Testosterone

A gay graphic novelist from the States is obsessed with finding his hunky Latin lover, who has mysteriously walked out on him; a search for the guy down in Argentina becomes a complex whirlpool of doubt, suspicion, paranoia and murder. David Sutcliffe, a low-keyed actor who resembles a gritty John Stamos, gives a passable performance here, yet it is tough to discern what the filmmakers were aiming for. As a noir, the movie doesn't absorb much interest with its loosely-hinged plot; as a mystery with a gay-hook, the picture is far too timid, teasing its target audience with just a few man-on-man lip locks. The low-budget shows, with the filmmakers failing to utilize the exotic locations to their full advantage...and why have the Latin stud disappear so soon? We hardly get anything useful out of this central relationship before he's gone--or was it to prevent alienating a heterosexual audience who might be sensitive to gay clinches? If straight movies about sexual obsession were this cautious, more viewers would be abandoning Hollywood films for foreign or pornographic pictures. This is an unusual attempt, but it is ultimately unsuccessful. ** from ****

Lots of things don't make sense in this film, which irritates. But it's so homo-erotic that a lot can be forgiven. Sonia Braga in full dragon mode, and lots of partially- or fully-naked hunks sucking face. Jennifer Coolidge has the funniest lines in the film, and I love her deadpan delivery in this one. It has the makings of a camp classic, but the premise of the film is irretrievably flawed. Given the final resolution, there is no reason any of the characters would have put themselves and each other through all of this. And the final shot (was that meant to be a twist of some kind?) makes absolutely no sense. Most tragically, no one ended up with the adorable bell-hop! I'd have taken him home in a heartbeat! ;-)

I do not know the novel. So , I can not compare with original a dark, decent film about loss, secrets, searches and romance, revenge and roots of succes. Sure, it seems have the sins of low budget films. The story is not always coherent, the actors , their name and their bodies are the main attraction, the story is not the very convincing one but, after its end, this mix of love/ obsession story, film noir attempt seems, for very subjective motives, just decent. The flavor of leaves ash in fall - like is, maybe , the best virtue.

Odd little b-flic. It starts off very bad Laughably bad. Sound, editing, acting, it all fails dramatically. 'So bad it's good'-style, so no complaints there. However, the movie gets better and better with the introductions of new characters. With the exception of Sofia, none of the characters will generate much sympathy from the viewer. But all of them somehow manage to imprint their role with such sardonic egoism, that the ultra thin script is more than forgiven.

So, if you want to indulge yourself in some strangely cool whodunnit story homoerotic style, look no further. Eat your heart out Eric Romer!

This film was certainly flawed and missed some great opportunities to be a lot better but it really wasn't that bad. I watched it from start to finish and that says a lot about a movie to me. It was not art, but I was certainly entertained. The ironic part of this film was that Antonio was really not that interesting on the screen. All the other actors and actresses were far more intriguing and Antonio's character was probably more important than the actor himself. This movie's only true downfall was that it didn't really capture its "theme" well enough to give the movie an overall point. Also, it was probably just a tad bit too convoluted. It's worth the 90 minute time investment, though, cause it's at least entertaining..