SanEat A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

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.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

rbnlstone This film is a great story and it made me cry , that in my book is a sign of a good one. It would have a made a cool series with all the characters in Humbolt having expanded story lines. The chemistry between the main characters is brilliant and you can feel the dilemma they face. Beautiful setting ! Gets your imagination going about the characters and wanting to know more that the film doesn't expand upon. It's sweet but sad story but quite believable and makes you reflect on life and it's fragility.I think people should realize it's not a Hollywood movie but just a great story. If you don't have an open heart don't watch it ! It's not a European style film. I didn't regret buying it ;) Thumbs up to all the actors :)

BlindMan-11 I tried, I really tried to get some feel as to who these people were and why they were doing what they were doing.1. So they live in rural Oregon and of course everyone there totally thinks that a gay couple with a son is just fine! And where did the father get this son and how does he have custody? 2. Why did the son stop speaking? 3. So he is in an 'unfulfilled' relationship. So he is now a martyr because he really does need to stay for the young boy - whom is not his son? 4. Chase, whom comes to continue writing his book, falls in love yet he is to come across as a reinvented virgin? He has lived this long and now he falls in love in less than one week? And to top it off he will keep a torch burning for 5 years to come back and see him? 5. So the boyfriend comes home and Everett packs his bag and leaves him? So what is with him 'finding' Chase and then what? 6. So now we are to 'believe' that Miles, his boyfriend 'knows' all about the 'romp' week and that there is great feelings for Chase and that Chase is coming back so he is going to take a powder and go with this son to visit his parents. And he is as unemotional as a dead stick, with more feelings for some baked goods? All in all this whole movie reads more like a cheap dime store hetro romance novel for 14 year old girls.All that was needed was more 'cheezy' dialogue..."He took me in his arms and my life was fulfilled with **sound of waves crashing...(OMG they are in the mountains but I am sure that they could have figured out how to have crashing waves)...7. Who was the brother and why did he have to do his little naked hot tub scene? That made no sense. And when he asked....'Do you love him?' WHO is he talking about?

Delius80 WARNING: This review contains major SPOILERS!! I just finished watching this movie and I have to say overall I liked it. I think Shelter is a better gay/romance movie though. The scenery in Redwoods is very beautiful, and I really really like Brendan Bradley. Matthew Montgomery grew on me as the film went on. My complaints are the following: The music is totally hokey. There were some scenes that were supposed to be kinda light-hearted moments and the music was really cartoonish during these scenes and I found it to be really distracting. There was a lot of times where I thought the character's actions and dialog seemed a bit unnatural. Some of the things that the characters said and did didn't seem realistic to me. Especially the scene where the mother tells the son about her own long ago extra-marital indiscretions. I don't believe that conversation would ever have really happened. I think she should have offered advice to the son and then maybe we could have seen her looking at the man's hidden picture and reading a secret love letter from long ago to show that she understands what the son is going through. After she tells him about the affair he asks, "Do you still think of him?" and I couldn't help but roll my eyes and say back "Obviously she does or she wouldn't be talking about him now years later." Everett and Chase have an argument that seems to come out of nowhere and then they suddenly decide they are so angry and frustrated with each other and the situation that they just have to go lay down right that moment and take a nap. Everett's brother strips completely naked in the middle of a conversation after the family dinner I guess he is some kind of exhibitionist but what importance was it to the story?? And would someone just strip down while talking to their brother like that? It is never explained why Everett returns to Miles after packing his bag and leaving to find Chase. He finds Chase and the viewer is lead to believe they will run off together but the next scene (5 years later) and Everett is still with cold as ice and uptight Miles. (What the hell?) I can only guess he stays for the little boy but have these people never heard of shared custody? There are two scenes of completely gratuitous full frontal male nudity such as the one mentioned above, the other when Miles throws his robe off and then stands naked while he nags Everett about clipping his toenails over the carpet and griping over mold in the shower. The scene does show how uptight and trite Miles is but he didn't need to be naked. I felt the two nude scenes only succeeded in cheapening the film as a whole. I'm no prude, and I'll be the first to admit that I enjoy some nice male eye candy, but it just didn't seem to fit in here. It was kinda random. I was actually disappointed that it was even shown. The writer/director , David Lewis, obviously didn't believe in his own film enough, it was like he felt he had to throw in the nudity to get attention. I know it sounds like I didn't like this movie, but I did. The characters Everett and Chase are both very likable and the actors have good chemistry. I fault the writer/director for any of things I didn't like. I look forward to seeing Brendan Bradley in other films. =)

sandover I wish I could go to Redwoods and engrave on the trees Oscar Wilde's aphorism so that everybody could marvel on the splendor of the insight.For at least one more thousand years, oh Oscar, stay with us, for I go Wilde with this, this thing, for this is a symptom of our current predicament, not a film: Suffocating cheap chords of piano and wind mark our downfall to letting cheap soundtracks describe our intimacy; no I do not want any more bad music describe my, or anybody's intimate moments. They make their own f***ing music.Mediocre writers-cum-directors feeding primly on previous films, not as films, but as hits, and they miserably miss, dragging us with them.(The actors in their two bed scenes were somehow let to be, and these are the only almost redeeming moments in the film - along with Brendan Bradley's bland expression playing the harmonica towards the close, that achieves something of pathos - , but, oh, so bereft when then one remembers the pap surrounding them.)No I do not want any badly informed directors turning the unlived life into one more self-indulgence!(And why is it that Matthew Montgomery is involved with creepily mediocre gay films ("Socket", "Gone but not forgotten")?) But let's start at the beginning: Dear trees, fade out then fade in, then fade out then fade in, then fade out then fade in, then fade out then fade in - did you get the headache spin; No, cut it to the middle: slow mo so oh slow mo cut with mom and dad pensive so; slow mo and tears aboard this is really worstward ho; scenes with me and my lover so, wait, no, this is mom and dad again, this editing is so -FIVE YEARS LATER Now this what can it mean?...Are we to marvel that the protagonist has not aged a day, that the film comes five years after "Brokeback", or that five years from now that we are going to have more of this kind of film? One starts to get the feeling we need more of the punk sensibility that informed Derek Jarman's films; one yearns for films with spunk.