I will just say up front that, just because a particular media piece has an obvious vested interest in a particular view doesn't automatically make it bad. (I think the difference for me is what approach is taken and whether the power of the media relies in substance, form, or both -- and media that depends solely on form without having substance is media that lacks integrity.)
The documentary is definitely put together to promote a particular side and cast the opposing views in a bad light, and definitely there's a strong play to emotions in terms of music, clip editing, and whatever else. Here, the highly intolerant end of the religious right is promoted as if it's representative of the whole, whereas actually I think most people who are negative towards homosexuality in some way have a more casual approach to it: They're against it but not actively militant until they feel threatened in some way. I think the documentary improves where it casts anti-homosexual opines as less extreme.
Part 1 (intro): Sets up the rest of the documentary, tone-wise. Pretty clearly telegraphs the style and point of the documentary.
Part 2: I have to say I was really uncomfortable by the scene where Anita Bryant got a pie in her face; I found it quite juvenile (and not very flattering) for the part of the gay activist, but I was also immediately offended by the religious posturing of Bryant and the others who bowed their heads and prayed for the "poor depraved homo's soul" right there in the conference, taking advantage of the media presence to enforce their "oh so spiritual" image. Just sickening stuff, even if Bryant was doing this sincerely -- I felt like I was watching strategies used by my pre-teen kids, where when they fight they capitalize on situations to make the other look worse.
// Hitler references? Ick.
// Again, promoting the most extreme anti-homosexual forces who are rabid, versus the most intelligent "equal rights" people on the other.
Sort of stacking the deck, isn't it?
// FINALLY, focusing on Gene Robinson's personal narrative, and interviewing his obviously religious parents who you'd think would be opposed.
It finally puts a normal, human face on the issue and connects in a much more "fair" way. Basically, "Look, you have these beliefs; look at this guy, look at the family; can you really say you believe all these awful things about this guy, just because he's gay?"
It gets to the crux of the matter; only the hardcore "theology trumps life experience" folks will completley ignore stuff like this.
//Interesting way to end the clip by the black pastor's comments: "I said, 'God, don't let my son grow up to be a faggot and my daughter a slut.' And God did that, yup.. he REVERSED it." And then he laughs. Some people would be bitter; his laughter makes it sound like he's had some priority changes; interested in seeing where his story has gone.
Part 3: Comments by Tanya (the black pastor's daughter) were rather funny -- she came out to her mom to "improve their relationship," since she hated the growing distance from keeping secret, and when asked how it went, she said, "It was... remarkably unsuccessful" and laughed.
Next comes the conservative pastor ranting against homosexual evils by dragging in people's concern for family; by linking homosexuality to "anti-family," a lot of emotional leverage can be gained by the pastor. (Of course, by linking anti-homosexuality to this style of pastor, a lot of emotional leverage can be gained with the viewers of this documentary.)
More good "personal narratives" here, showing how people grew up, basically tried to assume the standard baseline and make it work even when they knew they were "different," and how it ended up failing. ALl the people shown are "normal" people too; they seem reasonable, friendly, and rational. In the end, it looks like the black pastor and his wife disagree with their daughter's lesbian relationships, based on their religious beliefs -- although the mother seems definitely more angry about it. I think it's good to include fairly reasonable people like this who disagree, and show how the family dynamics play out.
In the end, can they stay CONNECTED in some way? And still respect each other? That's the important question.
Part 4: Powerful comments about the Leviticus condemnation of homosexual behavior and placing it in context of the culture at the time and their understanding of the act of procreation and scientific misconceptions of the role of male seed versus the irrelevance of the woman, in religious thought, except as an incubator. (This also helps explain why women/women sexual activity is never dealt with; it's always about acts that waste the seed of the man.) Using a variety of studied pastors from a variety of faiths and denoms and genders and race (including Bishop Tutu) gives additional credibility, although it's hard to tell if their view is a minority opinion; the variety of sources is geared to suggest it is not.
Powerful family stories. I love how it shows the reactions of both the children and the parents, the honest reactions, and confronting their own assumptions, expectations, and derailed dreams. It's very honest, and these parts -- which usually involve no sort of judgment, but just the sharing of the stories -- are probably the best of the documentary.
The matter-of-fact description of the teen who talks about the fun of gay-bashing is rather chilling.
*** Going to bed, tired
Homosexual friends of mine have highly touted this documentary, and many said it left them in tears. It's funny how pieces that resonate to our personal experience can move us, whereas those who haven't experienced it often remain untouched or at least not stricken. I haven't yet felt much emotional connection while I've been viewing it; however, I know I watched a particular documentary a month ago, and it was directly connected to the stress I'm having with my parents, and I went from laughing to actually sobbing in the space of about 3 seconds, seeing someone having a restored relationship that I feel will never happen with me.
So I think a lot of the emotional response is going to be based on one's personal experiences (can you directly relate to the level of rejection and abandonment that many homosexuals go through as part of embracing who they feel they are?), just to begin with.