Getting Go, the Go Doc Project

The DVD cover looked really uninteresting and ugly. i thought that it was just another gay film with some hot almost naked guys talking and doing something funny. I was planning to watch it in two nights, but once I started, I can't stop.

It feels as if those two boys were really in love. I wasn't sure if Tanner Cohen was really gay, but he looked like that he was really enjoying gay sex. hehe. both of them seemed to be good actors, they should do more films. they are totally talented.

Then the ending is a little bit sad. I guess that most of viewers probably want to scream at Tanner for making such a bad decision. And at the end, probably everyone wishes that they can really following this gay boy's online account. Too bad, it is only a film. This story is not real.

The sex scenes were a little too graphic for regular non-gay audiences. And the kissing at different places seem to be a little too much as if to fill the time for this film. If the director changed those two parts, I am sure that it could be an even better film just like the brokeback mountain.

There are too many sequences of this film that drag on past the narrative point of including them. In particular the final near silent montage of kissing delays the climax far too much. The pace of the story is killed as a result. Further, several of the montages of Go border on the hypocritical given the rest of the film's commitment to discuss the rampant objectification of people in the gay community. The film is 20 minutes too long as a result. Likewise, there is a amateurish quality to the performances that prevent a more polished film. Camp and Cohen have good chemistry but they are not great actors. Camp, especially, doesn't seem to understand what subtext is. The docudrama construction feels like a vain attempt too hide this. The film is largely experimental in its filming (They shot at Camp's actual apartment for example) and this can be rather off putting at times.

With that being said the film is quite good. The story is a painful, and a painfully accurate exploration of several major tensions present within the gay community. The notions of too much sex, the cost-benefits assimilation, how to be gay, the various "tribes" of gay men and fickle nature of the male gaze all get a hearing in the film. I related to much of it but I can't say I found it much more than hey this problem exist. A lot of it is left unresolved. That is probably a realistic viewpoint but it adds to the indie vibe of the film.

The film is quite forward in its depiction of homoeroticism. I found the sex scenes very naturalistic. I am not sure if I have seen gay sex depicted as realistic as I have seen here. The film does provide a nice counterpoint to the heteronormative depictions of the male form one usually finds.

I am glad I own this but it is a challenging film to watch.

My initial thoughts of this were not great. The iPhone arms-length POV style of juddery photography made me think it was going to be an amateur effort. Well it is, but it isn't... The gorgeously charismatic Tanner Cohen is the younger than his years, inexperienced - on all levels - ("Doc") who falls for an erotic dancer online whom he calls "Go" (Matthew Camp) and comes up with a ruse to get to meet him and explore how he lives his life. Surprisingly, "Go" accepts the proposals and we end up with a love story told in a mix of cinematographic styles with one of the most erotically charged sex scenes I think I've ever seen from US gay cinema. Not raw sex with noise and sweat; but based on intimacy and a genuine affection for each other. Occasionally the scenes may linger a little too long; the pace of the editing could certainly have been tighter - but then maybe it would have lost some of it's authenticity and the characterisations some of their depth. Sometimes real life meanders a bit - we all have plenty of pointless times/conversations in our lives - adds to the richness. I hated the ending; but that's because all I wanted for the pair simply wasn't what they wanted for each other. In a world of largely frothy, contrived plastic drama, this is a stand out piece of creative, observational cinema with two really good, fun, engaging performances.

A gorgeous, early-20s gay virgin in Manhattan (if you believe there ever could be such a person), just about to graduate from Columbia and then west to Iowa for grad school, fakes a documentary film project in an attempt to meet a gorgeous gay go-go dancer he's become obsessed with online. To his surprise the dancer goes along with the idea. The fake documentary leads pretty quickly to some very real sex and a lovely, tender, sort-of relationship.

Actor and singer Tanner Cohen, the star of Were the World Mine (made by the same guys who made this one, but MUCH different), plays Doc, the almost-Columbia-grad virgin. Matthew Camp, a real live go-go dancer, plays Go, who is actually himself. The movie was shot in Camp's own apartment, gym, club, supermarket, etc, and follows his regular daily and nightly routine. The only fiction is the business with Doc.

From beginning to end, nothing about this movie is conventional or predictable. Unlike 99.9% of gay men who see this, I thought Doc was lots sexier than Go, but the nerdy type with a totally natural body appeals to me lots more than the buff, shaved, go-go boy type. But Go is very smart and has an angelic face, and inside he's ten times sweeter and more appealing than Doc is - one of the sweetest and most appealing characters ever to appear in a gay movie. Matthew Camp is thoroughly delightful. Definitely, definitely worth seeing.

This is quite a hard movie to pin down. It blurs documentary with movie with reality, and sometimes it does so amazingly. And sometimes it does so HORRIBLY.

At times, I cringed at how stilted and dull the acting was between the two leads. It is painfully obvious when they are reciting lines from a script.

But then... the curtain is pulled back and everything feels so REAL. Did they suddenly find a burst of acting talent, bringing the script to life? Are they simply flying by the seat of their pants, every line adlibbed? Or are they simply playing "themselves", bringing their own thoughts and feelings onto the screen?

Personally, I don't know, but it gives the film this odd duality of fabricated reality. Sometimes its so painfully obvious that you're watching two subpar actors parroting lines at each other. But then not even five minutes later, the dialogue is flowing so seamlessly and the chemistry damn near jumping off the screen.

I can't understand it. It just boggles my mind and leaves me in a weird place.

I think with better actors we wouldn't have gotten some of the "real" moments that the film portrays, making the film weaker. But on the other hand, talented actors would have elevated the more obviously scripted portions of this film.

I just don't know. I say approach this film with an open mind and you'll probably be both pleasantly surprised and woefully dissapointed in equal measures.