Straightman

A riveting picture, in my book. It was very well acted and the characters felt real and uniquely realized. It also kept me on my toes because it felt so unpredictable Without divulging too much, I will say that the ending was not what I expected--or even hoped for, but they kept it realistic. Having witnessed David's dead eyes when making love to his female partners [ I probably look that way in the dentist's chair] I sort of expected that he was gay also. Later, I wondered if he just hadn't met the right woman, but those questions remained unanswered. It wasn't a glossy soap opera, but a sort of gritty depiction of gay life in the working class. Well worth a look.

The main leads are great, and it is great to see a working class gay movie. The style reminded me of 1970s John Cassavetes, so the lighting was perfect, the locations were excellent, and the acting was naturalistic. A few of the actors were either poorly directed, or just didn't have the chops. It was at times a mess, with poor character development on the female roles - which is a problem with the script, usually. Though this film is very uneven, it was ultimately satisfying. In the end, the film works.

I loved this movie. I'll agree with a previous reviewer in that it's a breath of fresh air to have a LGBT movie about a working class guy. The main character was hot. You can keep all of your shaved pretty boys. I'll take a real man any day over those fake characters. I grew up in a time when coming out was not an option, and my first 'lover' was my best friend, who was an auto mechanic. I can really relate to these characters, and the story was very genuine. One of the best independent films I've seen in quite some time.

It was refreshing in terms of the gay character. It's rare to see an older, working class character .That is one of my major issues with gay-themed films. The relationship between the friends was the most interesting aspect of this film. The dialogue was a little incoherent, but that is very indie.Speaking of indie films, do all the characters have to smoke? This isn't the 1960's.

I was hoping for more. I was disappointed. I dont know exactly what I was expecting. Two roommates. One gay one straight. Both have relationship problems. They build a friendship. Neither of them have any one else to confide in (which is strange in itself) and then one decides to move to another city. What was this film's point? Or did it have one? I felt like I wasted my time.

If I were to structure a ratio of money spent to cinematic value I would give this gem 5 stars. It is a mesmerizing study of the two main characters, finely acted and full of dazzling, truthful dialogue. Yes, there were moments when a keener sense of editing would have trimmed and improved the movie, but overall I recommend this film without reservation. And why isn't Mr. Redgrave a star?

Essentially a "buddy movie" about two blue collar guys, one of whom happens to be gay, this 2000 film's low budget atmosphere somehow fits the setting and the characters. We meet David, a husky womanizer who works as manager of a tiny comedy club, and Jack, a quiet guy who is a carpenter by trade. Both are in their mid-late 20's.When Jack's longtime girlfriend moves out, David helps Jack adjust to her absence, and the two friends find a larger apartment to share in the "low rent" district of Chicago. Shortly thereafter, Jack confides in David that, since his girlfriend left, he has been exploring his attractions for men, and has decided he is probably gay. David is openly supportive, though he has some "issues" that get resolved when the two have a talk. David is also faulted for occasionally being insensitive toward Jack's feelings (like when Jack falls in love with Carlos, a fellow tradesman, and David can't see that is more than "just sex" to him). David grows as a person as well, deciding that he too wants some stability in a relationship, unlike the overlapping affairs with women he has maintained in the past. One scene - with David drunk and being helped to bed by Jack - made me cringe that the screenwriter was going to go with the stereotypical "gay roomie seduces straight roomie" cliche' that one sees too often, but, thankfully, he refrained from that. In the end, both men realize what the other's support and companionship has meant to him, with both good and bad results.The male leads are played by the two guys who wrote the film (perhaps autobiographical? Might be revealed on the commentary track, which I didn't listen to.) The low budget doesn't detract overall, though there are problems with the sound (dialogue lost to background noise in a couple of scenes), and the direction (by one of the writers/actors) tends to spend too much time on "atmosphere" shots that do nothing to add to the film. Of course, there is not much of a plot, but that isn't a problem in a film that is more of a character study of two likeable guys.I actually give this film extra points for portraying non-stereotypical gay characters. The film may also be somewhat helpful to those dealing with their homosexuality or bisexuality, as Jack talks about his feelings at length with David and others. The film won the Grand Jury prize at the 2000 Los Angeles "Out Fest" (G/L film festival).

My enjoyment of this movie was greater than the four stars I gave it would suggest.. Actually, I was just frustrated because I wanted more. I wanted the movie to be longer. I was too busy enjoying what was on the screen, in terms of naturalistic acting and dialogue, to even have noticed the problems with sound and lighting other reviews refer to. Indeed, this movie is a refreshing change form the perfectly groomed men and decorator environments of most gay movies. I had not really noted, until now, how foreign those movies are from where I come from, and how alienating to my real self those movies can be.. These, "wrong side of the tracks," characters,' are a lot more real to me and their development into their awakenings, as well as their clarification to each other of what good friends they are, is very moving for me. I hope there will be more movies like this in the future. But for the shortness of the film, I would have given it a five star rating.

If ever thee was a complete waste of time and money, it was perfectly represented by this film. I have seen better highschool stage productions. I cannot imagine that anyone wrote the lines because everyone seems to be making it up (and this is where the folks from "Whose Line Is It Anyway?" could have given these guys a lot of lessons) as they go along. Improv and acting at its very worst. A story line that sags from the beginning and crashes shortly thereafter. That, along with the DVD that didn't function properly made for a couple of hours of my life that will never be recovered. I'm ashamed of that........but if you read this review, it might save you the unfortunate disappointment of expecting anything redeeming from this movie.