Lots of actor-operated hand-held camera shots (ala CLOVERFIELD). Lots of cars driving around at night with bright interior lights. Lots of trees. Lots of people appearing out of nowhere from behind the trees. Was it mentioned that the cars have bright interior lights as they drive around? What is missing are subtitles. The thick British English is impossible to understand. How come the Pythons, Benny Hill and the English TV stars seen on PBS are all so easy to understand, but not today's British movie actors? PUBLIC SEX seems to be harmless as a film, but not all that interesting. I might rate it higher if I can see it with subtitles.

Add an original story concept about something seldom talked about publicly, include lively, interesting actors, then conclude the story by by using every cliché available.Sadly, this could have been far better than it turns out. It's definitely not the fault of anybody but the writer or whoever had final say on how the film ended.The actors, camera people, post-production, sound crew, basically everyone but the writer, do everything possible to keep the film enjoyable despite the script. Hopefully, it was more of a studio/producer issue forcing a plain, boring, predictable, tedious, uncreative, pre-packaged ending on it because the plot and first hour really did show promise.

I thought this was a great film.At first I thought the dogging would be the main focus, but as the film progressed a rather sweet and sometimes subtle love story emerged, which overtook the admittedly stark world of dogging. Some very good performances, the Chav being my fave, though what he was doing in Newcastle I don't know.There's some great subtle comedy - the dogger who takes notes like a train spotter, and the doggers who oooo! and aaaa! at another doggers setup in his car, as if they were looking at a pigeon loft. Very northern UK-centric, but very funny.

Astonishing that this was the only British film reckoned worthy of a slot in the Tiger Competition at Rotterdam 2009. Programming the film at all was a baffling move, but to position it in such a prestigious slot is an embarrassment for all concerned.It's a rubbishy, mirthless Brit-com that's opportunistic and exploitative, but without any of the positives of old-school "exploitation cinema." Slim but convoluted plot hangs on the illicit sexual activity 'dogging' - semi-public in-car coitus - a practice that made some salacious UK tabloid headlines a couple of years back. Here it becomes the saucy/seedy pretext for a sloppily-scripted, tut-tutting exercise in larkish prurience, involving various feckless young adults (one of them a priapic Geordie satyr played by newcomer Richard Riddell, who deserves much better material) in and around the Newcastle region. NB : Given the location and subject-matter, surely 'Go Forth, Tyne Dogger' would have been a better title.