Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuBisexual travel writer Nathan examines his increasingly complex feelings for Maggie as they travel through California's wine country on assignment.Bisexual travel writer Nathan examines his increasingly complex feelings for Maggie as they travel through California's wine country on assignment.Bisexual travel writer Nathan examines his increasingly complex feelings for Maggie as they travel through California's wine country on assignment.
- Auszeichnungen
- 1 wins total
Jer Adrianne Lelliott
- Nicholas
- (as a different name)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
I agree with another reviewer here about the film's decent technical quality, but I wouldn't extend that to acting. Amber Benson is good, actually, but the rest of the cast is pretty much sub-par. I particularly thought many of Cole Williams' lines were read poorly.
The story could have been interesting, but the script didn't do it justice. The dialog sounded forced and stilted much of the time. It just didn't ring true, didn't sound like true life. When the plot conflict develops, I couldn't quite see the reason for it. There didn't seem to be anything happening that hadn't happened before so I couldn't understand the characters' reactions.
It was difficult not to compare this movie to Sideways. Not that they had all that much in common except the location, but that was enough to have me constantly thinking of how much better this movie could have been.
The story could have been interesting, but the script didn't do it justice. The dialog sounded forced and stilted much of the time. It just didn't ring true, didn't sound like true life. When the plot conflict develops, I couldn't quite see the reason for it. There didn't seem to be anything happening that hadn't happened before so I couldn't understand the characters' reactions.
It was difficult not to compare this movie to Sideways. Not that they had all that much in common except the location, but that was enough to have me constantly thinking of how much better this movie could have been.
I watched this movie as I had a spare hour and a half and the 73 minute running time intrigued me, as I often find that a lot films these days are over inflated and over long. This film is a confusing "love" story with an unlikeable lead. The casting of the leading male actor was a mistake as far as I was concerned. He didn't (to me) have the charisma required to portray the "lothario" he was convinced he was. His looks bordered on effeminate. Don't get me wrong, effeminacy does not bother me in the slightest,but in this case, I found it hard to find the actor/character as irresistible as the film would have you believe. Kudos however must go to the lady playing the female lead. I felt she gave a good performance and she made me feel for her. Which is a definite plus, right? The road trip format of this movie has been done before. And I quite enjoy road trips if the traveling companions are interesting and the destination is worth the trip. In this case, it wasn't. Not a total waste of time, but I would not recommend this as a must see.
This film is about the sexual relationships of a bisexual man and a heterosexual woman, who go on a trip together to research for a newspaper article.
Judging from the film length, I guessed that the plot is probably not so well developed, and there is little to be conveyed. Unfortunately, this turns out to be true. I feel that there are not enough character development to make the characters connect with the viewers. There are not enough subplots to make the film interesting either. Many of the momentary flashbacks could have been expanded to full scenes, such as Nathan and Maggie walking around San Francisco having fun together. This would serve as better story development, and to increase the film's runtime. It is a pity that this film turns out not to be as captivating and interesting as it could have been.
Judging from the film length, I guessed that the plot is probably not so well developed, and there is little to be conveyed. Unfortunately, this turns out to be true. I feel that there are not enough character development to make the characters connect with the viewers. There are not enough subplots to make the film interesting either. Many of the momentary flashbacks could have been expanded to full scenes, such as Nathan and Maggie walking around San Francisco having fun together. This would serve as better story development, and to increase the film's runtime. It is a pity that this film turns out not to be as captivating and interesting as it could have been.
I had been looking forward to this film for quite some time as the synopsis seemed interesting. Also, truth be told, I am a complete sucker for gay melodramas and romantic comedies. I waited foolishly and have decided I want my time back.
Was the writer even in favor of gay relationships or the gay lifestyle? I ask because he does everything possible to craft the most loathsome gay lead character in history. Not only that, but he managed to cast an actor who is equally unappealing to play the character.
For whatever reason we are supposed to enjoy watching Nathan, a young man who is so in love with his talent, looks, and irresistible sexuality that it induces nothing but unending eye rolls. This is due to the fact that Nathan does not come off as especially talented, attractive, alluring, or intelligent. All of his dialogue is spoken merely to inflate himself and belittle everyone else around him. How could anyone be attracted to this hateful, greasy, selfish character at all, let alone enough to profess your love for him.
Take my advice, steer clear from this movie. It's title is much more fitting than I could have originally imagined as this film, its lead actor/character, director, and script have taken a very steep and rapid trip to the bottom of my trash bin.
Was the writer even in favor of gay relationships or the gay lifestyle? I ask because he does everything possible to craft the most loathsome gay lead character in history. Not only that, but he managed to cast an actor who is equally unappealing to play the character.
For whatever reason we are supposed to enjoy watching Nathan, a young man who is so in love with his talent, looks, and irresistible sexuality that it induces nothing but unending eye rolls. This is due to the fact that Nathan does not come off as especially talented, attractive, alluring, or intelligent. All of his dialogue is spoken merely to inflate himself and belittle everyone else around him. How could anyone be attracted to this hateful, greasy, selfish character at all, let alone enough to profess your love for him.
Take my advice, steer clear from this movie. It's title is much more fitting than I could have originally imagined as this film, its lead actor/character, director, and script have taken a very steep and rapid trip to the bottom of my trash bin.
An arrogant jackass meets an airhead. This was a total waste of time. Not sure what the writer was trying to do but it didn't work.
The best acting was done by the car.
The best acting was done by the car.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesFilm debut of Justin Hartley.
- SoundtracksSonnet No. 3 (Like a Duck)
Written by Honky / Rock-A-Lot / Whacks-A-Lot
Performed by MC Honky
Published by Sir Rock-A-Lot Music (ASCAP), Dick Little Music
Available on spinART Records
By Arrangement with Ocean Park Music Group
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Offizieller Standort
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- Кто первый к заднице прильнет
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirma
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 5.468 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 1.549 $
- 1. Apr. 2007
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 5.468 $
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen