Flypsyde

Which is ridiculous because there IS no nudity in the film. Shoulders, feet, calves yes, nothing else. The film was so good at making us feel like we'd seen them do the nasty right in front of us when in fact it was all merely implied, that Youtube freaked out, as per usual.

So true, and entirely stupid. Youtube cut it because it was SO very well done that it felt like we had seen full-blown gay f**king when in fact we had seen very little of anything at all. Youtube is extra-super paranoid about gay sex, even when it's merely implied, not shown.

Why do you say Jack is transgender? I mean, maybe he is, but that's not clear to me. I took the crucial late scene to indicate that he had come to care for his partner so much that he was willing to "be" a girl for him as he still claimed to be straight. I mean, they had sex in the john for an entire school year and then full-blown sex later on. The partner would already know if Jack was trans.

To me Jack is a cis gay male (otherwise, considering what went down between them over time, his partner would have known long before the crucial scene at the end) who is willing to try to "be" a woman so that the young man he loves, who identifies as straight (which is ridiculous given all the gay sex he'd been having with Jack), can accept him fully as a sex partner and love interest. Clearly, it didn't work. lol

Can you please share a link to where you found the uncut version including the shower scene and you know what? The only uncut version I could find has the subs disappearing during the shower and then coming back afterward. No idea why that would be.

This is a very good and important BL. Please be sure to watch the UNCUT version. I watched it here: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2789818834571237 For some reason the subs cut out in a crucial scene but you'll know what's going down anyway. The subject matter is challenging, straight-forward and deals with young male sexuality as it actually exists, not the candy-coated fantasy version imagined by so many female BL writers and watchers.

Both Oak and Mon do an outstanding and brave job of acting out these two characters' stories. Don't let anyone tell you My Friendship contains graphic sex scenes. You will know exactly what is going on, but nothing explicit is shown. It is all done artfully, tastefully and well.

Oak is my favorite oddball BL actor, though as he continues to mature and grow in his craft, I may have to move him out of the "oddball" category altogether. I have seen him in four BLs now, in which he is always 100% committed to the character and full of energy. His seemingly independently-minded right eyebrow always gives me a kick. :)

My favorite Oak BL is "NightTime." Check it out.

The series I referred to above is "My Friendship." Please don't avoid it. I think it is a great little BL, brave and challenging in its story-telling. My statement about Mon's character in the story was made tongue-in-cheek. He did a great acting job; it's just that his character ultimately took some actions I disliked very much. The series contains some very sexual scenes, but disregard the prudes who comment on it, the scenes are NOT graphic. The viewer knows what is going on very clearly, but it is all conveyed artfully, tastefully and by visual suggestion, NOT explicitly. You will not actually SEE anyone's body parts or sex acts but there will be no doubt what's happening.

So...all that said, I think My Friendship is a very important BL. It deals with young male sexuality as it really exists, not as straight females imagine it to be in their silly BL online novels. Here is a link to the UNCUT version:

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2789818834571237

Bizarrely, in a crucial scene about halfway through the subtitles disappear, but you can pretty much get the gist of what's going on anyway. Unless you're one of the delicate flowers among BL commenters here who want their shows to exist in a sex-free fantasy land where adolescent young men have no testosterone, please give My Friendship a watch.

In the last few posts, I've given up arguing with you because you are obtuse as hell, you have NO experience in what is being discussed, English is not your first language, which means I don't know if you really understand what I've written or hell, what YOU'VE written.

And you just DID IT AGAIN: NO ONE, especially me, has said you don't EXIST and that you are not VALID. But the fact that no one has said those things doesn't stop you from replying to me as though someone did say them. You're either terribly dishonest or your English is horrendously bad.

BUT because you, at the age of 28, have NOT had sex and you have NOT had a relationship, which is extremely unusual and out of the mainstream of human behavior, what does NOT exist and is NOT valid are any opinions you may have on sex and relationships. Simply put, YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

Again: Get laid, date someone for a month, then come back and tell us all of the wisdom you then will possess. I'm sure we will be amazed at your deep understanding of the male sex drive and intimate human relationships.

Oh my god. Who the fuck SAID anyone at all MUST do it? It wasn't me. But that's how this entire discussion has gone. You make one ridiculous statement after another and then argue against it yourself, you make up shit I never said, you pretend to know things that aren't true and when I point out that you're wrong you just ignore it and say something NEW that's stupid, beside the point, and kind of weird.

I didn't "attack" your sex life either. Something that does not exist cannot be attacked. You also said you have no relationship experience either. But if you ever decide to get some sex or dating under your belt, come back and tell us all about it. I know you consider yourself an expert already at these things you have had no personal contact with, so I'm excited how much MORE of an expert you'll be after you get laid and date someone for a month.

Most definitely a BL. Did you miss the chemistry and the feels and the arm wrap-around and the hug on the swing? Oh yeah...BL City.

