FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Ava-Grace Willis Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Roedy Green The plot is simple. A straight girl and a très camp nominally bisexual boy go on a road trip and have a lot of sex and bicker.The problem with the movie is completely in the writing. The dialogue is monotonous, and not in the least believable. It is some naïve straight person's fantasy of what gay people are like. It lacks humour and novelty. It feels like ordinary people talking just to pass the time.The gay sex scenes are quite Victorian. The characters don't even disrobe. The actual sex is discreetly off camera. The raciest thing you see is a hand on an arm. In contrast, the heterosexual scenes are very in your face. That is cheating and insulting in movie that bills itself about being about gay characters.Cole Williams in particular does the best with the limp material, breathing some life into it.The very plot of the movie echoes that infuriating Christian lie that being gay is a choice and all that is needed is some heterosex to convert even the feyest boy.There is some quite fun music and animated dancing, the best part of this movie, unfortunately a small part.

david-blanco-861-258536 I watched this movie as I had a spare hour and a half and the 73 minute running time intrigued me, as I often find that a lot films these days are over inflated and over long. This film is a confusing "love" story with an unlikeable lead. The casting of the leading male actor was a mistake as far as I was concerned. He didn't (to me) have the charisma required to portray the "lothario" he was convinced he was. His looks bordered on effeminate. Don't get me wrong, effeminacy does not bother me in the slightest,but in this case, I found it hard to find the actor/character as irresistible as the film would have you believe. Kudos however must go to the lady playing the female lead. I felt she gave a good performance and she made me feel for her. Which is a definite plus, right? The road trip format of this movie has been done before. And I quite enjoy road trips if the traveling companions are interesting and the destination is worth the trip. In this case, it wasn't. Not a total waste of time, but I would not recommend this as a must see.

Gordon-11 This film is about the sexual relationships of a bisexual man and a heterosexual woman, who go on a trip together to research for a newspaper article.Judging from the film length, I guessed that the plot is probably not so well developed, and there is little to be conveyed. Unfortunately, this turns out to be true. I feel that there are not enough character development to make the characters connect with the viewers. There are not enough subplots to make the film interesting either. Many of the momentary flashbacks could have been expanded to full scenes, such as Nathan and Maggie walking around San Francisco having fun together. This would serve as better story development, and to increase the film's runtime. It is a pity that this film turns out not to be as captivating and interesting as it could have been.

RitchCS I rented this movie from Netflix and saw the running time 1:13...too short to a feature and too long to be a featurette. After fifteen minutes, I was already looking at my watch. Seldom have I seen so many misfit romances and affairs, it almost became laughable. The gay lead desiring sex from a hag who preferred a Lesbian in college. He was too effeminate to believe he desired her for sex. SPOILER: The people who got hurt were their two boyfriends back home...and her boyfriend preferred sex from our male lead. I kept wishing they would ALL die and end this piece of tripe halfway through. I watched until the end hoping there might be some redeemable value...but the ending only was worse...especially the tag-line at the end. The only conclusion I drew from this film was that the director must hate gay people to portray them in such a negative dysfunctional manner. Had I paid full price for admission, I would've asked my money back. Seventy-three minutes is too short for any film. The producer should have paid the audience nine bucks to sit through it!