Long-Term Relationship (2006) User Reviews (17)

A "Happy Ending" replaces any common sense

[Briguy-14 · 5/10 · 16 August 2007]

Interesting to read all the varying comments posted here regarding this movie. I think viewer reaction really depends on how much of a sucker you are for a romantic comedy that does away with reason and believability in an effort to come up with a happy ending.

One person mentioned that the director/writer/producer only read "Directing For Dummies" before he helmed this. I wish he had read "Screenwriting For Dummies" too. I think the major problem lies not in the direction but in his script. The development of the central relationship doesn't make sense. Supporting characters disappear for a good portion of the movie, only to reappear at the end.

There are a couple of laugh-out-loud funny lines - mostly delivered by actor Artie O'Daly as Eli. Some would say the character he plays is stereotypical, but he's a good actor with great comic timing & almost steals the movie. That said, other dialogue (and performances) are cringe-worthy.

Questions regarding political and sexual incompatibility in the central gay relationship are raised - which is good - but the solution, according to this film, is to just go ahead and get married! The Republican character doesn't offer any objection. Nothing is worked out. Just slap a happy ending on it. It's a shame. What we're left with is another gay indie film in which a writer/director/producer would have benefited from collaborating with someone to come up with a better finished product.

Good premise; not so good execution

[teejay4407 · 7/10 · 29 October 2008]

Note: the only "spoiler comment" here is one I've already seen in earlier reviews.

There truly is potential here for a great story -- kind of a gay romance version of the Odd Couple. All we need is a clever, creative writer to make it work. The really fun, interesting part of this film, to my mind, should have been showing how these two guys went from point A: meeting and clicking at first sight, but then recognizing that there were certain huge obstacles that stood in the way of any kind of long-term relationship, to Point Z: finding resolution, which, in this case, was marriage. However, you are pretty much left to imagine how they got from A to Z; the script doesn't tell you.

In addition, the dialog was rather unimaginative; after nearly every sentence, some little voice in my head said, "Yup--just what I expected." The acting was surprisingly decent, if often lacking in emotional; I kept thinking that had the script been more interesting, the acting would have blossomed nicely, but there wasn't much to get excited about.

In spite of all that, because the basic idea is good, I did enjoy watching the movie, which is why I gave it a "7" instead of, say, a "5".

Not so good. Not so bad.

[Suradit · 5/10 · 14 August 2014]

Not so bad, but that's about all that can be said for it.

There are some genuinely amusing moments in the movie, mostly supplied by the supporting cast, but at times both the comedy and the drama really stretch credulity and fall flat.

When Glenn asks Mary Margaret why she's drinking herbal tea instead of coffee, she smiles coyly and says she's in her first trimester. His reaction: "oh are you going back to school." Ha. Ha.

When Adam's parents come for a visit, Glenn is hesitant and nervous about spending the night with Adam while his parents are in the house, but then later in the night he comes out of the bedroom stark naked, walks past the bathroom and stands at the kitchen sink for a drink of water with Adam's father sitting a few feet away. Surprise. Then, when the father invites him to sit and talk, he stays naked sitting at the dining room table rather than quickly grabbing a pair of shorts or a bathrobe or even a tea towel, but we're supposed to be amused by him feeling awkward and uncomfortable because he's naked with his boyfriend's father.

These contrived, desperate attempts at humor along with some really lame miscommunications situations that lead to some thin but over-acted drama, unfortunately reduce what could have been a reasonably decent movie down to soap opera or second-rate sitcom level.

The supposed intensity of love between the two lead characters never really comes across so that their communications mix-ups and fumbling attempts at sex don't really raise much tension on the part of viewers for fear that their romance might flounder. Actually I was hoping Glenn would forget about Adam and realize that his friend & roommate Vincent, who had a long-standing crush on Glenn, was a far better, more attractive and lively catch.

The "happily ever after" wrap-up that encompassed most of the characters felt like it was tacked on at the end simply because the movie had gone on long enough and a resolution, no matter how fairytale-ish, was needed before the curtain came down on it all.

I sat through most of it, although towards the end I started jabbing at the fast-forward button. A different actor playing Adam might have made a big difference.

