Forumrxes Yo, there's no way for me to review this film without saying, take your *insert ethnicity + "ass" here* to see this film,like now. You have to see it in order to know what you're really messing with.

Tayloriona Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Justina The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

mgdq3 This is one of those movies that should have been way better than it turned out to be. I dread to think what the Blockbuster-approved edit must have looked like, because the director's cut on DVD was a bore of the epic proportions. Naturally, you don't expect it to be "The Godfather", but an acting class or two might have come in handy.Also, there were so many cute guys in this movie, but they were woefully under-exploited. I like watching a bevy of hotties writhe around in their BVDs as much as the next guy, but even I have a right to expect a little more. It wasn't a total loss, though; at least we got a peek a Drew Fuller's (covered) junk and truly upsetting haircut. And there's Huntley Ritter looking even cuter than he did in "Bring It On" (and acting about as well). There's always a silver lining, kids. You just have to look really hard for it. And occasionally, you have to make use of your pause button.

desperateliving You can't hold too much against this knowing that it was made in four days, and I had expected it to be campy anyway. (It's not all that campy in reality. With the exception of Kevin Kalisher and Huntley Ritter, who don't take themselves seriously, the rest of the cast plays it halfway straight; Riley Smith is exceptionally bad.) The ridiculous story is actually paid attention to, which kind of shocked me; I assumed the whole purpose with these ultra-low-budget horror movies was to cater to the basest sexual fantasies and not give a damn about the story, but they use lots of words like "technological" and "physicality" in the script to get their point across. (Although it's possible that the story is important only to explain why there's so few cast members.) Nobody cares about this stupid storyline, and the only things that are interesting in the film are the mocking of cults and the soft-core homoeroticisms (which aren't all that edgy). I would have enjoyed it more if there were just some random killings for no reason. The film is grainy, with a TV-quality look and acting level. There are a few "sexy" scenes that are alright -- the boys writhing in bed in their boxers, feeling themselves up; or being tied down and making orgasmic faces while wine is poured on them -- and some of them are kinda funny. And I liked the digs at L. Ron Hubbard and the intended irony of a story about religious cultists told with intense gay overtones, but it still isn't any good. 3/10

allie_kear Not bad movie except for the fact that there isnt much plot and a good 20 minutes of the movie is spent focusing on the boys rubbing themselves. The acting is wuite horrible for some of the characters, but it worth seeing for others. I'd say to rent it and give it a watch... it's entertaining at least.

Kevin-94 In reviews and user comments I've read online about these films,the writers will say things like `It's almost as if it's gay.' and `Itseems sort of gay.' The equivocal reactions are understandable. Allow me to be more bluntly clear: This is a horror film which,unlike Hollywood films, is more intent on pleasing a gay maleaudience than a straight one (though technically none of thecharacters are gay.)In `Voodoo Academy,' along with his film `The Brotherhood,'director DeCoteau has created what might be called `the non-gaygay film.' These are films which are clearly designed to appeal toa gay audience, yet nevertheless stop short of being overtly gay. On the surface, they seem intended for a straight audience. Thecharacters are not gay and they don't engage in any romanticactivities together. (And certainly the marketing makes noindication of a gay angle.) Yet at the same time, it's clear that something is going on here. There are lots of gratuitous shots of young men in designerunderwear. There's no straight romantic subplots and hardly anywomen. Unlike Hollywood films, which bend over backwards toplease a straight audience (and avoid any possible hint of gaysubtext), these films are clearly more interested in pleasing a gaymale audience than straight ones. As for the film itself, it's not very good. A bland young man enrollsin a small (6 students) college, where something strange is goingon. Long stretches of the film are given to providing expositoryinformation which ultimately proves irrelevant. Scenes lacktension. And the overall story is fairly dumb and ends abruptly. The technical stuff is good, but the acting is wooden and thescenes just drag.