Perry Kate Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

KnotMissPriceless Why so much hype?

Frances Chung Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Jose David Ahhhh the wonders of love, betrayal and everything in between. I believe this movie captures all that, maybe superficially at times, but it's there. Obviously the subject matter is similar to that of other movies as originality is hard to find. I mean lets face it, what hasn't been written and/or sung already?!This movie touches on a subject that most of us experience and that's love. How love hurts, pining for someone that you've known for sometime but your love/admiration for that person isn't reciprocal, so you think. The characters in the movie to me were very believable. This movie was about those bonds that you form with your clique and how love adapts and how acceptance of its adaptation plays out. It didn't need to be this over the top gay extravaganza like other movies. The actors were very good and I'm glad that they didn't throw in all the unnecessary extras (i.e. the bigger than life drag queen, the club scene where most have their shirts off dancing to club music, etc). I believe the script was well written and stayed on focus. Definitely very touching, soft and dark at the same time. It's a movie that no matter what your sexual orientation is, you can related to.

jm10701 For any serious movie lover, Those People demands to be compared to Whit Stillman's brilliant 1990 movie Metropolitan. Both movies are about a small, close group of late-adolescent rich kids on New York's Upper East Side; both cover a limited time period, offering a slice-of-life look into the isolated dream world the kids live in; and both were written and directed by men who were born and raised inside that world.The only superficial difference between the two movies is that Metropolitan has no overtly gay characters. But below the surface the differences are profound, and in every way Metropolitan proves itself the better movie, by far. The only good thing I can say about Those People is that it reawakened my interest in Metropolitan.The most obvious of Metropolitan's strengths is its point of view. Its main character is a guy named Tom, who is NOT from that world, but gets caught up with them by accident while hailing the same taxi in front of the Plaza Hotel. We see the rich kids' world through his eyes, and it adds depth to both the movie and all of its characters, a depth completely lacking in Those People.Those People has no similar Everyman character for the audience to identify with, so we see its world and the characters in it from the outside only, and it never feels real. Charlie, the main character in Those People, is an outsider only in being Jewish, which on the Upper East Side makes him not really an outsider at all. Although Charlie gets lots more screen time than Tom has in Metropolitan, he seems much less real, and the audience is left looking AT that world instead of seeing INSIDE it, which is Metropolitan's most astounding achievement.Although I'm gay, I felt a lot more at home in Metropolitan, with no gay characters, than I did in Those People, in which gays predominate. That's because every character in Metropolitan is a human being, a complex mix of traits that somehow gets conveyed clearly in a very short time. I believed in and I cared about all of the characters in Metropolitan, without even trying to.In Those People, we have The Gay Jewish Boy Who Doesn't Quite Fit In Even Though He's Rich And Very Cute, and The Languid, Spoiled, Self-Destructive Gay WASP Boy Who Is Everybody's Darling Even Though His Father Is A Crook, and The Exotic Middle-Eastern Gay Concert Pianist Who's Hot as Blazes Even Though He's A Foreigner And Over 30, and several other equally shallow stereotypes. It's very tiresome.I'd lots rather spend a couple of hours with real straight people than with gay caricatures. Compounding the problem is that none of the gay characters is played by an actor gifted enough to be believable as gay. I'd rather have NO gay characters than characters played by painfully straight actors trying their hardest to act gay.The fact that Joey Kuhn titled his movie Those People may indicate that he meant to keep the audience at a distance, outside looking in, but nothing else about the movie makes that seem intentional. I think we're supposed to CARE what happens to Charlie, Sebastian, Tim and company; I tried, but I just couldn't. Why would a director want to keep his audience at a distance anyway? I can't think of any good reason.So if you're thinking about seeing Those People, do yourself a big favor and see Metropolitan first. If then you still want to see Those People, by all means do it. I'll even give you my DVD.One final but very important note. The most important difference between Metropolitan and Those People is this: Metropolitan is a drama and Those People is a melodrama. For anyone who isn't sure what THAT difference is, here's a quickie: A drama is a mostly serious story in which relatively normal things happen to people who behave pretty much like real people behave. A melodrama is an unrelentingly serious story in which extremely dramatic things happen constantly to people who overreact to everything. Watching a drama is like watching people living their lives. Watching a melodrama is like watching a reality TV program, where every moment is packed full of extreme conflict or crisis or both.Those of you who have been raised on reality TV—ie, anyone born after about 1990, since The Real World gave birth to the genre in 1992—will be MUCH more at home with Those People. Joey Kuhn's sensibilities and idea of what constitutes entertainment clearly were formed by that "reality". The relentless stream of extreme crisis and highly charged emotional conflict in Those People will seem real to you, and Metropolitan will bore you to death.

hughman55 Artifice! Disingeuous artifice! Not one meaningful line of dialog. No character development. Spastic "storyline". I couldn't find a reason to care about anyone in this film. They were like cartoons; and not the funny kind. The message is, ostensibly, to see the good in everyone. And that trope resulted in a swing and a miss. Everyone here is depressed and in tumult despite having fabulous lives and wonderful imaginary jobs: Vogue Editor, successful painter, principal pianist of the San Francisco Symphony (a full time position?) - like there weren't a thousand other pianists in SF who could have played the third movement of The Pines of Rome every five years when it gets trotted out to kill the brass section. Memorable lines: "My father's dead. No I lied. He's really alive. I'm sorry I lied about that to you." "Isn't it hysterical when my phone keeps going off during synagogue!" "How can you be like him (the father in prison) when you're more like 'you' than anyone I know". I threw up in my mouth a little on that one.It is breathtaking how shallow and vapid this story and its characters are. I wanted to like this, I really did, but I can only take so much. We get so few gay themed films and we're supposed to grade on a curve because of that. I get it. But, really... I will get skewered here at IMDb for calling bullsh*t on this one. So, let's begin on, 3,2,1, and, go...

Derek Botelho The above line, spoken by the mother of one of the film's main characters seems to sum up one of the film's many rather deep messages: Life can kick you in the head, you've got to deal with it with some dignity and respect and be brave enough to move on. OK, so that wasn't as poetic as I'd originally intended, but I'm at a loss for intelligent words on how to describe this incredibly moving film. Written and directed by the preternaturally gifted Joey Kuhn, THOSE PEOPLE is a rare beast in indie "queer" cinema. First, the characters just happen to be gay, the film doesn't revolve around any dramatic revelation in that part of their lives. I can't express how refreshing this is for gay characters to not be traumatized by their sexual orientation. Nobody has AIDS, their parents don't reject them because they're gay, and they're not having a dramatic coming out. Moving beyond that, there are not stereotypical characters, of any sexual orientation. Sure, the group of friends has a "Token straight friend" but there's a single joke there as friends will make and it doesn't go any farther than that. Nobody falls in love with the straight friend, and nobody is tortured by the guy, which is another common story route in movies "like this". Only that's another revelation about this movie. There isn't anything remotely like this, at least that I've seen in recent "queer cinema". I'm rambling now, so just go seek this movie out, watch it, and recommend it again and again to anyone who will listen. It's that damned good. Also, don't be put off or tricked by the description that it's a film about a love triangle, because it's so much more, and even that description is spurious at best.