GamerTab That was an excellent one.

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

SanEat A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

matthewlee1985 A Four Letter Word is not a ground-breaking piece of cinema by any stretch. But for all its failings, there is enough substance to enjoy.The plot leans on the weak side and the main character (Luke) extremely unlikeable. I found myself, at times, feeling very disengaged with his experiences in the film.But pushing past this, there are laughs along the way and some of the minor characters actually steal the limelight.The problem with this film is that it throws together all the major gay clichés, and for this reason it stumbles constantly. The director surely must have had more vision than to peddle worn-out and tired gay stereotypes.Successful gay cinema celebrates diversity and breaks free of the constraints and expectations society imposes on homosexuality.If anything, A Four Letter Word is a major disappointment in this regard. I expected a lot more.It's easy to pick holes in this film but there is enough to keep watching until the end.I have given it a solid 5 for a pass and the power of the support cast saves me from a harsher judgment.

moonspinner55 Jesse Archer co-wrote and stars in this low-budget, low-brow gay comedy-drama about a New York City queen who works at a sex shop by day and spends his evenings bed-hopping; a perceptive co-worker informs him that he may just be a sexual obsessive, which leads the kid to a therapy group and a smidgen of self-enlightenment. Director Casper Andreas, who also had a hand in the script, hopes to titillate and shock his target audience with bitchy, outré dialogue and flashes of naked behinds; unfortunately, this isn't anything any filmmaker treading in queer-cinema waters hasn't tried before. The acting is so wooden, with casting choices apparently made on who had the best pecs, that one can only scoff at these smarmy returns. This is just the thing to kill off the gay comedy-drama. It shows no imagination, no sensitivity, no subtext, no sense of satire or self-parody. When a gay couple squabbles and breaks up for the night, it's merely for the most basic and childish reasons. Are all gay New Yorkers this immature and selfish? And if so, who needs to see it? NO STARS from ****

Nederstreet The first five minutes of this film had my friend and me squirming in our seats, convinced we were about to see another tired gay comedy with stereotypical characters and an all-too-obvious plot line.But looking back, I think we were purposely, and perhaps masterfully duped by the director to trigger our own stereotypes and preconceived ideas about what it means to be young, gay and living in New York. He flipped the stereotype switch gently, providing everything from drunk boys in bars, to gratuitous and seemingly premature skin shots. It was a useful tool that invited us to confirm the unspoken notions of our gay identities in order to bring about a more genuine deconstruction.The art of the film lies not in the acting, which sometimes stumbles; save of course, for Cory Grant who delivers a consistent and unique authenticity. Instead, the film's soul is truly in the scripted storyline and in the very digestible way we are taken on one character's drunken and stumbling path to the first spark of his own electric and glittery evolution.

preppy-3 Film about flamboyantly gay Luke (Jesse Archer) who sleeps around every chance he gets and doesn't believe in love. Then he meets Stephen (impossibly handsome Charlie David) and falls for him. But can he stop sleeping around and have a monogamous relationship? And is Stephen really as good as he seems? Various other subplots deal with a black/white gay couple, a woman going crazy over her impending marriage and a gay man searching for a direction in life.This film knows it's audience--within the first 10 minutes there are about 5 full frontal nude men shown. (I'm saying that as a good thing). Plotwise I hated it at first--Luke was obnoxious, VERY effeminate and just annoying. However this is needed to see how he changes later on. The movie is colorful and well-made on a very low budget. There are some bad puns, groan worthy lines and truly terrible acting but, all in all, it was a fun and amusing gay comedy. Also it was fairly truthful on showing gay life realistically and it's refreshing to see a black/white gay couple. In acting terms Archer and David are very good and all the guys are handsome and in good shape. Worth seeing.