Your Garage botysf16 Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it PME Fire TV Stick Subscribe & Save Patriotic Picks Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer AllOrNothingS1 AllOrNothingS1 AllOrNothingS1  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Introducing new colors All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Segway miniPro

Format: Amazon Video|Change
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on November 7, 2009
"Wreaked" shows aspiring actor Ryan (Theo Montgomery) allowing his career and life to be sabotaged by the torch he carries for a druggie ex-boyfriend, Daniel, who ran out of his life at least once before.

Ryan lands his first role with a acting group and celebrates by getting off on a web-clip by hustler Taylor (name from the commentary). Shortly thereafter Ryan comes home and finds the ex-Daniel waiting on the veranda. Happy Ryan is willing to take Daniel back if he gets a job and stops taking drugs. Daniel charms and agrees, stifling any further conversation with kisses and more. Ryan's life starts sliding downhill, and his job performance suffers. Taylor the hustler turns out to be a pal of Daniel's too, leading to an explicit three-way. To make the point clear, there is a photography student, who gets roped into first Daniel's and then Ryan's game. Ryan's life drifts out of control. He knows what to do but just loses the will to do it.

The DVD comes with a commentary by the two directors and Theo Montgomery, a deleted scene, an extended mixture of scenes, a photo gallery, and some TLA trailers.

The film gives a serious, focused depiction of the problems of unsuitable partners and of drugs and also gives a reasonably realistic and frequent display of bodies engaged in sex and in the incidentals of daily life. The actors are very good looking; Theo Montgomery as Ryan is spectacularly cute looking and did a good job as the makeup person (source: the commentary) on the set.

The production has multiple weaknesses. The sets generally shriek cheap, not always unsuitably. For example, the one window in Ryan's house is covered with a sheet. The sound ranges from clear to faint. The film stock is fairly grainy. There are a number of continuity lapses. For example, in one sequence Ryan goes to bed shirtless, wakes up early in one t-shirt, and then gets out of bed in another. The supporting actors were undistinguished. The commentary says the photographer's name is Rodney, but the character introduces himself as Tyler to Daniel. The commentary states that much of the character-development footage was cut out (but not included as an extra; there are photos in the gallery that probably came from these sequences).

The credits give some actor names and the co-directors' names but none other. There is no listing matching character and actor. I can't find the names given listed on; are they all pseudonyms? It appears nobody wants to be identified too much with the film, although the directors suggested a prequel was possible.

Still, the film was a good entry in the underused category of serious film that wants to display serious skin. The ads suggest this is a film for lovers of twinks. They're right.
0Comment|44 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on September 30, 2014
Ryan is an idealistic aspiring actor whose greatest claim to fame is the video documentary he and his ex-boyfriend Daniel appear in, arguing constantly over Daniel's drug use, disrespect and lack of work ethic. Daniel only plays down Ryan's growing concerns by enticing him into brief, brutal and drug-fueled sex. When Ryan comes home from a disastrous day of rehearsals to find Ryan screwing his other boy toy; a hustler, instead of kicking Daniel out, Ryan lets Daniel entice him once again, into a three way that lasts through the night. Come the morning Ryan awakens to the sight of Daniel's hustler friend comfortably lazing about in his underwear, a home in disarray, the sound of a running shower and no Daniel to be found

The thing about this film which I found hard to believe was that Ryan and Daniel had both been down this road together once before, and instead of seeing Daniel for what he was, Ryan still continued to hang in there for more. However, and I had to remind myself of this, that's a reality of abusive relationships. There's always someone who believes they can save the Lost One, and in Ryan's case, as it is in life, he winds up falling through the cracks himself instead of saving anyone.

I gave this movie two stars because I didn't buy it for the excessive drug use, I was hoping for something else. I would like to give it two and a half or three because it does deal with real life issues. However, a movie fan and the acting was bad, the sound was even worse and at times I couldn't even make out what was happening in some scenes because the lighting sucked. So, there you are people. Gather from this what you will. I leave it up to you.
0Comment|3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 15, 2010
The movie is a sort of grindhouse softcore porn. It is definitely an exploitation film, that only barely poses as anything else. Sort of like a prostitute wearing a school uniform. The main character, who apparently used to be a junky under the influence of his ex boyfriend, is attempting to get his life back together. He does this, not by going back to school or by getting a more down to earth job, but instead by trying out for a play and having his pictures taken by his asian friend. It is hard to believe that the play is really run by professionals, they look like they were picked up off the street and are auditioning for their play not on a set, but instead in what looks to be the basement of some local community center. It is also far too obvious that the only reason the directer is interested in the main character is not because of his acting potential, but instead for the potential in pants. Mean while the main character pursues a modeling career (i suppose) by having long discussions with a 20 something weird asian guy with a camera. His dreams of modeling fall through when he comes home to catch the asian guy taking weird pictures of his boyfriend cooking naked. Oh yeah, his boyfriend comes back, and provides what looks to be some desperately needed sexual activity after months of the main character being forced to troll around on the internet searching for web cam hookups. Needless to say the next morning, the main character quickly invites his ex boyfriend to stay with him despite the fact his ex bf blatantly says that he will not be getting a job or paying any rent. Then right after he leaves for the day, the ex bf proceeds to ran sacks his house for drugs and invites tricks over for sex.
There is really no story arch for this movie, the idea that he was "on the right track" before his ex bf comes home is a delusion. The kid is very lost, and really needs a parent or guardian to give him a kick in the pants. It is little wonder that someone as delusional to believe that he will either get an acting career or a modeling career from these people would be tricked by ex bf.
Having said all of that I do believe this is really an entertaining film. Pointing out the illogical nature of the film and its many flaws is entertainment in itself. And if you are a gay male that likes twinky guys, you will see plenty of their skin. This movie really is pushing the limits of "softcore porn" and may in fact actually be out right porn. But I enjoyed.
0Comment|7 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 22, 2010
I saw this movie at the Philadelphia QFest2009 (formerly the Philadelphia Gay and Lesbian Film Festival) and was incredibly intrigued by the synopsis and build-up surrounding the film. While the first fifteen minutes of the film were mediocre at best, the rest of the film was literally... torture. Bordering on bad pornographic material (unattractive actors and poor plot included!), this film had no substance, no plot, no backstory, ultimately, nothing at all.

