Crwthod A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

Tayyab Torres Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

caseymck I wish this "writer"/"director" would just hire teenage boys for sex in the confines of his own home rather than writing incredibly creepy, dramatically vacant vehicles for his own chicken fetish. The teddy bear should be a warning: beyond this point, there be creeps. The young lead is such a bad actor, he relies on the "exasperated" tone of voice to make any emotional inflection, and Bright has that terrible monotonous (attempting world-weary) delivery that just makes each scene between the two more excruciating. Bright is staggering in his lack of charisma. If you can't tell that lines like, "Mother, I just don't know about your attempts to run my life!" are embarrassing clunkers, you probably shouldn't be writing or starring in movies at all. And technically? At least learn how to make an eyeline match. It's not hard. The wrong frigging people have money to waste on masturbatory projects like this.

jm10701 If you, like Paul Bright, are turned on by the sight of middle-aged Paul Bright strutting naked, with everything flopping free, before a boy he's just met, young enough to be his grandson... and a few minutes later the two of them making out naked (both of them, this time) in bed (obviously the strutting worked its irresistibly sexy magic - but he IS the director, after all, AND the writer), then this is the movie you've been waiting for.I've forced myself to watch Bright's first four movies because his relentless determination to make them despite huge obstacles fascinated me, but this is the last. He has no talent. A monster ego, but not one drop of talent anywhere.Low budgets have nothing to do with it. Masterpieces have been made for a fraction of what a Bright movie costs to make - Shane Carruth made Primer for $5000, but Carruth has talent and Bright has none. Bright's movies do nothing but aggressively and artlessly push his absurdly narcissistic self-image and his nauseating libertarian fantasies of legalized drugs and uninhibited man-boy naked LOVE triumphing over diabolical government oppression and violent religious lunatics. They're extremely tiresome, like being harangued by an old, naked hippie.The fundamental requirement of ANY movie is that it be entertaining. Bright's movies obviously entertain him enormously, but they only irritate, bore and repulse me. In a DVD extra for his 2007 movie Theft, Bright said anybody who writes a negative review of his movies is "a bitter queen with an axe to grind". I guess that's me. I'd rather BE a bitter queen than watch another minute of his talentless egomaniacal crap.

Bill Shroyer Had the cast and crew seemed any less sincere in their efforts to make the best flick they could, I would probably tear a film like this to shreds. But more important to me than having the best of acting, props, effect, etc... etc... et... is to come away from the film with the feeling that it wasn't just thrown together and half-heartedly produced. I do think the producer - the kinda' cute older gent playing the lead - likes making these movies partially as an excuse to get to mess with young dudes, and find it amusing how he is utterly unafraid to let it all hang out in his flicks (literally). Even so, I don't get the impression that's the entirety of his motivation - that seems more like just one of the "perks" to him.That said, if you just want to know the pros and cons, here are my views on the matter:Pros: - Realistic, believable plot - I have little doubt that sooner or later, humans will be tagged in just such a way, and that sooner or later someone, somewhere is going to take advantage of it for their own tyrannical ambitions; - While all the effects were cheap, they weren't utterly absurd like they tend to be in most films of similar budget. This guy really seems to know how to make the most with practically nothing, and to make it believable. Not that there were a lot of really special effects - the CGI was bare-bones minimal - but the look, feel and functionality of the props (automated voice greetings, videoconferencing, one or two of the implants after they'd been removed & destroyed, etc...) were good; - A message that people really do need to hear, about a topic we're almost certain to face not too far from now; - Paul Bright's exposed booty.Cons: - Bad acting. Bad, bad, bad. At least for the most part. One or two of them were pretty good most all of the time, but all of them had their moments where they couldn't possibly have been any less believable. You really do have to just overlook it through much of the flick, so if that bothers you then you probably should avoid this one; - Unclear plot details - particularly regarding the man he video'd with and his boss lady. I understood the guy's role in the unseen back-story leading to the movie's current events, but not what he was supposed to be doing in the present and definitely not what role his boss lady was supposed to be playing; - Paul Bright's exposed booty. You're either going to like it or you're not, and after seeing similar in "Angora Ranch", it seems fairly clear he's just being exhibitionistic. I personally don't mind, but a lot of people would and so I figured you might as well hear about it now. It's not real frequent or anything, but for the short time it's there, it's _all_ "there", if you catch my drift.

pinkas-2 I have just watched this film and I would like to write this review while it's still fresh in my mind.I have to admit that in this particular gay themed movie, the gay issue is the least important aspect. There are many similar examples to this kind of film, and it's no better or worse then any of them.However, the near-futuristic plot line is vital, and in fact it is the first time I see this kind of realistic plot that deals with what will definitely be our lives in 15, 20 or 25 years ahead - life with no freedom, life which is monitored and controlled by our would be oppressors - the government, the army, the elite. It is truly important that everyone should watch this film and relate to it not as a sci-fi movie, but as a real life experience - 20 years or so ahead from today.This I feel is the main contribution of this film.As for production levels - well as one can expect from indie low budget; but please try to look beyond the mere look of the film, and into the strong message it entails.Highly recommended viewing!