Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

Absolutely Fantastic

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

If you enjoy stories based on ridiculous premises; if you're a devotee of deplorable acting; if you get a kick out of seeing naked men who, for the most part, would be best filmed in really dim lighting, this is the movie for you. The lead character is reasonably good, but most of the supporting cast seem to specialize in over-acting while spending their time unsuccessfully searching for ways to speak that don't sound like Nathan Lane and Martin Short trying to be too camp.Reminds me of porn produced 40 years ago with modest improvements in the technical results.

caught this move on my cable network and was surprised that a film with such graphic and explicit scenes would air on television at around ten o'clock. nonetheless i settled in to watch this piece by famed director and photographer Bruce labruce who hails from Toronto, Canada. i still haven't formed a solid opinion of whether or not i like this film as it is difficult to classify. there were many interesting aspects such as the camera following the different characters/hustler around west Hollywood as they waited for their next meal ticket of sorts. the opening scene definitely got my attention as it came at you fast and furious and relentless. the sex scenes themselves were on the boring side except like the rest of the reviewers the amputee gay sex scene. the grittiness and edginess of the the picture made it more realistic though i could have done without the one scene where a male hustler gets his leg run over by a car that tony ward's character is driving and is shown in graphic detail. while i've been an admirer of tony ward's previous work as a runway model and Madonna's boy toy he looks haggard and beaten down in this flick. labruce's other films such as raspberry Reich and skin flick all seem to have the same elements ie. graphic in your face gay sex, political themes and messages and unsavoury characters. a film that will have people talking i can't say i would watch it again. but if you're aware of labruce's style than you might like it. to all others, stay away.

It's fairly obvious that the man who pretends to be a director Bruce La Bruce ought to stick to doing strictly porn. His pretensions to art wouldn't be taken seriously in a Film 101 class at NYU.Performing for porn and acting are two entirely different skills and our director seems not to notice the difference or care. His performance as the effeminate writer is no homage to Truman Capote. If Truman were alive he'd sue. In fact if the sisters of the late Eigil Vesti are alive I hope they sue this man. Naming one of your characters with the same name of the victim of a sensational gay homicide is not my idea of satire.Back in my working days at the New York State Crime Victims Board, I got into the Norwegian Consulate to do the paperwork intake for a claim filed by one of the two sisters of Eigil Vesti. Eigil was a young and naive Norwegian kid who was picked up and killed for somebody's idea of kicks. Before his body was discovered with a black leather mask on his head, his picture was all over the Greenwich Village and Chelsea areas of Manhattan as a missing person for about three weeks.I really fail to see the humor in using the name of the victim of one of the many GLBT homicide cases I did a claim for. He was a beloved younger brother to those two women from Norway whose first visit to the USA was to bring back his body for burial in their country. Having dealt with Eigil Vesti's family, I see no humor in defaming his memory in this disgusting manner.The film was bad enough as it was, using Eigil Vesti's name was way beyond bad taste, it's despicable.

A good effort from La Bruce as a director, if not as an actor. In fact the major drawback in the film is the dreadful 'acting'. Here I am Bruce! I'm a good actor (so I've been told anyway) and I'm gay! One of the major drawbacks of gay films in this ilk is the acting. So I'm not good-looking. Hey, we can't all be! Anyway, aside from a few sick, sleazy moments designed to shock (but are mostly just boring), this is a much better effort than his earlier films. Maybe because he had a collaborator this time?