Queer as Folk

Queer as Folk gets off to a triumphantly provocative start. The least that can be said is that there's nothing else like it anywhere on the air. [2 Dec 2000, p.C01]

At its heart, this American adaptation of a popular British series about a group of gay friends is dramatically rewarding, convincingly acted and smartly written. At times, though, it seems as if writers Ron Cowen and Daniel Lipman and director Russell Mulcahy do too much to keep viewers from reaching that heart. [1 Dec 2000]

There's a lot of good writing and acting here. [1 Dec 2000, p.C10]

Compared to the grittier British version, the American Queer as Folk has a sweet, romanticized aura. At times, it even recalls the TV adaptation of "Tales of the City." The script has plenty of conflict, and the sexuality is hard-core, but the show also exudes an ensemble coziness and jokiness that finds the gang gathering regularly for late-night snacks at Debbie's diner. [1 Dec 2000, p.F1]

It's not about politics, and it's not (only) about gag lines. It's a mostly honest attempt to explore the human condition through a subculture where sex is upfront and serves as lens and entree into other issues of love, death, friendship and life itself. [30 Nov 2000, p.43]

Divorced from a believable social context, Queer too often plays like a voyeuristic tour of gay life that's only interested in the most outrageous sights. It doesn't have to provide an insight into every gay person, but it does have to paint a more believable portrait of these people, which means anchoring them in a real place and expanding their lives beyond sexual encounters. [1 Dec 2000, p.15E]

Queer as Folk is good. But it isn't shockingly good. However, it is Showtime's best original series yet. [1 Dec 2000, p.1C]

With its intelligent, nuance-laced script, credible performances from a group of newcomers, a mouth-dropping star turn by Sharon Gless, and the "no limits" backing of Showtime, Queer as Folk is easily the best TV take on gay life since "Tales of the City." [3 Dec 2000, p.10]

Yet for all its obviousness, Showtime's Queer as Folk is something rare: a look inside a formerly forbidden place. [3 Dec 2000, p.1C]

I hate to be one of those reviewers who tells you that the original, difficult-to-locate item was superior to the subject under review, but... it was. ... The new Queer as Folk lacks a soul at its center.

I doubt any gay person will see him- or herself represented on Queer as Folk with absolute realism and accuracy. It's basically a trashy soap opera with a veneer of social criticism a gay, sexually explicit "Melrose Place." But it's fun all the same addictive, suspenseful and sometimes moving, a populist glimpse of a subculture that pop culture rarely examines. [1 Dec 2000, p.F1]

This is the bottom line: If you give this series three hours, you'll start caring about these characters, and that's no small accomplishment by the writers...But, during that time, the series more often feels like a network soap opera than it does a serious, groundbreaking drama. [2 Dec 2000, p.1E]

Unlike the HBO hits, Queer as Folk isn't great TV. It is interesting TV, entertaining TV, at times very good TV. But not in the same league as The Sopranos. [3 Dec 2000, p.3E]

What I kept looking for in Queer As Folk was a transcendent story line or sex-neutral message to lift this drama higher than the sum of its body parts. I couldn't find that deep thread of meaning...There are shreds of stories but, basically, it all comes back around to men bumping like bunnies - or wanting to bump like bunnies, or talking about bumping like bunnies.[30 Nov 2000, p.47]

Queer as Folk tries hard to expand the portrayal of gays on television beyond stereotypes. Unfortunately, the shock factor is so high that few viewers whose minds might be opened seem likely to stick around for the learning experience. [3 Dec 2000, p.C2]

There are limits in good drama, and there's not enough restraint in Queer as Folk...The series' bigger problem, though, is the three main characters fall short of dynamic. The British original of Queer as Folk featured three riveting actors...The American version, which is set in Pittsburgh, offers three handsome actors of lesser skill and versatility. [3 Dec 2000, p.F5]

Queer as Folk obviously has a healthy libido. It'd sure be nice to discover it has a heart, too. [2 Dec 2000, p.E5]

Showtime's "Folk" relies too much on sitcom-like one-liners and double-entendres -- and the sex -- to carry it, instead of its interesting characters and universal themes of relationship woes, acceptance, and the fear of loneliness. [3 Dec 2000, p.5C]

In contrast, the British original, while just as explicit, is also funny and warm, with a Trainspotting zip. You'll be happier renting videotapes of that.

If Queer as Folk worked better as drama, its characters would be more fully defined and would speak to both straight and gay viewers more easily. The series is not harmed by its gay perspective but by its limited aesthetic reach.

It will leave viewers alternately amazed at being allowed into the private universe of uncommitted male sex and disappointed from a dramatic standpoint. Handsome flesh and cinematography, but is that all there is? [3 Dec 2000, p.I-01]

In desperately straining to be so uncommonly edgy, so explicit and so provocative in its sexual candor, the show all but tramples its dramatic structure in the process. [3 Dec 2000, p.C05]

As drama with the ring of emotional truth, Queer as Folk falls far short. When it comes to explicit, simulated sex, it barely puts a toe in the water. As a shallow depiction of one corner of gay life, it's worth a look. [1 Dec 2000, p.137]