This was a good film, but it has flaws.<br /><br />Visually it's got problems because much of it was shot on digital. I suppose they ran out of money, but it's a shame they couldn't use film. There were some interesting shots but the discipline of film would have had them making sure the light readings were carefully evaluated rather than what happened: the typical low quality of digital, but with even muddier shots than normal for digital.<br /><br />Now, on to the story: very interesting plot. And interesting characters. I felt they were real people. But the two actresses did a better job than the actors. Not that I didn't think the Michael character was that unbelievable. But he wasn't given lines to show any range of emotion. Of course his character is SUPPOSED to be subdued and pensive, but all people have a range of emotions within their personal boundaries and the Michael character didn't test them.<br /><br />The different takes on sex give you a lot to think about. But there could have been a little more irony/human condition/redemption...something in the story to give us more to ponder about. But there WAS something there. I left the theatre thinking about how there are more chaste individuals and more "alpha" individuals but how they can sometimes drift into the opposite directions. Specifically in this film how Michael unexpectedly responds to "Do you want to make love?" with "No. I want to f*ck you hard." Contrast that with the sexually confident Justin, who has to deal with one of those "criers after sex" on a one-night-stand and contemplate alone in a car later just what he lost with his current girlfriend.<br /><br />6 out of 10 because it kept me thinking and I'm confident that both the director and actor/actresses have the talent to create even better art in the future.