Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

fuzzyblueslurpee After reading several comments about how this movie was finally the gay thriller we have been waiting for, I decided to give this film a try. There are several problems I have with this movie but I will only focus on a few to save time.First off, the acting wasn't the worst i've seen but it was still pretty bad. But I wasn't expecting much from a gay thriller based on the past "gay thrillers" i've seen. The scenes with sex and nudity were terribly contrived and out of place. If the filmmakers were trying to pass this off as a movie that just happened to have sex in it, they failed. In fact, so much of the plot was focused on the main characters sex life that at times I forgot there was a killer at all.There were also a few scenes which I assume were meant to break stereotypes by illustrating how "Manny" was not only good looking, but was also intelligent and vulnerable, but they all came off as plain obnoxious. Besides, what kind of decent gay man would watch some scummy cop treat his friends like crap and then have sex with him? If there is a person or persons in your social circle who would do something like that, I suggest finding new friends. Gay men can be really superficial but a lot of us do have some ethics.All in all, my advice is to skip this movie.

Franco-LA Low budget gay films often have certain weeks -- usually plot and acting -- which this film certainly suffers from. The problem is that its reach far, far exceeds its grasp. It makes the nice effort at being a serial killer/thriller but this is essentially simply window dressing to disguise a very soft-core pornish excuse for nudity, which is surprising in this day of so much free naked male imagery and the ease at obtain steamed video hard and soft core male on male visuals on the web that any one would bankroll something like this. The serial killer plot is poorly thought out and filled of some blatant and gaping plot holes, as some other reviewers commented. There are enough crime procedurals on TV to know, for example, that it would never be that easy or quick to get a search warrant, that you would interview the obvious possible witnesses (neighbors, etc.) and that there is no way a body could simply sit in a man's apartment for a month -- this guy has no job and no one else in the building has a sense of smell? Can you just picture the cops from Law & Order moving into someone's apartment -- or that the person being "protected" would just be OK with it? Also, how does the killer get into all these apartments, particularly the john who paid $700. And how many hustlers in DC make $500, much less $700 for what appeared to be an hour long out-call that wasn't even originally going to include anal sex? Technically, the movie also suffered in a poor sound mix, some occasionally bad lighting, and the unevenness of the performances. While some were adequate to decent/good, others were just plain bad, although that may have been just as much of a reflection of the lack of character development and the poor script. Finally, in addition to the lack of reality that a detective would simply force his way into the home of a man who would assuredly be considered a key suspect by even Springfiled Police Chief Ralph Wiggum, the relationship between him and the male lead just wasn't plausible in any way, they lacked chemistry, and the sex scene between, in addition to being purely gratuitous (like so much of the other nudity and sexuality in the film), was also poorly reasoned in having the Andreas Thomas character (Manny) all of a sudden want the detective to top him. This was also made even more nonsensical by the ending, having the Manny character end up with his best friend, which is not supported by anything else that has taken place in the film earlier.I have nothing against sex and nudity in films, however in this movie it just so clearly exists to try to create a soft core porn movie and makes little sense to the story, except that it takes places in a web cam chat room environment. A better plot, such as perhaps a serial killer in a gay gym, would have accomplished this in a more logical manner.

reeves2002 When I saw the trailer it looked interesting enough.I liked this movie but could tell while watching it that it was a very low budget movie with amateur first time actors but it made it more real.Even though not the best movie i've seen,I found it enjoyable and got more laughs out of it then suspense.It's not the most original story and it's been done before but it's one that I could easily relate and identify with.The characters are like many people i've known and encountered.It's a very true to life tale.One thing that surprised me a bit(and seems so typical and over used)is when the main character Manny sold himself as a whore for $700.00 saying he was doing a friend a favor.It was degrading and he obviously had no self respect.One problem I have with a lot of the gay movies is they all center around sex.It doesn't matter what the storyline is,it always comes back to that and is very oversexed at that.I don't care if it's a story about lovers but there seems to be no morals or commitments.Everyone is always screwing around on their partner and no one is ever monogamous.It would be nice to see some focusing more on relationships and story then so much sex.Of course if that's what you expect or want to see then that's OK.And this movie had it's share of it.There was frontal nudity and very authentic looking action scenes. I got a kick out of Hamilton played by Amir Darvish.He was a sleazy cop hitting on every young guy he could after leaving a marriage of possible convenience.He was perfect as a don't give a sh*t kind of guy and did whatever he wanted,but did solve the murders in the end.I at one point thought he was the killer and he easily could have been since his competition kept dying off.I am glad though that Maury and Manny hook up finally.It was a nice touching little scene between them at the end.

gradyharp 'OPEN CAM' could have been so much more than it is. Writer/director Robert Gaston takes a few risks with this latest entry into the gay cinema foray, adding a story that avoids the usual topics that stereotype gay men. He assembled a cast of young actors whose best attributes are physical appearance rather than technical training, and then covers the dialogue with incessant background music that makes the viewer strain for the conversations - and much worse, he hides behind the mores of restraint that prevents US films from achieving what European films do well.The story revolves around a recently jilted young artist Manny (Andreau Thomas) who when not in front of the easel spends his time on the Internet dating on a sleazy chat line, keeping his physical encounters anonymous to avoid personal disappointment. On the Internet chat line (using 'open camera') some murders are captured and a detective Hamilton (Amir Darvish) takes over the investigation - a detective who also happens to be gay and acts out with just about anyone it seems. When Manny's friends (or ex tricks) begin to fall victim to the serial killer on the Internet, Hamilton moves in with Manny to protect him, and it is in this living situation (a very physical arrangement) that the serial killer is finally caught on camera and in person. How the episodes of loss of friends and re-establishment of trust and love replacing just lust brings the story to a bit of a disappointing end.The cast (Andreau Thomas, Amir Darvish, Ben Green, J. Matthew Miller, Christian Jones, et al) are a good-looking group of men. There are a lot of sensual scenes, but unlike European films the men who are supposed to be nude for a reason are shot to protect them from full frontal exposure - and that seems so very ludicrous and insulting given the theme of the film. American cinema has a long way to go: even movies of heightened physicality in straight films have little problem showing every detail of the female body yet either blur or out-of-focus shoot or drape male bodies as though there were some secret that MUST remain off camera. Time to grow up - and where better to start than in films such as OPEN CAM. 'Tis pity....Grady Harp