WasAnnon Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

Mehdi Hoffman There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Wyatt There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

gridoon2018 "Threesome" is like a cross between "Jules and Jim" (for obvious reasons) and "When Harry Met Sally" (it examines the same central question - can there be "just" friendship between a man and a woman?). It's also the movie where I fell in love with Lara Flynn Boyle, back in 1994. Watching it again now, it remains fresh, funny, bold, bittersweet, and even wise at the end. Like the whole experience does for Josh Charles' character, it's a film that stays with you. *** out of 4.

Armand one of nice films about high school in easy manner. good looking actors, sentimental chaotic existence, an error and the pieces of strong friendship. nothing original but a smart script and few not bad actors are pillars for a comedy who could be good choice for an evening Sunday. the confusion as basis of the events, the levels of love, the life of characters as bricks of same circle, the hilarious situations and the realistic characteristics of heroes are interesting details for not a great film but surely a seductive one. the gay impulse does the story different by many films from same genre and Josh Charles is an inspired option for the role of Eddy. in same measure,the rude Stuart by Stephen Baldwin is realistic and almost soul of story.

narulagaurav All in all, a below average watch. There is no touch with reality - whether from a relationship perspective, college life, friendships, or anything else.The acting is atrocious, as far as Baldwin and Boyle go. Charles redeems it a bit - but only a BIT. The situations are simply ridiculous. Statements are made, and then left hanging without culmination. Friendships are portrayed with an emptiness around them that is difficult to understand.Considering the writer is the director (Fleming), not much more could've been expected since the story itself is so awful.I saw the movie 'coz the actors are from my era, and I thought it would be nostalgic. Hardly - avoid it if you can.

ssloan A university bureaucratic snafu causes a woman to share a dormitory suite with 2 men. The three of them develop friendships and there are interesting sexual desires/relationships between some of the characters.Overall, this was a funny and at times moving film. However, parts of the movie were difficult to believe, which made the entire movie a little difficult to relate to.The character who narrates a few scenes, Eddie, is the most believable and he is an easy character to relate to. Stuart is almost believable, but this is borderline. He almost belongs in "Animal House," although he is not that extreme. Finally, the woman, Alex, is the least believable as she is can be very sexually aggressive. The other tough part of this movie it moves too quickly for the relationships to develop. The characters' public displays of friendship are amusing, but surprising because it happens relatively abruptly. In another scene Eddie has a theory about Stuart and refers to several things that Stuart said to support his theory. However, we never saw the original scenes where Stuart made these statements. I suspect they were edited out. Despite everything I wrote, I am glad I saw the movie. College friendships happen quickly and can be very serious very quickly. They can also be amusing. Each of the main characters was likable and the movie was entertaining.