Alex and Leo (Alex und der Löwe) (Germany 2010)

The Gist:

Timid Alex and subdued Leo, who have just broken up with respectively, a boyfriend and a girlfriend, meet and are obviously attracted to each other. Alex introduces Leo to his group of friends, two women and an annoying gay man, who are all wacky when not being morose. Will Alex and Leo do anything about being obviously attracted to each other such as immediately jumping into a serious long-term relationship before the dust settles from the disasters of their last relationships? 

Comments (with obvious spoilers):

The movie is a romance comedy that doesn't quite work. There are low budget issues and 'meh' level of acting skills, but even ignoring those, it doesn't solve the movie's main problem, that it's kind of boring. 

There's some very minor character development, mainly in the leads becoming slightly less meek by the time the story ends, but other than that, not much really happens other than Alex's friends alternating between being weird and kooky, or hungover and morose. Unfortunately neither extreme is interesting. To qualify, the women are kooky and or morose; the annoying gay friend is just written as an asshole. So much so it's not clear why anyone remains friends with him. 

The other not clear thing is just why Alex and Leo are so into each other. That's partially due to the actors having no 'chemistry' with each other, but also due to the way the characters are written. That's not to say they would not have had sex. That's totally plausible. It's the falling in love and wanting a relationship that didn't ring true. 

The movie is also somewhat disappointing in that sexuality is rather rigidly limited here. Leo, who has spent the past four years in a relationship with a woman, isn't allowed to be bisexual, fluid in his preferences, flexible, not strictly heterosexual, or just "unlabeled." Instead there only two options, 100% gay or 100% straight, so being with a man means he must be gay and his prior relationships with women all lies.

On the positive side, there are some funny bits, and there's a certain raw charm to the story. I guess for some folks it would also be a plus that Marcel Schlutt who plays not-straight Leo has done porn. He doesn't actually get full on naked though and he's only okay as an actor, so if that's the only draw, it's not worth it. 

I intended to write that the movie was okay even if it was not worth seeking out, but given all the words I'm using here, from poor acting to boring to disappointing, I guess okay is too positive an adjective. 

Women: 
Yes

People of color:
One person has one line

Gratuitous nudity: 
Sort of. There's a sex scene that nearly, but doesn't quite show butt

• Director: Ives-Yuri Garate 
• Writer: Andre Schneider
• Actors: Marcel Schlutt, Andre Schneider, Sascia Haj, Udo Lutz
• 96 min
• Dialogue is in German
• IMDB

The Last Straight Man (U.S. 2014)

The Gist:

After a drunken bachelor party, the groom-to-be and his best friend, a closeted man with a secret crush on the groom, end up having sex. They spend the next decade or so meeting up yearly in the same hotel room on the anniversary of their first encounter, with the intent of "merely" hooking up again, which of course is not quite what happens. 

Comments (with minor unimportant spoilers):

This is an interesting movie. While there are several low budget issues, they are mainly technical in nature, and don’t negatively affect the story too much. Things like occasional wonky sound or the fact that the hotel room our leads have met in for over a decade has apparently never been redecorated. 

I looked around online for reviews and opinions about the movie out of curiosity over reactions to the use of nudity and sex in the movie, because the movie makes generous use of both. Not surprisingly opinions tends to fall along expected lines, that the nudity and sex was too distracting / the movie went too close to being actual soft porn; or that because the movie has naked men in it, it was best thing ever. 

I don't fall into either position. While I've complained in some of these write ups that throwing pointless nudity into a movie for the sake of having nudity detracts from the story because it pulls you out of the story, that is not what is happening here. The story is about a decade long passionate emotional and physical affair, and actually showing some of that passion serves rather than detracts from the movie. As is, it's not the entirety of the movie as more time is spent with our leads talking about their lives then sexing each other up.

So yes, I like the movie. Even though there are story details that don't make too much sense if thought about too much, such as how the married man is able to continually sneak away for a yearly trip on the eve of his wedding anniversary. 

Regardless, overall it is better than not and is interesting enough that it is worth checking out, with the caveat that nudity and implied sex don't bother you, or a second caveat that a movie where characters spend more time talking then being nude or having implied sex doesn't bother you either. 

Women:

Yes, one maid has a couple of lines. Perhaps not that bad, given the very limited cast. 

People of color:

Yes, same one maid who has a couple of lines. Perhaps not that bad, given the very limited cast. 

Gratuitous nudity:

Nudity yes, but as I discuss above, given the way the story is told I wouldn’t describe it as gratuitous.

• Director: Mark Bessenger
• Writer: Mark Bessenger 
• Actors: Mark Cirillo, Scott Sell
• 90 min
• IMDB