Very Believable Hair

[meaninglessbark · 1/10 · 15 March 2013]

Long Term Relationship (LTR) is so poorly written and flatly presented it makes the typically weak programming on the TV channel Logo look like Masterpiece Theatre.

LTR is supposed to be a comedy drama. The comedy consists of terrible one liners or sight gag montages. There's some frank joking about sexual incompatibility and discussion of supposedly insurmountable political differences but everything LTR attempts to address or make a joke about has been done before and much better.

The story is standard romantic comedy fluff with spikes of drama thrown in. The writing sounds like a college freshman's first script. Most of the characters are terrible clichés, the side characters in particular. There's a supposedly wise and sexy Asian female best friend of the main character, her husband who hangs out with gay guys but is utterly clueless about anything gay (Har!), a couple of mildly flaming constantly quipping gay guys, the professor, and Mary Ann. The last two aren't really in LTR but the side characters are as one dimensional as old TV sitcom characters. Except the acting in LTR isn't as good as the acting in a TV sitcom.

The two leads acting is competent (when they fall flat it's mainly due to the terrible writing) and their characters have some interesting aspects...Interesting enough that it makes you wonder what a better writer and director would have done with them.

The most notable thing about LTR (other than some pleasant but completely out of place piano music) is that the gay characters all have hair that looks as if they just rolled out of bed or possible cut it themselves. If believable hair was the goal it's LTR's one success. But the reason the hair is even noticed at all is that everything else about the film is so dull and obvious it makes the hair really stand out.

Wonderful movie

[fred2212 · 8/10 · 6 December 2006]

The movie was shown during the Verzaubert Filmfestival in Berlin today and I have to say I really enjoyed it. I agree with some other comments made that the plot really uses a lot of gay stereotypes. But aren't the "straight" (apologies for making the comparison...) romantic comedies not just the same - with the exception that to my knowledge they did not focus on erotic "incompatibility" yet. Unfortunately exactly this part is not very convincing in the movie...BUT you forget about all the stereotypes and deficiencies when you watch the marvelous performance of Matthew Montgomery - his acting is very intense and I am looking forward to see more from him in the future.

Frustrating film because of poorly developed major conflict between lead characters.

[amaready · 3/10 · 13 August 2006]

Movie had some good acting and good moments (though obviously pretty low budget), but bad rating due to basic premise being badly developed. The main point of conflict between the two leads doesn't play out in a realistic manner at all. There are a few scenes where they disagree because of it, but no discussions of any great depth that would explain how they can be together while seeing the world so differently, especially since the employment of Glenn is so wound up in this part of his life (and Adam is active enough with his that he supports it with time and money.) Also, several times Glenn is portrayed negatively for being the way he is (apologizing to Adam for his past) while Adam is shown to be upstanding and "traditional," which the film proclaims to be the "good" way in the end. I don't like being preached to like that. I attended a discussion session with the director after viewing LTR, and he said that he presented this conflict between them because, if he was in Glenn's shoes (and he said he does in real life relate to Glenn's view) that he could never date someone with Adam's views. Well, then, I think he should have done a much better job explaining how Glenn could do it in the film. Also, director said he directed this, his first movie, only after reading (Directing For Dummies.) Directing was not that bad, but far from a top notch effort. I've seen worse, but I rarely leave films feeling this frustrated.

Great Fun

[bigbro501-1 · 9/10 · 15 August 2006]

Long-Term Relationship is one of those films that will go down as a must see for gay film lovers. First off it is very funny. The script is witty at every turn but doesn't lose sight of it's story because of it.

The cast is great. The stand out is Mattew Montgomery. He holds the whole film together. With his good looks and quiet charm, Matthew treads along the zany world of his friends and works on getting his long-term relationship perfect. The other characters are pretty well rounded too. And what is a gay film without cute guys? The cast is full of them but as far as cuteness goes, I am partial to Jeremy Lucas who plays Vincent.

The romance in the film is so natural. The characters of Glenn and Adam develop a real relationship complete with the way they talk to each other to having relationship rules as well.

All and all this is a nice writing and directing debut by Rob Williams. It is an intelligent and funny film about relationships and gay culture. I look forward to seeing other films Rob does.

