It is very evident that this film was made on a shoe string budget. Also the film is set in the run-down parts of the Rio city which is more poor than seedy, and where old man paying for sex with young hookers is par for the course. To be honest, the direction and the treatment of the film felt a bit amateurish to me. No wonder, later I realized that this was the first film by its director.
Middle age successful writer EduFalls for young and charming prostitute Fabio. Surprisingly the feelings are reciprocated. Edu is going through a writer's block while Fabio on the other hand is young and carefree and spends his time hustling, hanging out with his other young friends. Edu resents the fact that Fabio doesn't seem to care in the world. Also Edu constantly worries that since they are having unprotected sex and Fabio sleeps around, they are risking themselves. Surprisingly Edu comes out positive but Fabio is negative. This adds more tension to the relationship coupled with the fact that another young hustler, a friend of Fabio, constantly tries to come in between the 2 guys. Eventually the two men move apart and move on.
My big problem with the film is a lot of unknowns. Why are the two men together in the first place? Understandably Edu falls for Fabio, but is Fabio genuinely interested or is he just playing a role to get more money and gifts? Edu like shim but constantly complains and is grumpy and hence why does Fabio stick around? You can probably guess why they are together but a bit clarity would help. Also it feels the movie just randomly keeps moving and is expected from audience to piece things together. Who was Edu's female friend and a random older man whom Fabio had dinner once. Why was Fabio's friend relentlessly after Edu (just for money or was it jealously? Even the whole HIV angle was thrown in but then not really addressed properly. It was jus there. Fabio looks charming and acts well. Edu was simply annoying. To be honest, the film is not awful but there are random moments of silence and it completely lacks character development. Hence you really don't care what happens with the actors next.
The film had interesting premise but lazy writing and incomplete and rushed film making makes this experience quite underwhelming. (3.5/10)
Middle age successful writer EduFalls for young and charming prostitute Fabio. Surprisingly the feelings are reciprocated. Edu is going through a writer's block while Fabio on the other hand is young and carefree and spends his time hustling, hanging out with his other young friends. Edu resents the fact that Fabio doesn't seem to care in the world. Also Edu constantly worries that since they are having unprotected sex and Fabio sleeps around, they are risking themselves. Surprisingly Edu comes out positive but Fabio is negative. This adds more tension to the relationship coupled with the fact that another young hustler, a friend of Fabio, constantly tries to come in between the 2 guys. Eventually the two men move apart and move on.
My big problem with the film is a lot of unknowns. Why are the two men together in the first place? Understandably Edu falls for Fabio, but is Fabio genuinely interested or is he just playing a role to get more money and gifts? Edu like shim but constantly complains and is grumpy and hence why does Fabio stick around? You can probably guess why they are together but a bit clarity would help. Also it feels the movie just randomly keeps moving and is expected from audience to piece things together. Who was Edu's female friend and a random older man whom Fabio had dinner once. Why was Fabio's friend relentlessly after Edu (just for money or was it jealously? Even the whole HIV angle was thrown in but then not really addressed properly. It was jus there. Fabio looks charming and acts well. Edu was simply annoying. To be honest, the film is not awful but there are random moments of silence and it completely lacks character development. Hence you really don't care what happens with the actors next.
The film had interesting premise but lazy writing and incomplete and rushed film making makes this experience quite underwhelming. (3.5/10)
Comments