AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

WasAnnon Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Nonureva Really Surprised!

bkoganbing Lovers Kyle and Marc have a silly lover's quarrel and each go their separate ways. By chance both come upon superhot male model Troy and each is looking to nail him. For Kyle, he's even willing to go so far as to pretend to join an ex-gay campus group headed by Jacob. Troy's kind of unsure about his own sexuality. He seems one obliging dude, willing to share sex with just about anyone. This leads to a whole lot of trouble all around, but in the end all the boys and girls in the film seem to be nicely paired off. I do so love happy endings.There are lots of laughs in this film, but it actually takes a look at a very serious topic, the preying on impressionable kids just starting to find out about their sexuality by some very uptight people. There's a whole lot of new thinking about human sexuality over the past century and a half, but don't try and tell the fundamentalists anything in that regard.Best performance in the film is Scott Vickaryous as the ex-gay leader of the campus group. The unveiling of the inner Jacob is something to behold, as is the disrobing of Marco Dapper as Troy.Worth the price of admission alone.

preppy-3 Kyle (Jim Verraros) understandably falls in love with nude model Troy (Marco Dapper). However Troy is ashamed of past gay experiences he had and wants to be str8. So Kyle pretends HE'S str8 and used to be gay to lure Troy into bed. Meanwhile Kyle's ex Marc (Brett Chukerman) finds this out and now HE wants to get Troy into bed...OK--I HATED the original "Eating Out". It was boring, stupid, unfunny and kept teasing the audience that we were gonna see some hot man on man action--but we never did. The acting was dreadful too. As you can see the plot of this one is ridiculous too--but this movie is so entertaining who cares? It moves quickly (it's only 80 minutes), looks great and is much funnier than the original. Also we see plenty of hot guy on guy kissing, gay sex (not explicit) and frontal nudity on Dapper and Chukerman (both of who are very handsome with great bodies).The acting is (for the most part) good. Verraros (the only holdover from the original) is a little bit TOO nerdy and needy--but he tones down his performance as the film progresses and actually is very affecting by the end. Dapper is unbelievably handsome with a great body and--surprisingly--is a very good actor. I was impressed with how talented he was--he perfectly shows his characters confusion. Chukerman is even better as Marc. A very easy-going, relaxed and believable performance. All the other actors are OK--the story basically centers on these three guys.This is no great milestone in gay cinema but it was fun, breezy and entertaining. Also the casual frontal nudity and gay kissing just made it better. Worth catching--especially for a gay audience. An 8.

mendozalouie Let's put it this way:Variety writes: "Eating Out 2: Sloppy Seconds" -- and the film-making continues to be just as sloppy.You can't argue with Variety, the showbiz bible. This film probably has two more laughs than the first film, Eating Out, which means it has exactly TWO laughs. Trouble is I can't remember what they are now. What I remember is some really bad acting -- just like in the first film. I remember a stupid script that could have been written by a horny gay high school student. I can't comment on the direction since there isn't evidence of any. My problem with films like this is that they create such a negative image of gays and lesbians for the straight community. The characters are stereotypes. I don't know people like the characters in this film and I don't want to. Why can't the producers of this movie use their financing powers for good?

HollywoodMusic Just like the first movie under this name that was made,"EATING OUT" this is merely a sequel to the kind of insipid superficial gay movie that gives the gay community a bad name. The total polar opposite of first class writing/directing. If you like all the superficial and unrefined elements of a culture, then this is for you. If you are looking for something more sophisticated and that even attempts to approximate 'art', then look elsewhere. Real Insipid, superficial gay junk movie. Not worth the time or money. I can never understand how this kind of stuff can get made or where these writers or directors heads are when they think this stuff up. It is really the type of movie that has become the bane of existence of the gay community.