The films were all a bit samey. The characters being portrayed seemed all to be at least upper middle class or wealthy. The younger actors, including the women, were uniformly good-looking with the men all being hunks any gay guy's eye would be drawn to. As it happens, this is not my type but I can understand and appreciate the aesthetics. Even the two older actors and one older actress who appeared in two of the films were clearly lookers in their youth.
Then the plots. They nearly all involved conversion of supposed straight guys into raving homos or alternatively guys not accepting that they are gay and remaining in the closet or at the least having sex with a guy after a clear lifetime of longing to do so.
I didn't find any of this particularly original or true to life. Sure, some guys have a bromance that turns sexual, but to have this theme running through a series of short films or that of a sudden revelation that they are gay, giving in to impulses long hidden is a bit repetitive.
Some of the plots are contrived. Who would write a Dear John, leave it for their partner to find and instead of leaving, wander off for a bath? Would a terminal cancer ward allow a rent boy to stay for a couple of hours without ever checking the patient? OK, these were devices to develop the stories, but I thought that they were clumsy.
The first film, which was the only one I had seen before, had virtually all of these themes - turning gay from straight, being closeted, non acceptance, goodlookers, posh hotel thus wealth.
I have just reread this and have reduced the mark from a five to a four. I really didn't feel this was saying anything to me despite my having lived some of the situations albeit in somewhat different ways.
I watched all the way through over a couple of sessions just expecting more or a hint of a difference. I didn't really get one. These were polished little vignettes but ultimately sterile.
