1/5 Disappointing
  by Alfredo R. Villanueva (New York, NY United States)
A disappointing movie, full of logical inconsistencies. First and foremost, the mysterious madam whose way of dealing with wayward merchandise is to rub them off. What? She kills her own golden geese? Second: the directors obvious fixation with anal sex--including at least two totally gratuitous "rape scenes, both happening to the "top" male character. Third, an ending that makes you want to shoot the director--a total cop out in the most classic homophobic tradition. And i could even add a fourth, a character that does naked cleaning while covering his jewels with one hand, whereas seconds later he is supposedly administering
to the sexual needs of his paralyzed client!!!!

4/5 Skin & Bone
  by bigboyone (johnson city , tn)
a very good film of type.
excellent work by director / actors
you will enjoy this one

4/5 A fascinating but flawed film
  by Otto4711
This film that explores the lives of three hustlers at different points in their careers is dark and atmospheric. The bleak black-and-white photography is used to great effect and the images of the pimp Ghislaine endlessly circling the streets of Los Angeles in her car as she sets up "dates" for her stable strongly symbolize the emotional bleakness of the lives of the hustlers, particularly Harry. Much of the film was improvised over the course of a year, with director Lewis writing some material to loosely link together the improvised material. An incautious viewer might look at the disjointed effect this has on the film as a defect but instead it should be viewed as representative of the disjointed lives the hustlers, again especially Harry, are living. Harry is almost schizophrenic in his insistence in separating his job as a hustler from his attempts to get acting work. He looks upon his work with clients with a sort of twisted honor, an honor that being asked whether he does nude scenes (a coded request that he submit sexually to the casting director) is not hypocritical but instead fits perfectly with his character. While the penultimate scene is a little contrived, the film's final scene again makes perfect sense when viewed through the eye of the characters involved. This is a complex film but even if you're not into it for the complexity the performances and the attractive cast make it worth watching.

2/5 Hypocritical Sleaze
  by Blake Fraina (Connecticut)
Sleazy film about an LA escort service that caters to clients with elaborate [mostly S&M] fantasies and the hustlers who work there while trying to get their break in the film industry. Writer/director Everett Lewis wants to eat his cake and have it too, decrying the exploitation of these men while putting his own actors on prurient display for the delectation of his audience. In one scene, a casting director asks the protagonist if he would be willing to do nudity for a film, to which the protagonist replies, with indignation, "I'm an artist." The irony is that B. Wyatt, the actor in that scene, appears here nude as often as he does clothed. Hypocrisy, bad acting, bad production quality and an absurd neo-noirish sub-plot make this film a big thumbs down. The only pleasures I derived from this one were the surprise of a brief appearance by David (credited here as Fernando) Arquette as a high strung john who has disfigured one of the rent boys with a hot iron and watching actor Alan Boyce as Dean, coyly cupping his package in every one of his many nude scenes. Watching him sweep the floor with one hand is priceless. What's he hiding under there anyway? Not recommended.

4/5 A Bit of Both
  by (San Francisco, CA USA)
While I agree with Joe Edkin's comments regarding theinteresting compositional technics of SKIN AND BONE, I concur overall with the judgments of "a visitor," from Nyack, N.J.

The film is a mix of "styles" ranging from the Andy Warholschool of "Oh, My God! I Can't Believe How Wretched This Film Is!" to moments evoking both "pity and horror," the yardstick by which all Attic tragedy is measured.

While Mr. Edkin places SKIN AND BONE in the "genre" of hustler
films and proceeds to name his chosen few, I am, as yet, unaware
there exists such a genre. A handful of films upon a common ground do not a genre make. A film, like a play, is "grounded" upon stakes for the central characters, as Mr. Edkin states. But stakes do not a "theme" make. What "drives" a character, his stake, whether in film or stage play, is borne out of the aggragate of his autobiography.

It would be nearly impossible for any film or play to begin at the "beginning." A plot will usually begin "in media res" (in the middle) and work toward a denouement with backward glances as required for an understanding of "how" a character's life became "staked" and entangled in the lives of the other characters.

SKIN AND BONE needs to be watched more than once in order that the subtleties (and there *are* subtleties) of the film become apparent. You will, I warrant, find the existential dimension of the two leading characters' lives as alluded to by "a viewer" to represent, overall, the more reliable and *intuitive* of the the two postings.

SKIN AND BONES holds a place in my dvd collection along side LILIES, WILD REEDS, LOVE! VALOUR! COMPASSION! and GODS AND MONSTERS.

Sterling company.