Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Monkeywess This is an astonishing documentary that will wring your heart while it bends your mind

Tayyab Torres Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

NJMoon ISSUES 101? So did I miss the other 100 volumes in this series? If so, THANK YOU! I just know there is a hardcore gay porn cut of this vid out there somewhere. If you find a copy, do me a favor and cut out all the boring, talky parts first. This vid has the worst dialogue ever made up during Rush Week. The actors are cute enough, sure - but the word 'acting' should be omitted from their resumes. The videography isn't awful - it's worse. One scene is shot against a flat stucco wall, and another against a pane of windows reflecting the glare of the minimal camera lights. I played a fun game while watching ISSUES 101 (No, not that! Dirty-minded IMDb users!) - I pretended I was on a gay version of "Mystery Science Theatre 3000"! I cracked myself up! It was fab! As for ISSUES, I just hope there isn't a 102.

eslgr8 I've seen very good, even excellent, low budget gay themed films which despite low ratings from some IMDb.com users, nonetheless show talent and imagination and ingenuity by the cast and filmmakers. Issues 101 is however the work of a writer-director (John Lincoln III) whose supreme lack of talent is at the level of the infamous Ed Wood. There is not a moment of credibility in this mess of a movie. Michaael Rozman, the above the title lead, is 10 years too old for the part and does not for a moment convince the viewer that he is gay. On the other hand, Dennis W. Rittenhouse Jr., has not a moment of believability as a straight man, even one who is "straight with issues." That anyone other than a hopelessly smitten girlfriend would doubt for a minute that he's as gay as a goose is beyond belief. Bad casting from the get-go. There's also an excruciatingly bad "performance" by Gary Castro Churchwell as the fraternity president. Faring much better are Jeremy Smith and Trevor Murphy, who are charming and believable in their supporting roles. But a couple of supporting performances do not a good film make. (Oh, Kelly Clarkson does make a cameo appearance in the film--for a full 11 seconds!) Another IMDb.com user has commented on the incredible scene in which fraternity brother Todd invites total stranger Joe to his house for beers and is then shocked when Joe assumes he's gay. (Who wouldn't?) But this is nothing compared to the scene in which the viewer learns that in this fraternity, pledges are forced to perform oral sex on eager fraternity brothers while in the same room another pledge is paddled bare bottomed. A gay porn fantasy, absolutely, but I didn't buy it for a moment, and from that point on, nothing was believable, if it had been slightly so before then.There is some full frontal nudity by Naked Boys Singing original cast member Michael Haboush (certainly hired just because he was willing to show his goodies) though Rittenhouse, while cute enough to do gay porn, keeps his hand over said goodies and is otherwise shot from the back. Jeff Sublett, as Rittenhouse's gay younger brother, is also a cutie, but exposes less.I can't say I hated watching this movie. I might watch it again just to marvel at it's horribleness (and to check out a few of the cuties again).I don't regret buying it for the above reasons, but those who have better things to do with their money would be better off renting, or skipping this untalented writer/director's first, and hopefully last, film.(I truly doubt that the 10 star reviews posted here were written by anyone other than someone connected with this film.)

bew_50 Issues 101 is without a doubt the worst movie ever made, with absolutely no redeeming values except for a few shots of some nice boy ass, and proves once again that anyone with a cheap video cam and a few friends can make a film. Not only is the story absurd and the acting so amateurish that it rivals the worst kindergarten play, but the characters are so stereotyped that gay and straight people alike will be offended by the depiction of the characters. It was like watching a train wreck; I could not avert my eyes and I was horrified the entire time. God only knows why I watched the whole movie. Most gay actors are capable of portraying straight men with no problem; these guys were not. The gay characters were total flames, vapid and shallow and able to fall in love and have their hearts broken in the time it takes most of us to enjoy a good meal. The so-called straight characters were not far behind. One expected them all to drop their pants at any given moment and have an orgy in the fraternity house. To wit, did the writer, director or any of the people involved in the making of this trash ever go to college or ever go inside a fraternity house??? Quite frankly, I've seen more convincing acting and stories in gay porn films.In short, I cannot say enough bad things about this piece of garbage and would exhort any reader to avoid this movie like the plague.

Havan_IronOak Unfortunately, this film should be mandatory viewing for film makers, so that they can see what mistakes NOT to make in their films. Issues 101 has real problems. As a romantic drama it's a failure. Seeing this film only a few hours after watching Andy Warhol's Trash led me to question why Trash is so riveting (albeit in a sick car-crash sort of way) while Issues 101 required real force of will to watch to the bitter end. Neither film has well scripted dialogue and yet they couldn't be more different in their audience impact. One is fascinating to watch and one is painful to watch. Somehow in Trash we see beyond the flaws and imperfections and see that there is truth (in this case what it must have really been like to be in a dead end relationship with a junkie in late 60's NYC) In Issues 101, we see no such truth. The reality of the digital video contrasts wildly with the inane dialogue (lacking in both sense and substance). The result is an insipid film lacking in truth, excitement or interest. The flaws were so off-putting as to keep yanking the viewer back to the `real world' and not allowing for the willing suspension of disbelief that works for most films. The REAL problem for me with Issues 101 is that it gives me a terrible case of the `might-have-beens.' For the most part the actors were pleasing to the eye and the ideas presented in the story could have been told so much better. On the surface, a story about a fraternity pledge that somehow gets through a chink in his frat brother's straight façade, the frat brother setting the pledge up with his younger fraternal gay brother to take some of the pressure off, and the jealousy that ensues are all great plot elements. However in this film almost none of it works. The sex with the supposedly straight brother goes way too far without an adequate `gosh was I drunk set-up'. The whirlwind speed with which the pledge and the younger brother get seriously involved happens way too quickly. And finally the pledge causing all these issues is neither handsome enough nor charming enough to make us believe that either brother would be interested in him.To make matters worse there were scenes that were totally unmotivated and others that were totally unnecessary. I understand that this film ran out of money near the end and so much was lost in the director's vision but overall what was left is nearly unwatchable and actually painful to sit through.