if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

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

This film is about 3 gay couples spending a weekend in a country hose together. Their troubles are unleashed and their relationships are tested."Boyfriends" has quite a brutal plot, as all three couples have problems in their relationship. One couple has been together for 5 years but is not happy; another couple's relationship is not working because a guy's love is not reciprocated; while the third couple have just met but not seem to get on. All these problems are common everyday problems that people do face, and the film analyses the emotions and reactions of these characters in depth. I think "Boyfriends" is a great character study.I agree that "Boyfriends" is a low budget amateur production. However, I think this adds to the realism of the film, as it is about everyday problems of everyday men. There is no sugar coating, no pretentiousness, no fancy fluffs and no stereotypical drags. And no pink stuff at all anywhere. A plain and direct film about what problems gay men face is a welcomed change.

Having recently dredged Boyfriends up on video i thought i might give it another chance.I was surprised to find it wasn't as horrendous as a I remember from the first time round.The wonderful mismatch of the slovenly Paul (James "let's play camp characters for the rest of my career" Dreyfus) and the wonderful Ben (Mark Sands) does shine through.The other characters have no depth. It's as if the writers scribbled the script in one night, sorry Neil and Tom.The only shining scene is the "pig" scene, wonderfully performed by Mark Sands.Not anywhere near the class of "Get Real" and "Like It Is", yet worth a watch if it ever comes on television, which i doubt.I think i may put the video on my bookshelf, and not in a cardboard box in the attic like last time.

Although this film DID remind me of something else (NOT "The Big Chill" either), I found it to be refreshing and thoroughly enjoyable. The ensemble cast was particularly talented, the writing was appropriately intricate with a few surprises, and there was even a fun Dinah Washington song ("I Wish I Knew the Name of the Boy in My Dreams")to spruce it up a bit. As with most British films, I had a bit of a difficult time with the accents at first, but I think I got most of it. There's just something INTELLIGENT about the SOUND of the language in British films! At any rate, once I figured out the relationships (and lack of them), I had a good time watching the country weekend for the "lads" unfold. Perhaps the film didn't especially break any new ground, but I don't think a film HAS to do that to be worthwhile. Does every STRAIGHT movie that's fun break new ground? I don't think so. It's about time that a gay movie can be kind of ordinary (no drugs, no AIDS, no suicides) and still be good entertainment. I think the British are much better than we Americans at making gay films, and this is just another example. By the way, the film that reminds me of this one is "Love! Valour! Compassion!"--but this one came first.

Whiny, dull characters, a cliched "Big-Chill" style set-up and predictable, flat dialogue. Like the majority of 90's gay cinema, offers little in the way of insight and simply satisfies itself with rehashing tired identity politics and reinforcing conventional notions of gay male attitudes and behavior. None of the characters resonate; the film starts at point A and basically stays there for what feels like a very, very loooong time.I'd rather sit through "Boys In the Band" or "Cruising" a hundred times than watch this pedestrian mess again.