I saw this movie last night as part of Q Cinema (Fort Worth) monthly movie series. Wow.... bad movie...
Let's start with the plot. Not actually bad and in the hands of a great director and cast could have been worthwhile. Our hero, Adam, a young, athletic, gay school teacher picks up celebrity photographer Jake in a bar and has a one night stand. Unfortunately, Jake is kidnapped and apparently killed after Adam leaves. Unbeknownst to our poor Adam, Jake is at the center of a major gay conspiracy. And now, Adam is being followed, stalked and harassed by various groups setting up the entire plot which is based on one contrivance and coincidence after another. For example, Jake just happens to be the son of the owner of a major news organization which just happens to employ Adam's ex-girlfriend who is an ambitious young reporter. Adam just happens to pick up Jake's cell phone by mistake that holds the clue to the big conspiracy. And if Adam would simply have worn a different jacket at any point in the movie, half of the people tracking him would have been confounded since that's where a tracking device was planted on him! I imagined Alfred Hitchcock directing this and what a good movie it could have been of showing an innocent man caught in a web of intrigue.
On the other hand, the dialogue and acting really let the mediocre plot down. Some of the dialogue is laugh out loud funny and this is NOT a comedy. Part of that is bad writing, part is bad acting. The main characters come off as amateurs spouting high school prose.
The entire execution of the film left me baffled. We're supposed to believe that not only does the government but a major news industry has created a network of surveillance cameras so complete that they can spy on us anywhere... at home, in a public restroom, at the bathhouse (let's hope that's not true but then again that footage would be better than this movie). So a large part of the film is shot to appear to be close circuit cameras which could have been a good plot device if not over used. After a while, though, I began wondering, how they got that camera there in that angle instead of watching the movie.
Another directorial choice made was to replay key scenes from different perspectives or after you've learned more. As a general rule, I find these distracting if not used well. Here, they are way overused. Sometimes we see the same scene 10 seconds later and the "replay" adds no value.
About the only unmitigated praise I can give the film is that the star is a good lookin' guy. So there's an eye candy benefit.
Let's start with the plot. Not actually bad and in the hands of a great director and cast could have been worthwhile. Our hero, Adam, a young, athletic, gay school teacher picks up celebrity photographer Jake in a bar and has a one night stand. Unfortunately, Jake is kidnapped and apparently killed after Adam leaves. Unbeknownst to our poor Adam, Jake is at the center of a major gay conspiracy. And now, Adam is being followed, stalked and harassed by various groups setting up the entire plot which is based on one contrivance and coincidence after another. For example, Jake just happens to be the son of the owner of a major news organization which just happens to employ Adam's ex-girlfriend who is an ambitious young reporter. Adam just happens to pick up Jake's cell phone by mistake that holds the clue to the big conspiracy. And if Adam would simply have worn a different jacket at any point in the movie, half of the people tracking him would have been confounded since that's where a tracking device was planted on him! I imagined Alfred Hitchcock directing this and what a good movie it could have been of showing an innocent man caught in a web of intrigue.
On the other hand, the dialogue and acting really let the mediocre plot down. Some of the dialogue is laugh out loud funny and this is NOT a comedy. Part of that is bad writing, part is bad acting. The main characters come off as amateurs spouting high school prose.
The entire execution of the film left me baffled. We're supposed to believe that not only does the government but a major news industry has created a network of surveillance cameras so complete that they can spy on us anywhere... at home, in a public restroom, at the bathhouse (let's hope that's not true but then again that footage would be better than this movie). So a large part of the film is shot to appear to be close circuit cameras which could have been a good plot device if not over used. After a while, though, I began wondering, how they got that camera there in that angle instead of watching the movie.
Another directorial choice made was to replay key scenes from different perspectives or after you've learned more. As a general rule, I find these distracting if not used well. Here, they are way overused. Sometimes we see the same scene 10 seconds later and the "replay" adds no value.
About the only unmitigated praise I can give the film is that the star is a good lookin' guy. So there's an eye candy benefit.
Tell Your Friends