My only memorable moment at the end of the film when there was a simultaneous gasp of relief and... silence. Not one person in a sold-out crowd clapped and the general feeling of disgust was shared amongst the theatergoers.

As a cultural studies specialist, this film is an insult to vast spectrum of Queer Texts. I was hoping that the film would be dropped given the general discontent with the film - but a word of warning to anyone even considering purchasing this: It is a waste of money that could be spent on other films like, "Shelter", "Holding Trevor", or "Heights", and it will be time wasted that you will never get back....

Absolutely nothing positive to say... you've been warned.
0Comment|33 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 15, 2015
I wasn't really a fan of this movie. Like most gay films, the acting was crappy, the storyline was choppy, and the filming was cheap. Someone needs to learn how to make a gay film with out it looking like it cost 5 dollars to make. This is not worth watching and I don't saw that about many movies. It's too bad too, the guys are hot!
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on October 9, 2014
Is there a way to give these no stars ? I will say that I only watched 7 miserable minutes of a hour and 15 min movie that was really bad from the get go. Acting, Production, Casting etc was bad from the first second to when I had finally had enough. I have seen bad movies and loved them and this was not one I could get into let alone love. Some may say i did not get enough time to watch and see well you be the judge. Dare you!
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 1, 2014
There was a lot of sex and male nudity in this movie which I think was its main selling point. The problem was that I could never understand why the lead character would have ever been drawn into the relationship. To be completely honest, I kept watching to see the naked men and just tolerated the movie itself
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 16, 2013
True to any relationship with a drug addict, this film also doesn't know how to end the nightmare. The graphic scenes add to the intensity of feeling in this film - the love / hate relationship we have with drug addicted partners. Sadly, the Wrecked lives do not end well in this film - an all to common occurrence in this sort of relationship. I liked the film because it didn't conclude as usual Hollywood fodder, "and, they all lived happily ever after." The film is a true dose of reality and does not intend to leave us feeling good in the end. There is extensive nudity including erect men. Frequent acts of sodomy are shown and this is done to demonstrate that this form of activity is about anger and domination more often than sexual pleasure.
0Comment|2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on November 7, 2011
"Wrecked" is a story about an ill-fated relationship that takes place in a somewhat decadent background. Shumanski's film, however, cannot be fully understood if one forgets Jacques Lacan's notion of jouissance.

Jouissance can be translated as joy. And according to Lacanian theory, joy is not the same as pleasure. Pleasure is a discharge of tension while joy is the building up of a tension. Joy is also the painful pleasure; joy presupposes an eventual and belated pleasure, but quite often it remains as joy and thus blockades the real possibility of pleasure.

Ryan is a young boy struggling to become a theater actor. Daniel is Ryan's ex-boyfriend who one day shows up in his apartment and reinserts himself into Ryan's life. It's made clear for the viewers that this relationship will end up badly. Unbeknownst to the viewer, though, is how badly it could actually end.

Narrative strategy relies upon addiction and its effects on people. One could say that Ryan becomes too dependent on Daniel's presence. But what is undoubtedly a fact is that Daniel is a drug addict that will eventually bring down Ryan.

In the past drug addiction was seen as perfidious attack on morality and the parental authority. It wasn't long before drug addiction was considered a disease, and as a disease it had to be treated in a most clinical way (rehabilitation clinics, pills, etc.). Lacan, however, adds an extra layer by defining drug addiction as yet another manifestation of the jouissance. One of the typical characteristics of joy is that the individual is rarely aware of it, most of the time the individual is trapped in some sort of vicious circle of joy. The woman who is constantly beaten up by his husband is, in fact, enjoying it, id est, she is suffering, she is building up tension, she is expecting a reward after experiencing all this pain, her commitment with the violent situation is so strong that she can't simply step out of it. The same happens with drugs. Drugs can be seen as joy but never pleasure; the risks of an overdose usually don't scare drug users, one might say that this risk only entices them.

Much can be said about the differences between joy and pleasure. Nonetheless "Wrecked" has been clearly inscribed into a Lacanian narrative of jouissance. And as such, it's no surprise to observe the inevitability of a dreadful outcome.
0Comment|3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on January 1, 2015
Watched this last night. An indie film made in Memphis. Two of the actors, the two main characters, looked familiar, especially without their clothes. I felt like I was curling right up with them. Oh, the movie? Was not that terrible. Good acting by Daniel. Simple, but complex. A 3 of 5. I mean I like it better that Harry Potter. Peace.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Customers also viewed these items


Send us feedback

How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you?
Let us know here.