GurlyIamBeach Instant Favorite.

Spoonatects Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

Keeley Coleman The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

Caryl It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

will_hughes Summarily: Soft porn with interjections of a message about the porn industry and safe sex.The movie could've almost been bashing itself. The badly shot and cut footage makes it completely unrealistic. The actors/models never actually lose their underwear, even for the tamest of shots. The movie completely fails to question or explore preconceptions / boundaries / taboos and exists entirely within the limited scope of an outdated cultural paradigm. It's almost like the story was written by some bastion of moral fortitude, with limited experience of gay culture, let alone sub-culture. It's almost entirely acted out, like a melodramatic fantasy, dreamed up by a gossipy virgin, straight from the Midwest USA. We can at least surmise, that the writers aren't Catholic, as evidenced by the ever present, "wear a condom" message. Which brings me to another point. Anyone pushing the views of the AID$ industry, should be considered either malicious, funded or ignorant. I'm assuming that the constant references to condoms and then PEP (Post Exposure Prophylaxis), highlight an even deeper lack of research or understanding and complacently reinforce the status-quo. Though full of opinions (like mine), the internet does detail the fraud and misconduct findings, surrounding our beloved Dr. Robert Gallo (the father of HIV). Since the late 90's, we have documentaries like AID$ Inc and House of Numbers (also reviewed on this site) to help communities understand the industry and it's associated scandals. It appears that few of us have even slowed for breath, instead of doing a little cultural or scientific fact checking. Perhaps in this respect the movie is quite realistic, everyone blithely ignoring facts and living in a World that doesn't appear to contain one heterosexual, or a woman (I am absolutely not putting myself through that again, just to check). All that being said, these people are doing something to produce a movie that has some specific relevance to gay culture. I would however, like to see something that was less dependent on flesh and had more mind expanding backbone.

Van Fannel This film shows why being artsy just for the sake of it is not good, especially at the expense of plot clarity and good dialog. Half of the time I had to struggle to understand what the character is trying to say because they are too busy trying to be poetic when a simple line would have done the job of describing what he tries to say. Ditto with the repeated visual nightmare the main character keeps seeing. It's the same thing over and over again which is annoying.The worst part of the film is that the pairing of the main character (Paul) with another character who has no chemistry with him (Griffin). Paul seems to have better chemistry with Zhivago and Baxter and moreover, those two seem to care more about him. Paul's romance with Griffin came out of nowhere as well.

wadestevens I absolutely ADORED this film and could not disagree more with the other reviewer here. The things he found boring and monotonous, I actually think these very parts are what make the film so good. Its meant to be dark and kind of moody, i liken it (the mood) to Donnie Darko but not quite as bizarre. The dream sequences are stunning and are only repetitive to a point, which is the point i think, each time they are shown throughout the film, we are shown a little more, from different angles that reveal more while not answering questions.... it had me guessing to the very end...who is behind the mask? what happened to his brother? and is he even real? these are a few of the questions i found myself asking, hence me wanting to watch more and get more drawn in, until you are finally given the answers in a pretty awesome twist i reckon! :) I suppose it just goes to show, what some people love about a film, can be the very same thing that turns someone off (though its kinda hard not to be turned on! there's a lot of sex scenes and nudity, but its not gratuitous). If you want to watch a gay themed movie thats different to any other so far, id say watch "seeing heaven". I personally LOVED IT!

philip-1 Seeing Heaven is a very artistic film that certainly has a unique and often hypnotic aesthetic. The depiction of the gay porn sub culture is rather plastic and not very believable, but that is not what really defines the film.The bizarre visions that the lead character has while attaining orgasm is really the main focus. The fatal mistake here is that director Ian Powell lingers on these nightmarish visions and repeats them with little variation, over and over again until the viewer just loses patience with the entire project. They certainly are intriguing at the beginning of the film, but when one sees the same collage of clips reoccurring throughout, they become annoyances that only hold up what little story there is. Ken Watanabe's constantly repeating music adds to the ever increasing monotony of the entire proceedings.Actor Alexander Bracq is believable and beautiful to look at, but his understated, almost sleeping-walking like presence adds to the gradual boredom that sets in for the viewer. There is plenty of steamy sex and attractive bodies in the film, but frankly, if this is what you're looking for you might as well watch a real porn film rather than an artistic miscalculation about the porn industry.With a faster pace, a better editor, and a more interesting script this might have been a really great experience. As it is, I'm glad to have seen it, but certainly would never return to this unsatisfying picture.