Fantastic!

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

I watched this movie driven by many good reviews depicting the story of complex and difficult relationship, dealing your drugged partner while full of self-uncertainty and an unfulfilled life. Gay themed background or not, sounded worth a detour. This Indie movie (low budget) so I will not grade with an eye out for an outstanding choreography and impeccable script. It has some anachronistic oddities (character not changing style over many years, New York City scenes out of era, interior not changing a bit over the course of many years) but also a few artistic shot that may catch your attention (playing with lights, framing or softness). There is a reasonable balance of both your sensitivity or attention to detail may find either enjoyable or disappointing. Again, an Indie movie - don't be too harsh.With that in mind, the final product does fairly at treating the topic especially with the character of Erik well developed and believable. But it also has gaps and short comings. The second main character of "Paul" as the closeted gay lawyer with a secret side, fails to develop beyond that. By the end, we know nothing of him and it is not all clear if this was intentional or not. Without this development, it is hard to judge of the depth of the struggle - when the "intervention" scene comes to the forefront, we realize there is a real in-depth problem but have not been driven into it but we cannot relate to the depicting of Paul as a "loving and carrying character". We have to feel this as real through Erik.The movie has also holes and the side scenes and stories do not add much to the thread but raise more questions. From under-developed characters to shallow in passing add ons, we often miss the point and the value added to the threaded theme. OK, we get the idea that Erik has an unstable love life and fall for phone based dating and hook ups. But take the character of Igor for example. Who is he? Do they have a relation? Does he present a better alternative for Erik? This is so brief that the intent is unclear. And what about Erik's BFF? They often travel together but at no point in time are we sure of the nature of their relation - why the friendship and dependence? The confidence? How instrumental is she to his life's story? We are left in our unanswered thoughts.The performance of the main actor, Dane Thure Lindhardt (Erik), is one to remember for a movie which is not very deep and at times, treated with flaws, omissions and unexplained or unclear characters. The whole atmosphere succeeds to give you a sense of sadness and disconnect but comes short to an in depth drama.

I'm convinced that this is a very sincere production, but it left me rather depressed and unsatisfied. It's the story of two lovers who are followed through a period of like 10 years. Erik is a bit of a sullen and insecure film-maker (who works with financial support of his father forever on one project); Paul a more world wise and intelligent lawyer who gets hooked on all kinds of drugs. While Paul slowly but deliberately glides away from his lover into his own drugs-filled universe, Erik desperately tries to hold on to what he sees as the love of his life. We see them love and bicker, parting and coming together again and endlessly talking to save the remains of their relationship, until finally (and understandably) Erik gives-up. The end. Both actors (Thure Lindhardt as Erik and Zachary Booth as Paul) do a fine job and are convincing enough. And the script may not give us an optimistic point of view but it's authentic and painfully realistic. My biggest problem though was, that I couldn't feel sympathy for either of both men. Paul is aloof, egotistical and doesn't seem to have any empathy; of course you know that his personality is marred by the abuse, but still you want to smack him for treating Erik so bad. On the other hand Erik is extremely passive and lets Paul walk all over him again and again. One important scene illustrates this poignantly: Paul (who had disappeared for yet another long period) suddenly calls Erik up and invites him to a hotel room, where he (heavily influenced by drugs) receives him but at the same time has an escort come over and has sex with this guy, with Erik sitting miserably next to the bed. It didn't help (at least not me), that both men aren't really good- looking, which all the more made me wonder what they saw in each other to begin with anyway. To sum it up: definitely good performances but a depressing experience.

