“Lonesome”- New Gay Cowboy Indie Flick

Bump

Nah, I'm good.

Well, it does have former DL fav Ian Roberts.

I can't tell what it's about

Mumble mumble mumble.

It’s about a lonely gay Cowboy who moved to Sydney.

It’s a British production set in Sydney.

But the guy is American? He has an American accent.

Is there much demand for cowboys in Sydney?

There are ranches in Australia, and Sydney, yes.

Is this an Australian Brokeback Mountain ?

Homely Aborigine?

Homely Aborigine NASTY!

I was surprised at how much I liked this movie. Does DL actually watch or like any gay movies?

Gay coming of age/coming out/first nice love films with cute untrained actors mumbling banal lines are a dime a dozen. This one's worth about that.

I loved it.

Any pinga or arse on display for a discerning audience?

Looks like a way more boring version of 'Dog Tags' (2008), which at least had Candy Clark, some bisexual babydaddy drama, the !raq War, and a Marine recruit in naval uniform.

This looks like a Cinemax After Dark flick. I think I'll go directly to something a bit more adult.

R16, yes, quite a bit.

I watched "Of an Age" after "Lonesome". I liked that both movies had interracial relationships. Both were better and more realistic than the overwrought "In from the Side" that only had hot white guys.

Yeah, because it's completely unrealistic that some gay white guys pair up together. 🙄

I haven't seen either Lonesome or Of an Age yet, but count me as one who really liked In from the Side.

And while I'm at it, I loved the recent Moroccan film The Blue Caftan.

Very mid-1990s.

R22 In From The Side had a couple of hotties as the leads, didn't it?

I watched this at the weekend and really enjoyed it. The cinematography is stunning, and the lead Josh Lavery is really, really hot.

Can anyone enlighten me why Ian Roberts was / is a DL fav R3 - is it just his body?

How are these two films about interracial relationships? The leads of both films are white…

The second lead in Lonesome, Daniel Gabriel is most definitely not white

Wow I was wrong r27 .

R13 Yes then no. Some of us prefer an interesting story when we sit for an hour and a half to watch a movie. Porn takes all of 5 minutes. Gay filmmakers really should pin that to their laptops during writer's meetings.

The movie looks interesting. Thank you for making a thread about it, OP.

The story is quite slight, but there is lots of eye candy in it.

[quote] Some of us prefer an interesting story when we sit for an hour and a half to watch a movie. Porn takes all of 5 minutes.

Five minutes? You last that long?

Just kidding. The problem is that everybody is a critic on social media. Some find a story interesting or relatable, but you rarely get those comments (and if they post, they get called shills), but most people post how they hate that story, can't relate to it at all, and how every single actor is not only ugly but also miscast, making it the worst movie ever.

DL is still a great place for sassy shade occasionally, but it's not the best place to look for praise and support online.

I’ve enjoyed many of the LGBT films from Australia. Looking forward to seeing this one.

R32 No, DL really isn't. I tried to watch this, but it was really shallow and not very good. Unfortunately, that applies to many of the gay movies that I've seen and that's very disappointing. Every once in a while, I'll come across a gem that actually has substance.

I'd like a gay film that DOESN'T have a sequence where the leads go swimming.

I get it is because they want to show as much flesh as possible without it being a sex scene, but it's such a cliche.

What's up with the subject matter of many gay films? I'm browsing Prime and the synopses are...Brad meets a young hustler OR a young hustler falls for his client (who happens to be a hunk) OR a student falls for a foreign exchange student OR...

I'm really getting tired of movies in general, you know? I used to work with an older guy who admitted that he didn't "Really like movies" and I thought that was strange, BUT now that I'm older, I get that he meant most movies aren't worth 2 hours of your time. So, I'm slowly moving away from movies to series--unless something really catches my eye.

Watching it now…deep.

[quote]Can anyone enlighten me why Ian Roberts was / is a DL fav [R3] - is it just his body?

Perhaps it's because he was a trailblazer, being the first pro rugby player to come out as gay (at a time when there were very few world class athletes who dared to)? And his activism trying to combat homophobia?

So sick of the red tags

Ruins other threads. MODS-JUST DELETE THE ONES YOU DONT LIKE!

There were sone pretty graphic sex scenes in the movie - unfortunately, oddly unappealing sex scenes. Ian Roberts still has an amazing body but his face was busted - all scarred up and banged up.

Unappealing? Isn't everyone into being fisted using pasta as lube?

I'm going to have to watch this movie again, it seems. I thought it was one of the worst films I'd ever seen, gay or otherwise.

I don't understand the positive reviews. Raves for story, acting, cinematography, direction. Each of which I thought was garbage.

Someone tell me what I missed, please.

You missed some hot fucking and Ian Roberts' body.

Loved Josh Lavery's uncut cock. You could tell he was fearless in his nude scenes, while his co-star less so. Wish we could have seen him hard at least once. I'm sure he's a nice grower.

Oh wait... a quick Google search showed up more

...and another

Bump

I actually thought the cinematography was great, wonderful shots of the cowboy hat against the Sydney cityscape. Good performances, especially from Josh, who appears to be a circuit boy in his real life. The story wasn't bad but the script was very uneven and too self-consciously dramatic in places. Could have done without the pasta.

I've never met a cowboy in real life but their hats are cool. And their boots. And their jeans. I'll stop now.