An Excrucitating Exercise in Camp

[Coralknight · 2/10 · 17 September 2016]

An assault and insult to gay men everywhere; apparently of whom the majority are vapid yet stern democrat sexoholic clichés who make poor attempts at wit and humor. This film tries so hard to be relevant and funny, but is a LONG tedious road-trip away from both. None of the jokes were remotely funny (and here's a hint: don't edit in long pauses after each joke for emphasis as if you're at a dinner-party...PICK UP THE PACE and maybe we won't NOTICE how bad the joke was!). The premise that any gay man who doesn't work for "ACT OUT" remotely cares about the political leanings of his sex-partner is beyond laughable. The only theme that COULD have been interesting was how two men overcome "bad sex". THIS was what I personally wanted to see resolved...and it never was! Were they just satisfied to a semi-platonic relationship? Did they find the magic formula (i.e. "being old-fashioned"?) or were they destined to continue trying? This was just a really bad exercise in campy comebacks...the type one would expect from shallow friends-of-friends at a drunken cocktail where you tell everyone you'll keep in touch but give fake numbers to.

Nothing Worth Watching Here

[ekeby · 2/10 · 7 January 2008]

Or listening to, for that matter. Even the soundtrack is a bore.

Honestly, this isn't the worst gay movie I've seen (that would be Regarding Billy), but it's down there very close to the bottom of the barrel.

This thing drags and drags and drags. It's not that the plot is inane--in the hands of a good writer it might have worked . . . it certainly could have been much more entertaining. There's not one plot point you can't see coming for ten miles down the road. The dialog is flat. The jokes are old. To add insult to injury, it's full of one-dimensional, stereotypical gays.

Nothing in this movie convinced me that the situation or the relationship of the two leads was possible, much less real. There was no chemistry, no dynamic, in fact no evidence of why the leads love each other . . . we're just told they're in love. Hard to figure when they have nothing in common and aren't compatible sexually. They like the same book? Huh?

The acting is not totally bad, but the pacing is excruciatingly slow. I mean, almost Jarmusch-slow, but without Jarmusch quality. In fact, that would be a good barometer for you. If you like Jarmusch films, avoid this one.

Two movies in one: Commentary was funnier than Mystery Science Theater 3000

[Emproph · 10/10 · 11 November 2007]

I loved it. At first I was concerned about the "stereotypical" depiction of casual gay-sex, but I think it was necessary, and that most if not all of the remaining nudity was within the context of the relationship. So it wasn't gratuitous or distracting. Which was fortunate, because the story itself and the subplots were rich and integral to the story. But it still had that constant tinge of spontaneity throughout. Enjoyable, nice flow.

So if you like it, make sure to watch it again with the commentary on.

The commentary was AS entertaining, if not more entertaining than the movie itself. In a completely different way of course, but don't miss that. It was an hour and a half of ROFLMAO. Plus you get to see all the adorable shots of the movie again.

Innocuous or offensive?

[lavarian · 3/10 · 7 November 2006]

A truly frightening film. Feels as if it were made in the early '90s by a straight person who wanted to show that gays are good, normal, mainstream-aspiring people. Retrograde to the point of being offensive, LTR suggests that monogamy and marriage are the preferred path to salvation for sad, lonely, sex-crazed gays. Wow! Who knew? The supporting characters are caricatures of gay stereotypes (the effeminate buffoon, the bitter, lonely queen, the fag hag, etc.) and the main characters are milquetoast, middle-class, middlebrow clones, of little interest.

As far as the romantic & ideological struggles of the main couple are concerned, there's not much to say: we've seen it all before, and done much better.

Everything's perfect until we discover Adam is . . .

[alanjj · 8/10 · 4 June 2006]

This is a traditional romantic comedy--love at first sight, complications, reconciliations, and lots of laughs. It centers around Glenn, a wiry, handsome, intense, Richard Gere type, who gets lots of one-night stands. His best friend/roommate is looking through the personals for an "LTR". He reads one that catches Glenn's interest, and Glenn winds up meeting Adam, a Brendan Fraser type. If you've ever wanted to see Richard Gere make love to Brendan Fraser, now's the chance. The contrast between the two types makes the physical contact especially hot.

The description of the movie in the program for New York's LGBT Film Festival gave away one of the best punchlines, which I will not do here. There are major differences, however, between Adam and Glenn, but they have such a strong love for each other that they stick together. Until . . .

