾食品，喜欢Rudy把自己当作主角编进故事里，虽然电影里Rudy的故事从来都只讲一个开头，但可以猜到，它一定有个好结局。

然而现实中的Marco却结局悲惨，Rudy和Paul的同志情侣关系被揭发后，Marco被生活淫乱的生母夺回抚养权，他最终走失，孤独死在一座桥下。

不是因为他出走后忘记了生母的住处，那条路他走过无数次；只是在他心里Rudy和Paul才是他的家，但因为世俗的干涉，那个家他再也回不去……影片根据真实事件改编，虽然情节涉及到儿童抚养权，但影片的重心并不在同性家庭是否有资格收养儿童这个比同性恋本身更复杂很多的问题。

Marco的作用还是拷问社会对同性情侣的不公正——因为和Rudy的关系被揭发，本来即将升迁的Paul丢掉了工作，同时他们失去了对Marco的抚养权，唯有Rudy唱歌的梦想侥幸没有被打破，他夜夜在酒吧，唱一首让人心碎的挽歌。

影片在很多时候显得情节失控，导致目的不明。

看完我仍然会困惑它到底想说的是同性恋受到不公正对待，还是同性情侣是否有资格收养小孩，再或者，是如何关爱特殊儿童。

作为探讨敏感问题的电影，本片显然力道不足，而导演耽于煽情，演员入戏过深长期飘在自high状态（尤其Rudy）更加重了煽情意味，也让电影更加绵软无力。

影片很多情节设计很像撑同片的典范费城，比如律师被发现是同志后丢掉工作，比如最后没有人愿意接同志的案子所以主角求助黑人律师。

但费城分分钟都是剑拔弩张的气势，汤姆•汉克斯为它掉的每一斤肉都是打在保守世俗脸上的响亮耳光。

而本片思想较费城并不失之毫厘，但力度却差之千里。

然而我相信，任何对于现存问题心怀诚意的探讨，都是有价值的。

至于有人提到的Rudy和Paul的情感发展缺乏铺垫，没有说服力，可以套用我一心思细腻的朋友对新版笑傲江湖的评价：剧情是狗血的，感情是真挚的。

嗯……