The snippets that pass for episodes in the first season could be classified as being concise but are very lightweight, and leave very little room for character development, and most of the acting was in my opinion well below average. The triteness of the dialogue was tiring, but I assume this was for those with a short attention span. I saw both series in one go, and the second series seemed to me be more boring than the first as it veered towards a more conservative approach than the first season. Visually it looked marginally better and there were moments of (sort of) originality like the use of the Hitchcock film ' Psycho ' soundtrack. It is used in a restaurant when one of the very many gay encounters asked the lead actor to meet his mother. The second season has four episodes lasting twenty minutes each, so to state the obvious has the same length as the first, which lengthened the dialogue but still added very little character development. ' Hunting Season ' was made in 2012 and in its way was brave enough to show male genitalia and scenes that bordered on to gay softcore porn. We have not improved much on sexual honesty, and for this I applaud the series for attempting to do so, especially series one. But one prudish thing I did notice was that only the ' minor ' characters dared to show all, and the leads did not. I would like to question more about this hierarchy of presentation of the sexual body, but this is perhaps not the forum to do so. Personally, I find it undermines the honesty of (especially) the male genitalia while giving the impression it is challenging taboos. I also found in ' Hunting Season ' that the minds of most, but not all of the characters were rarely raised above adolescence. I give it a four for the internet use, and for certain scenes that made advances on gay/queer representation.