This was a really enjoyable film, with hot actors, snappy dialog, and a decent plot. It's very easy to relate to the situations. Maybe a bit too much emphasis on the campy gay friends, and the best female friend role has been done to death already (I guess you need the fag hag to attract the female demographic). But the film is fun all the way. And, have I mentioned, hot?

Can't watch

[scottinhawaii-1 · 2/10 · 17 February 2019]

Stilted dialogue, bad acting, weird pacing, flat jokes, sex negative with self promiscuity shaming. Windom Beacham is the only one that is at all natural. In fact he's charming.

Goes nowhere!

[qui_j · 2/10 · 16 May 2019]

This film just seems to drag on and on without really getting anywhere. The story might have been better told in the hands of an experienced writer and without the writer being the lead actor and producer (always wary of that combination). It's the kind of film you have on just to provide background noise and nothing more.

Loved it!

[BeachhGirl · 10/10 · 31 December 2007]

I have seen many gay films, & this is one of the best. Rob Williams may be a "new" director, but I think he did an excellent job. The looks, comments, moves, etc. by the characters only added to the movie. Casting was great - There was wonderful chemistry between Windham & Matthew, which only added realism to the movie. I disagree with another comment that fag hags are necessary to attract the female demographic. (many men, straight or gay, have female friends, & I resent that term). I am a straight woman; & while I liked the character of Mary Margaret, I certainly wasn't very interested in her part (sorry). I was interested in the love story between 2 hot guys who were looking for real love. While the story line is somewhat predictable, it is a good romantic comedy, with some great and funny lines. Artie O'Day, Jeremy Lucas - they were all good. The Commentary is hilarious & definitely worth listening to after you've watched the movie. Check out the soundtrack - it's got some wonderful tunes. I will definitely look for more from Rob & all the actors in this film.

Rob Williams, Matthew Montgomery Triumph Again!

[paulrdietz · 10/10 · 8 February 2010]

The film settles around the topic of relationships, in all aspects, friend, strangers, family, love, (workplace for Eli - where there is no love lost - LOL) It also gives us views in the varying ways relationships work out. Past are the days of your soon to be lover telling of HIV or cheating, comes a new threat on the political front. LMAO was very funny. There are betrayals, forgiveness, laughs, sorrows - all the things that can make up todays complex relationships. And Rob handle them extremely well in a nice tight picture. (Be sure to pay attention to Matt in Eli's office - a very fun moment.) Matthew Montgomery presents a character that many can connect with even if they don't admit it. Moreover, the beauty in his performance is the transfer to that deeper caring man. Playful - compassion - hurt - loved, he tackles these aspects masterly sometimes with just a look, a stroke on the cheek or a smile. He has mastered that talents of acting with the ability to not say allot, but make you feel it all!! Artie O'Daly and Jeremy Lucas give fine support rolls as the side kicks friends and Bret Wolfe gives us a good look at the single side of romancing. After watching be sure to watch the commentary track. It was hilarious. Yes, I am one of the 5 to watch it. Have some drinks ready and settle in as you become privy to their thoughts. Halfway through you feel like your sitting with your own friends. This is a MUST SEE!!

Sleeping With The Enemy

[jromanbaker · 8/10 · 28 February 2022]

This film deals with a gay relationship that for some reason has problems attaining sexual fulfillment. As gay relationship which wants to endure, it does smash apart the still homophobic view among certain heterosexuals that long term commitments between men cannot last. This is a good point to make when we look at films such as 'Call Me By Your Name' and 'Brokeback Mountain' which I dislike intensely. On top of that, the two lovers come from opposite poles of the political spectrum, and I will give no spoilers about how this added problem works out. For some of the friends that surround them this a sort of sleeping with the enemy, and yes, there is humour in this as well. One of the lovers has a flatmate. The flatmate loves his sharing partner very strongly. The actor who plays him I found excellent. And to a certain extent I got a bit tired of why the sex between the two lovers failed despite their devotion to each other. But there are good things in this film and in my opinion it is well worth watching. It was clearly made on a shoestring, but then a lot of good films are. See it if you can. Made in 2006 it is still relevant.