Lot to mention but let me say first off I do not consider this a "gay film." Yes, there is a male/male gay relationship that figures prominently. Lesbians are left out here. (You remember lesbians, right? Gay women.) Anyway, what you do have is a bi-sexual tale of swapping and loving that isn't a bad story, but one that takes a number of detours along the way. Then gets completely lost at the end.
They could have easily cut 20 minutes plus out of this film and not lost a thing. Nor does it bother me that the sexual scenes between straights are somewhat more graphic than those depicting gay men. Why does this bother people so? If you are looking for porn just go find it. It's free and it's everywhere.
To be honest, I subscribe to the "less is more" theory. I want the director (and the screenwriters) to leave room for my personal imagination. I want to fill in the blanks romantically. Stop turning me into a cheap peeping Tom sitting in the Peanut Gallery and let me become an extension of every scene---sexual and otherwise. Sometimes with modern film I feel like I'm just a circus prop.
There are several side characters that just slow things down. The whole notion of these young people working to put out a magazine is treated almost as an afterthought.
But the worst of all is the entire 3-way plot line. That both men and women can exist in this kind of 3-way arrangement is ridiculous. Human frailty being what it is, it just never works out. That's why so called "swingers" have to continually look for new partners. In this script, the young woman is at first repulsed by the idea of sharing her boyfriend with a man. In a matter of 30 minutes she's not only accepted that arrangement, she's joining in between them. Theatrical license is one thing. This is silly.
They could have easily cut 20 minutes plus out of this film and not lost a thing. Nor does it bother me that the sexual scenes between straights are somewhat more graphic than those depicting gay men. Why does this bother people so? If you are looking for porn just go find it. It's free and it's everywhere.
To be honest, I subscribe to the "less is more" theory. I want the director (and the screenwriters) to leave room for my personal imagination. I want to fill in the blanks romantically. Stop turning me into a cheap peeping Tom sitting in the Peanut Gallery and let me become an extension of every scene---sexual and otherwise. Sometimes with modern film I feel like I'm just a circus prop.
There are several side characters that just slow things down. The whole notion of these young people working to put out a magazine is treated almost as an afterthought.
But the worst of all is the entire 3-way plot line. That both men and women can exist in this kind of 3-way arrangement is ridiculous. Human frailty being what it is, it just never works out. That's why so called "swingers" have to continually look for new partners. In this script, the young woman is at first repulsed by the idea of sharing her boyfriend with a man. In a matter of 30 minutes she's not only accepted that arrangement, she's joining in between them. Theatrical license is one thing. This is silly.