This is a terrific, low budget, independent, limited release, film about a relationship mortally wounded by addictions. Erik and Paul (Thure Lindhardt and Zachary Booth) meet while trolling for sex on a phone sex line back in 1998 when people were still doing that. The opening scene is of Erik, spread out on his bed in his dingy apartment, on the phone, clicking back and forth between callers, sifting through details of size, appearance, top, bottom, etc. These calls are not about, "would you like to hook up". They are about, "I'm ready, you're ready, do we suit each others needs". One after another he either hangs up on them or they hang up on him, and then, score. Next, we then see Erik walking through the streets of NY, which are as dark and dingy as his apartment, to meet up with "Mr. Right Now", Paul. And then - the big reveal. Erik knocks on Paul's door and as it opens you have the moment that is the giant metaphor for this whole movie: are you who I'm hoping you are and will this work out? Did he lie or tell the truth about his height, looks, hair color, penis size? Will this be a fairytale or a nightmare? On most occasions this is probably where, if you are the one knocking you turn and walk away fast. And if you're the one with the door you slam it and lock it. They do neither. And, for just a second, before the sleaze begins, their eyes lock in a gaze that tells you that they will know each other long after this encounter is over.Writer/director Ira Sachs has some problems with this script. It bogs down near the end. In the scope of the entire film, however, it's minor but worth a mention. He has written, and brought to life, a very gritty, sentimental, and real, story about two men falling in love, as one of them crashes to the ground in flames. Paul has a drug problem. A bad one. Erik tries to tolerate it, bargain with it, talk Paul out of it, literally hold his hand through it, until he finally says, enough. The road from here to there is painful to watch. It unfolds nakedly through the actors, the script, a brilliant music score, and menacing cinematography. This is a familiar story, with a new treatment, and it is raw to the bone. The cast here is breathtakingly effective. Julianne Nicholson (Flannel Pajamas) plays Erik's colleague and best friend with disarming gentleness. Zachary Booth plays Paul, a man only slightly aware of the harm he does to himself and others. Erik's sister is played, sparingly but effectively, by Paprika Steen. With very few lines she establishes the "normal" facets to Erik's character. There's brother/sister tension. But mostly there's love and family. The very thing Erik and Paul want for themselves. One of the more interesting castings is Russ, played by Sebastian La Cause. Russ is one of Erik's distractions from the chaos of Paul, and he is bizarre. They meet over the phone and their first encounter goes a little differently. Sebastian Le Cause has very little screen time but he makes an impression. He is the flashing caution light for those contemplating anonymous encounters. And the way he does this character is jarring. He is as menacing as he is alluring. Ultimately, this film belongs to Thure Lindhardt as Erik. Lindhardt makes you feel this movie, and his journey, as he is dragged through the madness of drug addiction and loving someone who is out of control. He has the same quality that I attribute to great actors like Heath Ledger. He pulls away from the camera, away from the movie, and draws you in closer, until you're living the story with him. Before you know it, Erik's problems are your problems. Which made me care deeply about both of them. It is an astonishing technique and Lindhardt gives a mesmerizing performance. It is natural and unstudied. He finds the perfect pitch in every scene and the expert camera work is there to capture all of it. Thimio Bakatakis's cinematography is art. It's not possible to discern who the genius is here, Bakatakis or Sachs, but someone has angled a camera here, boxed in a shot there, and sometimes filmed scenes where a character is completely back lit by a bright sky, leaving them in shadow, empty, lifeless, or unreachable. Twice, you see Erik caged in the shot. The first time at the museum when he is made to hide from Paul's unexpected ex-girlfriend. The second time, at the bathroom door listening to the running water, quietly calling for Paul. If you turned off the sound, the camera work alone would tell this story.It's easy to get into the weeds too much about how, and in how many different ways, this film is brilliant. But ultimately, it is just compelling. You want these two guys to win. You want their love for one another to trump the mountain of odds stacked against it. You want them to live happily ever after. If ever a film cried out for a sequel, and they almost never do, this one does. Five years after the credits roll on this film I can see Erik and Paul together again, tenuously, carefully, and forever. At the beginning of this film when they see each other for the first time, unglamorous as it was, you know that it's the start of something better. When they see each other for the last time here, I just got the feeling that it wasn't over. This is not an easy film to watch. But much like driving past an accident on the freeway, you can't not look.

I saw this movie at the LIGLFF Out at the Movies event last night. As it happened, I liked it better than most. I thought it was a nice mood piece, with good acting, and an involving story, for the most part. I definitely would recommend it.There were some flaws, though. The biggest one was the time changes. For very little apparent reason, we flash though about 9 years of the main character's lives, and yet they look exactly the same from beginning to end. They have the same hairstyles and have not seemed to age at all. It just seemed non-sensical to make a big deal about the passing of years and not have it impact at all on the appearance of the actors.Also, other issues pop up that seem to have no relevance to the movie at all in the end, like the results of an HIV test.While I did like it, I thought it was definitely way too long. It was not as if each yearly segment had some significant action attached to it. Sometimes they didn't. The movie sometimes lurched jarringly ahead a few years, seemingly without valid reason. Since the movie's outcome was obvious in the first half hour, it played out way too long. Still, I did find the characters involving.As for the person who commented that they had never seen a gay crack addict, this film begins in the 90's. There were gay men who did crack. And not every gay man in this movie did drugs. In fact, the movie made that point quite clear. One of the 2 main characters tried it but did not like it. There was a definite validity to some of the drug culture the movie was referring to. I think more surprising to me was that the person in the movie who was very addicted still managed to hold his high-level job, without repercussions.One more thing, I did love the soundtrack in this film. It totally matched the movie.This film was not especially deep, however it was a bit of a melancholic art film that was an interesting look at the decade in the lives of 2 gay men.It is what it is, and not all that much more.