Boyfriends

This film is about 3 gay couples spending a weekend in a country hose together. Their troubles are unleashed and their relationships are tested.

"Boyfriends" has quite a brutal plot, as all three couples have problems in their relationship. One couple has been together for 5 years but is not happy; another couple's relationship is not working because a guy's love is not reciprocated; while the third couple have just met but not seem to get on. All these problems are common everyday problems that people do face, and the film analyses the emotions and reactions of these characters in depth. I think "Boyfriends" is a great character study.

I agree that "Boyfriends" is a low budget amateur production. However, I think this adds to the realism of the film, as it is about everyday problems of everyday men. There is no sugar coating, no pretentiousness, no fancy fluffs and no stereotypical drags. And no pink stuff at all anywhere. A plain and direct film about what problems gay men face is a welcomed change.

Having recently dredged Boyfriends up on video i thought i might give it another chance.

I was surprised to find it wasn't as horrendous as a I remember from the first time round.

The wonderful mismatch of the slovenly Paul (James "let's play camp characters for the rest of my career" Dreyfus) and the wonderful Ben (Mark Sands) does shine through.

The other characters have no depth. It's as if the writers scribbled the script in one night, sorry Neil and Tom.

The only shining scene is the "pig" scene, wonderfully performed by Mark Sands.

Not anywhere near the class of "Get Real" and "Like It Is", yet worth a watch if it ever comes on television, which i doubt.

I think i may put the video on my bookshelf, and not in a cardboard box in the attic like last time.

Co-writers/directors Tom Hunsinger and Neil Hunter conjured this little Indie film in 1996, an examination of relationships among seven gay men that not only impresses as a non-exploitive, honest sociologic study of life in the 90s in England, it also is a film that is a healthy mix of humor and tenderness that stands up well more than ten years later.

Three couples of varying endurance gather for a weekend holiday to celebrate a birthday: Paul (James Dreyfus, remembered as Hugh Grant's ditsy travel book shop worker in NOTTING HILL) has been with Ben (Mark Sands) for five years but their relationship is rocky because of Paul's wandering eye for a lad he met at the funeral of his brother Mark; Matt (Michael Urwin) is celebrating his three month steady relationship with Owen (Andrew Abelson) though Owen already has the itch to move on; Will (David Coffey) brings his latest one-night stand twinkie Adam (Darren Petrucci), knowing that his chances of retaining the youth's interest are less than favorable. Into the mix comes James (Michael McGrath), the ex-lover of the recently departed Mark whose arrival and introduction to the group occurs in the form of a tryst in the woods with Owen.

Each of the paired men face confrontations and face honesty about their pasts - recent and distant - and it is through the weekend of bed swapping that each man finds his own real needs. And the results vary from happy reunions to factual realities of choices made.

The cast is a mixture of seasoned professional actors and newcomers who have not made subsequent films. There is a ring of honesty in the portrayals and the creators have opted to study compatibilities based on personality traits and needs as opposed to filling the story with the requisite soap opera subplots that tend to dampen the effect of these studies of groups and their lives. It is not a great film, but is an honest little quiet movie with particularly good performances from James Dreyfus and Andrew Abelson. Worth watching, even in 2007! Grady Harp

Whiny, dull characters, a cliched "Big-Chill" style set-up and predictable, flat dialogue. Like the majority of 90's gay cinema, offers little in the way of insight and simply satisfies itself with rehashing tired identity politics and reinforcing conventional notions of gay male attitudes and behavior. None of the characters resonate; the film starts at point A and basically stays there for what feels like a very, very loooong time.

I'd rather sit through "Boys In the Band" or "Cruising" a hundred times than watch this pedestrian mess again.

Although this film DID remind me of something else (NOT "The Big Chill" either), I found it to be refreshing and thoroughly enjoyable. The ensemble cast was particularly talented, the writing was appropriately intricate with a few surprises, and there was even a fun Dinah Washington song ("I Wish I Knew the Name of the Boy in My Dreams")to spruce it up a bit. As with most British films, I had a bit of a difficult time with the accents at first, but I think I got most of it. There's just something INTELLIGENT about the SOUND of the language in British films! At any rate, once I figured out the relationships (and lack of them), I had a good time watching the country weekend for the "lads" unfold. Perhaps the film didn't especially break any new ground, but I don't think a film HAS to do that to be worthwhile. Does every STRAIGHT movie that's fun break new ground? I don't think so. It's about time that a gay movie can be kind of ordinary (no drugs, no AIDS, no suicides) and still be good entertainment. I think the British are much better than we Americans at making gay films, and this is just another example. By the way, the film that reminds me of this one is "Love! Valour! Compassion!"--but this one came first.