Whirlwind

A correct film. Not great, not impressive but enough for create some emotion, use , in smart manner, some cliches and a spoon of realism and propose a dark character testing, perturbing a group of good friends grace his impecable art of manipulation and provocative gestures , words.

It reminds old fashion homosexual films from 1980 - 1990 decade, and exactly this flavor, like the inspired construction of few characters are the good point for define Whirlwind as little more than interesting.

The personal stories are right constructed,the dialogue is far to be desappointing. So, just correct film.

It really fit its title well. I liked how it characterized this group of men as a family to each other. There was a driving story -the work toward's the party. Each character was challenged and each grew from it.

I think more background about Drake's history might have been nice and a little bit more sexiness. Drake is hot as the poster shows us, but we don't see his chest that much. After all, gay films have an obligation to show a little bit of butt, at the very least.

I thought it was a nice surprise. When they are bad, I fast forward through them. I didn't this one. I also liked that the DVD has a director's monologue, but I wanted to know more about the casting which it didn't reveal.

I also find it refreshing when most of the actors are gay. I want gay actors playing the gay parts. They do a better job and we need to support our out gay actors and stop giving away all the gay money to others.

This is a film about a group of five gay men in New York and how their lives are affected by the arrival into their social set of a "nasty type". Unfortunately, the "nasty type" is so transparent and two dimensional that it is difficult to believe that anyone with intelligence would allow themselves to be taken in by him. But then the other characters are two dimensional, cardboard cutouts too. The plot was entirely predictable from the very beginning. The "wit" was nonexistent. The sex scenes were flaccid. The acting ranged from the competent to the wooden. Frankly, it was difficult to care what happened to most of the characters. It had the moral vision of a Victorian novel and just about the same grip on reality.

The first part of the movie was meant to ensure that we knew the five main characters were great friends, so we get to listen to them exchanging supposedly intimate jibes and charming repartee. We also get a little insight into flaws in their personalities & relationships as well as some potential issues, all of which suggest their shared intimacy and charm are somewhat fragile.

Handled well, all of this insight would have served a useful purpose in developing the plot. Unfortunately neither the acting nor the script really rose to the occasion. It was pretty heavy-handed & obvious and I don't think many viewers could be expected to feel any emotional connection to any of the characters or any concern for what would happen next. It all was pretty predictable and no surprises lay in store.

When the "bad guy" appeared he was not wearing a black hat, but there was still little doubt that his mission in life was to sow the seeds of discord amongst the happy band of brothers and that he would, theoretically, be a force to be reckoned with. I doubt anyone in the audience could fail to see what he was up to, although the characters in the movie were utterly oblivious & helpless and he was able to work his evil magic on them without setting off any alarms … or creating much interest.

Thrown into the mix is a couple who are nearing their 25th anniversary together and who, we are told, everyone just loves to death. They were two-dimensional cardboard cut-out unemotional characters and the supposed great love for them felt by everyone else was never convincing. Nonetheless, planning the party to celebrate their anniversary is meant to be the glue that eventually holds everyone together.

Had the plot been well written and had the actors been a bit more appealing & convincing in presenting their characters to the audience, it would have been a mediocre and trite work. Unfortunately it never quite reached that level.

The actors who played Bobby and Sean were sufficiently attractive and charming to engender some sympathy for their characters and to hold one reluctantly in his seat to see how things panned out for them, but they weren't really enough to save the production.

There are certainly many worse movies out there, but it's hard to think of any good reason why anyone should bother watching this rather poorly crafted soap-opera … although watching Bryan West might just have made it more tolerable.

Well it deservedly didn't win an Oscar but it's not the worst gay movie out there.

Yep, it's a bit predictable. Yep, some if the acting is quite wooden. But some of the actors actually have a flicker of talent. The script is a bit cliché, but a lot of the problems are with the direction. Rehearsal and tightening up of the dialog would have helped. Witty repartee comes fast and furious, not after a pause for someone to realize that that was their cue. Some instances could have been helped with editing.

Bryan West has been in other things, but only lists this one title. Maybe he changed his name. He is by far the most natural of the cast. And the hottest.

And don't believe the claims of hot sex. There's some foreplay but it's hardly hot.