SpuffyWeb
Sadly Over-hyped
CommentsXp
Best movie ever!
Hadrina
The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful
LHFugal-64-77849
Why does Kit Williamson, and other people trying to create "gay" content, even try? I'm gay, looking on Netflix for something new, saw this, wanted to give it a shot. I'm sad that I keep watching episodes, hoping that it somehow becomes "gay." Funny, even as a gay man, I'm more interested in the relationships with the straight people. Nothing about Cal and Thom says "gay" to me.
I'm not looking for porn, guys, but the interaction between Cal and Thom and Jeremy is ridiculous. Please.
Totally gay-offensive.
Stop.
hddu10
Set in what appears to be Silverlake in LA, Eastsiders describes itself as a "dark comedy"...but the writing had nothing worth laughing at. The ACTING on the other hand was in fact laughable in a face-palm kind of way-- an example being one of the leads, John Halbach, obliviously miscast as a straight character...because his boyfriend, the writer and other lead (surprise!) didn't have the courage to say, "oh, honey...no...you don't "do" straight very well". This is one of those projects where all the parts were written as vehicles for these aspiring writer-director-actors to showcase their particular abilities (or lack thereof) to potentially catch someone's eye for future projects (an example being a scene where one particularly bland actor, Matthew McKelligon gets to speak Schweizerdeutsch..to show he can). Luckily, however, this forum did appear to help a certain brilliant and amazing star, Constance Wu (who was the ONLY reason I watched this mess). Although the writing for her is pretty much as predictable and stale as the rest of the characters (all of whom seem to be written in the tone of an ultra-liberal male feminist), she is the only actor who actually carried the scenes and personalized the character to any depth (she is the only one who really stands out as having formal training). In fact, these 4 VERY generous stars are only because of Constance, who I'm hoping will not have this mess come back to haunt her, in what I hope is a very long and successful career.
Annabel Blauwvaren
The first season was fast-paced and kinda had a story. Even though I didn't like the ending of season 1, I liked the season overall because it was quick to watch. Season 2 was really boring and nothing really happened in that season. The episodes were 25 minutes too so it was not fun to watch. I also didn't like they focused too much on the alcohol. It's only about the alcohol in this series. They also shied away from the ugly of alcohol.Season 1 was watchable and kinda fun, season 2 not so much. I would only recommend season 1.
ekeby
I think the younger you are (if you're gay) the more this will resonate with you. The writing is uneven, but the starting premise is interesting. It's infidelity but not just simple infidelity. And the production values and photography are both fine.Overall, the gay characters are better done than the straight characters. The gay characters are more underwritten, e.g., the actors communicated with their faces/bodies a lot, which is a good thing; it wasn't so dialog driven. The straight characters on the other hand seemed overwritten and, frankly, unconvincing. As the episodes progress, some of the coincidences are a bit much. And the way people relate to each other doesn't always seem real. A lot of the time it does, but a lot of the time it doesn't. For those of you with a lot more life experience this will be harder to take. For example, the art gallery/art world shown is like somebody's idea of what that world is like, rather than what it's really like. That's true for a lot of things, including some relationships. However, most of the gay hook ups/relationships were plausible to me because, well, been there done that.Still, I found this very watchable, even though I knew the quality was just above average. But like I say, the younger you are, the more likely you will be to enjoy it.
