Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

ilikeimdb If you haven't seen the stage version of Naked Boys Singing! (NBS), then what more can you do but see this film. The film's fun, campy, well-acted, well-sung and has lots of inspired choreography. However, compared to the live stage version, the film misfires conceptually, has truly cheesy "just graduated from film-school editing" and doesn't do justice to the essential intimacy of the material -- it neither delivers a good film nor a piece of theater-on-film. // Before writing this review, I watched the "making of" segment (titled "Nuts and Bolts") to find out how the producer/director could have gone astray with excellent material and a stage production that literally sells itself. Biggest problem: They tried to reimagine NBS as a film, making the same sad mistake foisted upon A Chorus Line -- both shows are perfect as-is and were designed to be seen in a theater from a center row in the Orchestra (and in the case of NBS, the second row): Why add all the superfluous cut-aways, back stories, reverse angles (again, an audience isn't supposed to see what the actors see), cutesy effects (slo-mo, sepia tones, dissolves, multiple-image shots, etc.)? This screams "I'm trying everything they taught me in film school." Moreover, introducing the numbers by showing the musical scores gives a documentary feel to what should be a live production. Why incorporate techniques from an dissonant genre? Hasn't anyone seen the excellent Sondheim recordings of his stage productions? They record the performance. Period. That said, there is the issue of how to record the actors...no body mics. But somehow, when I saw NBS in New York in that intimate little theater in the Village, no one needed a mic. So, I reject the rationale that they had to lip-sync everything to get the recording. No, they had to lip-sync in order to support all the cheesy/cutesy editing techniques! So much time and effort could have been saved had they simply filmed the show in a, er, straight-forward fashion. Simple, direct, intimate...that's what drives the NBS source material -- and the film introduces too much schlock and unnecessary distractions.

paulweeks-1 I don't understand how a reviewer can complain that a show has show tunes. With a name like "Naked Boys Singing" did he expect a Western? I suppose it could be called "Naked Boys Singing and Dancing". For what it was, which is exactly what it purports to be, I thought it was terrific. Some of the songs and situations were quite moving to me, having experienced some of the situations myself. It was very touching to have a chorus of "I feel so alone" - the fact of the chorus indicates that perhaps we weren't as alone as we felt.I found the Perky Little Porn Star to be adorable. I suppose I did object the tiniest bit to the ode to "regular guys" who were not so totally buffed out from the gym sung by these totally buffed out guys, but they gave it their best shot. Dancer's bodies, what're you gonna do?All in all a lot of fun.

ekeby I'm writing this as I watch the DVD. I grabbed for the laptop and went to IMDb during the first song. I didn't know anything about the movie except that a friend said that the show was supposed to be good. It has a decent Netflix rating too, so here I am.Maybe on the stage this worked. But I have to say that the sight of chorus boys dancing and singing completely naked just seems silly. And the lip syncing to a prerecorded score adds to the strangeness.Most of the songs and routines are about aspects of male nudity. This is my idea of nothing, sorry. The score, so far, is generic show tune music. Nothing memorable, or particularly melodic. Everything is to serve the lyrics. Which, I have to say, sound like they were written by a committee. Each song is essentially one extended joke. If the jokes were ten seconds, they might work. These single several-minute-long jokes don't.I'm now watching the movie by chapters--a few minutes until I get the gist. Kind of in the hopes that one of them will be different, or entertaining enough to keep me from going on to the next scene. Nope.Okay. I'm finished. So here's what I think. If you have any experience or long-standing appreciation of musical theater, avoid this--it's just not quality. If, however, you're a gay twenty-something and have never seen or heard a musical comedy, you might be entertained. Or maybe this would hold your interest if you've never seen a lot of attractive naked men. I have.

Joel Kurzynski Before starting I should say that I saw the original show in NYC in 2001 and enjoyed it. What made the stage show unique is that it provided quality musical theatre by nude actors, LIVE. The live quality gets the show a long way. Seeing it on film (with popcorn) is sort of odd.I saw the film as part of the 2007 Seattle Lesbian and Gay Film Festival and was surprised to find it to be a filmed version of the live show, taped in LA. The beginning of the film shows the cast members flaunting into the theatre while casually shedding their clothes in preparation for the show. Besides these and a few other cinematic flourishes, the movie version offers little new content or perspective. A treat for fans of the show are new arrangements, orchestrations, and musical settings of the familiar songs. (For example, the song "Nothing But The Radio On" is turned country.) What frustrated me most about the movie was the quality of the movie itself. This is a GREAT show and for posterity sake deserved a great adaptation. The film makers obviously hadn't have experience in filming a live performance. The production quality was more pornographic. The editing was choppy and the pre-recorded vocals were way too loud. The "special effects" were akin to those made by a novice film maker, fresh out of high school.While the live show may be hard to see for some (especially in rural areas) the film can act as an acceptable substitute (like "Puppetry of the Penis). Most folks will go for the camp and penises. I just wish they were shown it in a prettier frame.