Well put! DEFINITELY a romantic BL. The goofy, sweet feels between Oak and Mon on the swing sealed the deal, but you could tell early on that it was Mon's character who first felt drawn to Oak's. He was finding obvious excuses to get his number and chat him up. Adorable.

I'll look forward to seeing that raunchy sex you mentioned in the sequel.

Oak is never going to be beautiful in a conventional way, but he's a person whose inner beauty shines thru and makes them attractive regardless of anything else. Plus, his haircut is hideous here and he's still got his braces and he's skinny as a rail. I feel like he's still growing into his looks and may surprise us. It doesn't matter. He is a talented actor who has captured my attention since "NightTime," another little series that surprised the hell out o f me. Actors like him don't NEED to be physically perfect, they have the X-Factor, and that's all it takes.

What a little sweetheart of a series. Oak is my favorite little oddball BL actor. I have loved him ever since stumbling across "NightTime" a year ago, in which he and his fellow lead broke my heart in a good way. He and Mon back together was a nice thing to see too. Mon is so freaking cute, but I hated him in the other short series I saw them together in but we won't talk about that one. This one was just a big-hearted sweet-fest of good feels and it's just what I needed this evening.

Anyone who says this is bromance is nuts. That was no bromance on the swing, nor was the final farewell that of a couple of good buds. I'm thinking a future wedding at Kaptawan Homestay in the sequel, which surely there must be.

Pretty bad. There's actually a few bones of an intriguing story here but the execution, editing, plot sequencing, is all over the map. Lots of bad acting too. In a lot of the Pinoy films I've seen you have a straight main character who out of the blue starts having sex with men for the flimsiest of reasons. This one featured more explicit straight sex than gay, which is always annoying in a "gay" film. Three stars.

There are a number of reasons I'd have to dispute that, but it really doesn't matter enough to me to give it the energy it would take. I think the movie tried too hard for its own good to be artsy with the time line, or this wouldn't even be up for discussion.

Thanks for your take on the movie and its parts and meanings. So you're saying the ENTIRE flick, from beginning to end, takes place on the night the flight attendant returned to Korea? Is that correct?

Good Lord. Even in the minority of places where 18 is the age of consent, itdoesn't mean people younger than that are NOT having sex. I assure you they are.

Any objective reading of our discussion demonstrates that you are an idiot who keeps repeating fallacies regardless of the facts. So there's no point in continuing this stupidity so I won't.

I don't care about Asia Argento and Jimmy Bennett. All over the world, MOST people can legally do the nasty at 16. I'm sorry you are 12 years behind the norm, but perhaps your mode of argument is an indication as to WHY that's your case. I suggest you campaign to have the age of consent in your country raised to 30, so that you can consider yourself to be "normal" again. lol

You refuse to understand the difference between averages and anomalies like yourself. Whatever. Done arguing. Your are 28, you've never had sex and you think you're qualified to even have this discussion? lol Get laid first and then we'll talk. If you're 28 and have never been in a committed relationship OR had sex, something's off. Not up to me to fix it. There are plenty of therapists out there. Make some calls.

It's one thing if you DON'T WANT to have sex or a relationship. You sound as if you do but in 28 years it hasn't happened. hmmm...

The age of consent for sex in most states is 16. Look it up. It's also mostly 16 around the world Look it up. I did. It doesn't matter what some stupid actress supposedly did. You don't even link to that allegation. But you can google the rest yourself.

Have a good one.

1. I did NOT say being a virgin at 28 is "a bad thing." I said it was highly unusual. I also said if that's your choice, that's fine. Be a virgin all your life. Some people are and don't care. You're right: you don't have to worry about STDs. I don't care if you have sex or not. Just don't imagine that your situation is a common one. It's not.

2. lol Why am I "abnormal" for quoting a statistic to you? The age of consent for sex in most of the USA, as well as the rest of the world, is 16 years of age, not 18. You can fuck before you can vote. Google!

3. You are basically full of shit. Did I say we "must" have sex with everyone or anyone? No, I did not. I said two healthy young males practically naked in each other's arms all night, are more likely than not going to have sex. Their developing affection for each other is only going to make this MORE likely. This is called common sense. No one here is talking about cheating and raping...except you and that has nothing to do with my original point.

4. My use of the top and bottom tropes was tongue-in-cheek. I was being a smart-ass. In the real world, Jin would have already given it up to Bbomb a bunch of times. Only in BL World, where most of these stories are the fantasies of straight women who know nothing about male sexuality, would Bbomb and Jin be sleeping over together without sex going on. Oh, and in your fantasies too.

Terrible. Starts out kind of intriguing with the crowded, crime-infested, teeming, filthy inner-city streets of Manila serving as the backdrop to a street criminal's antics. He steals, connives, fences stolen goods, fucks whores, then all of a sudden at the end goes gay with a photographer buddy out of the blue. "I've known it from the start...you want me. I want it too. I want to kill you. With pleasure." lol wtf? Then everyone gets exposed and killed, whatever. Again, not enough gratuitous sex and nudity to make up for the rest of the mess.