Long-Term Relationship

2006 "It takes humor to be in one..."
Long-Term Relationship
6| 1h37m| en| More Info
Released: 02 January 2006 Released
Producted By: Guest House Films
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Tired of the unsatisfying singles scene, Glenn answers a personal ad and meets Adam, a handsome Southern man seeking a long-term relationship. The two hit it off immediately, but their initial attraction is soon put to the test. Glenn's gay friends say he'd be happier playing the field again, but his straight pals encourage him to work at the budding relationship.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Guest House Films

Trailers & Images

Reviews

hddu10 An assault and insult to gay men everywhere; apparently of whom the majority are vapid yet stern democrat sexoholic clichés who make poor attempts at wit and humor. This film tries so hard to be relevant and funny, but is a LONG tedious road-trip away from both. None of the jokes were remotely funny (and here's a hint: don't edit in long pauses after each joke for emphasis as if you're at a dinner-party...PICK UP THE PACE and maybe we won't NOTICE how bad the joke was!). The premise that any gay man who doesn't work for "ACT OUT" remotely cares about the political leanings of his sex-partner is beyond laughable. The only theme that COULD have been interesting was how two men overcome "bad sex". THIS was what I personally wanted to see resolved...and it never was! Were they just satisfied to a semi-platonic relationship? Did they find the magic formula (i.e. "being old-fashioned"?) or were they destined to continue trying? This was just a really bad exercise in campy comebacks...the type one would expect from shallow friends-of-friends at a drunken cocktail where you tell everyone you'll keep in touch but give fake numbers to.
meaninglessbark Long Term Relationship (LTR) is so poorly written and flatly presented it makes the typically weak programming on the TV channel Logo look like Masterpiece Theatre.LTR is supposed to be a comedy drama. The comedy consists of terrible one liners or sight gag montages. There's some frank joking about sexual incompatibility and discussion of supposedly insurmountable political differences but everything LTR attempts to address or make a joke about has been done before and much better. The story is standard romantic comedy fluff with spikes of drama thrown in. The writing sounds like a college freshman's first script. Most of the characters are terrible clichés, the side characters in particular. There's a supposedly wise and sexy Asian female best friend of the main character, her husband who hangs out with gay guys but is utterly clueless about anything gay (Har!), a couple of mildly flaming constantly quipping gay guys, the professor, and Mary Ann. The last two aren't really in LTR but the side characters are as one dimensional as old TV sitcom characters. Except the acting in LTR isn't as good as the acting in a TV sitcom.The two leads acting is competent (when they fall flat it's mainly due to the terrible writing) and their characters have some interesting aspects...Interesting enough that it makes you wonder what a better writer and director would have done with them.The most notable thing about LTR (other than some pleasant but completely out of place piano music) is that the gay characters all have hair that looks as if they just rolled out of bed or possible cut it themselves. If believable hair was the goal it's LTR's one success. But the reason the hair is even noticed at all is that everything else about the film is so dull and obvious it makes the hair really stand out.
ekeby Or listening to, for that matter. Even the soundtrack is a bore. Honestly, this isn't the worst gay movie I've seen (that would be Regarding Billy), but it's down there very close to the bottom of the barrel.This thing drags and drags and drags. It's not that the plot is inane--in the hands of a good writer it might have worked . . . it certainly could have been much more entertaining. There's not one plot point you can't see coming for ten miles down the road. The dialog is flat. The jokes are old. To add insult to injury, it's full of one-dimensional, stereotypical gays. Nothing in this movie convinced me that the situation or the relationship of the two leads was possible, much less real. There was no chemistry, no dynamic, in fact no evidence of why the leads love each other . . . we're just told they're in love. Hard to figure when they have nothing in common and aren't compatible sexually. They like the same book? Huh?The acting is not totally bad, but the pacing is excruciatingly slow. I mean, almost Jarmusch-slow, but without Jarmusch quality. In fact, that would be a good barometer for you. If you like Jarmusch films, avoid this one.
BeachhGirl I have seen many gay films, & this is one of the best. Rob Williams may be a "new" director, but I think he did an excellent job. The looks, comments, moves, etc. by the characters only added to the movie. Casting was great - There was wonderful chemistry between Windham & Matthew, which only added realism to the movie. I disagree with another comment that fag hags are necessary to attract the female demographic. (many men, straight or gay, have female friends, & I resent that term). I am a straight woman; & while I liked the character of Mary Margaret, I certainly wasn't very interested in her part (sorry). I was interested in the love story between 2 hot guys who were looking for real love. While the story line is somewhat predictable, it is a good romantic comedy, with some great and funny lines. Artie O'Day, Jeremy Lucas - they were all good. The Commentary is hilarious & definitely worth listening to after you've watched the movie. Check out the soundtrack - it's got some wonderful tunes. I will definitely look for more from Rob & all the actors in this film.