Greenes Please don't spend money on this.

Borgarkeri A bit overrated, but still an amazing film

Anoushka Slater While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Payno I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Laight Jesse Rosen is a very attractive guy with a wonderful smile--although his hair line recedes oddly throughout the movie as though he's two days from going bald--and plays young-and-sexually-confused well. His female friend who's going through her own confusion does a better job, though, mostly because her character has something of an arc to follow (and better lines to recite). As others have pointed out, the biggest problem here is that just as the third act of the movie starts, and the resolution of the issues begins to settle, the movie ends. For a moment I thought something was wrong with the TV, but nope, it's as though Rosen just decided, let's stop here while I think about how to end this. Still, the movie is worth seeing just for its pleasant, rather realistic recreation of young 20-somethings in LA in 2008.

thesar-2 While The Art of Being Straight wasn't a terrible movie, original for the most part – that is, having a convincingly straight/confused character, it's not great either. I give them kudos for the effort for the majority of the film.After Jon (Rosen) breaks up with his girlfriend and moves to a frat household to be one of the boys again, he discovers he likes, well, boys. The movie just pans out to his "self-discovery" at a relatively slow pace, even at just 70 minutes.Honestly, it's been a few weeks since I've seen this (I'm catching up on a lot of reviews) and nothing really stuck out for me to really remember or recommend. Again, I believed he was straight, for the most part, and that you rarely get in movies like this. In fact, for the majority of gay themed films I watch where a straight male barely puts one foot out of the closet, they might as well mirror RuPaul. So good for them. Too bad the movie as a whole wasn't as good or rememberable. Watch for a quickie before your real movie night.Oh, and side note: for having an independent film, and for someone who wrote, directed, starred, etc, you'd think he wouldn't have gone all out on his "baby" for the DVD. Well, that sucked. Bad. I always appreciate a good audio commentary, outtakes, behind the scenes, etc, to learn more about all they had to go through and sometimes understand the film more. I seriously can't imagine an "Extended/Special Edition" of this movie, but if it does come out, I will re-rent for that purpose.

scootmandutoo This movie surprised me on many different levels. I was scratching my head, however, coming here and finding a relatively low rating. The comments, though, are fairly spot-on.I am very wary when somebody gets listed as writer, star and director. In the case of this movie, I realized very early on that Mr. Rosen is not only very good with dialogue, but also with conveying characters that are multi-faceted.The performances in this film, especially of Rosen and his female lead, Rachel Castillo, are very strong. It is helped by a script that is very believable, for the most part.There were many instances where gestures and the economy of less dialogue caused moments that were very moving and impressive.What prevented me from giving this film a higher rating was the disappointing nature of the interaction between Rosen and his best friends. As another commenter stated, outside of his best friend, they hardly seemed straight. Which is quite odd, because some of the supporting casting is very well done.But the whole last scene seemed to me as if the production ran out of money. Exactly where you think there will be some dramatic tension when his friends may react to the fact that he had outed himself to another friend, the movie just stops and doesn't even deal with it.I assume Rosen was trying to make the case that after coming out, one's friends will treat you exactly as they did before (well, if they are enlightened friends, yes). But, in this movie, one never knows, because it doesn't get addressed, which makes no sense because prior scenes allude to the fact that it might be a problem.Summary: The positives: Some of the most realistic representations ever written about the coming out process, some very nuanced and strong performances.The negatives: It is an unfinished work. It just ends. Some of the friends are badly miscast.Overall....this movie shows Rosen has an awful lot of talent. Definitely worth checking out. But don't expect much in the way of the film's resolution. It is, as was written earlier, a slice of life. Just not a complete slice.

lossowitz To make a first movie, to write it, direct it AND star in the leading role might either be genius or heading for the big big fall. Jesse Rosen has decided to take his chances and really, he did not fall.There's a lot to comment on this movie: superfluous scenes, overplayed emotions, clichés, amateur actors and pretentious camera-work at times. But that does not get in the way of the story. The script is well wrought, although the juxtaposition of the straight boy going gay and the lesbian going straight is a little too symmetric, but things are left to guess and find out for yourself. Does Jon really go gay? Will Maddie ever make something of her life? Is Paul a predator or just looking for love? The acting by the two leads, and some supporting actors (the history teacher, the best friend), is good and a times funny and on the dot. ("Oh, you were the cutest bottom boy!")Why the ending is not more pronounced might be a question of taste, but the scene where Jon is getting back with his friends (who are supposed to be straight but seem played by very gay actors...) is plain weak.So Rosen did not fall, that's good, but it is no work of genius either.