The best food the best Broadway not to mention the best of hairstyles, aren't the gay men of the world supposed to be the major producers of high quality high entertainment fun? and then you give us this? what is very disturbing is that the TLA releasing was producer of this show, then reading the reviews by the critics they all rave on it then i sit there nearly biting my nails. No this show was horrid! the camera work for one made me feel like something i would expect from "Blair Witch" the actors sad to say were not really model type attractive in my book. There were times that i had hopes that the actual deep core drama of these actors might shine through however in the light of the script it felt like nails across a chalkboard. I don't know - i know i am not a good writer i don't feel like i would make a good reviewer but i know good acting i think. i watch a ton of movies and I listen to my gay friends who point out quality acting and great story lines, sadly many of they say: "if TLA supports it then its worth a watch". now i call them all liars. don't see the show. it was not a well produced, or well acted movie IMHO.

Well, what can I say, I enjoyed this flick and I think the previous negative reviews were quite harsh on it.Okay, I see all its flaws and they are many, mainly (a) the female character which is totally absurd both as a role and the terrible way it was acted, and (b) the laughable ending. B-acting and B-writing all the way on those two items.But, those two points aside, the rest of the film was pretty decent in most aspects; production, direction, script, photography, it was all decent enough to watch easily, and sometimes it was really good -- minus the horrible sound management. So, I think Lockhart deserves some credit here, because telling a story decently is not a small achievement on such a low budget and little directing experience. I was not bored, not even for a minute. On the contrary, I was quite taken and amused on several moments, thanks to the warm romantic story and great chemistry of the couple. Their beauty didn't hurt either.Lockhart's acting was no surprise, he was his usual playful, spicy, sexy-cute, delicious self. His acting is okay, but not as controlled as it should be if he aims to a proper mainstream career. He has some serious studying to do on this craft before he gets to be as good as it takes for this purpose. He has potential and soul and charisma, and he certainly has something special about him that makes him very memorable and likable. But his acting needs work in order to get rid of his occasional shallow amateurish mannerisms -- which he obviously adopted during his glorious (but alas, poorly directed) pornstar days.But the other guy... Man, now THAT was a surprise. Because, in my humble opinion, Jack Brockett CAN ACT. He totally can act, and the way he went through this role was great. Seriously, the guy has huge potential, mind my words and remember his name. And he is very beautiful. Super hot body/movement (the boy can move) and a very expressive face, with stunning rare eyes; very intense and handsome face indeed.Anyway, that was an overall amusing film, and quite sweet and touching at moments, much better than e.g. "Judas Kiss" to my poor taste. I'm referring to Judas for comparison, because those two films are the only ones out of the numerous gay films I've seen which are supposed to be "gay themed" but they are actually not about gays AT ALL. Both films could have straight lead characters of any gender and still tell the exact same stories. Both films are not about homosexuality. They take the sexual status of the characters as a guilt-free/comment-free matter of fact, and they just tell a story about those persons. Congratulations to both film-makers, for really starting a new era on cinema: An era where random stories will include random gender/relationship combinations, just like e.g. nowadays people of all races and colors are randomly included into mainstream storytelling -- something unthinkable, say, 60 years ago. The goal is that in the near future no one will pay attention to any film protagonist's sexual orientation (unless the story particularly focuses on it). This is already happening with support characters in many mainstream movies. Well, it's about time it happens with the leads as well, and films like "Triple Crossed" make a definite step towards that direction. Such a healthy way to picture gays --without any misery, self-pity, bad endings, damnation--, such a relief.(FYI, I'm a straight woman.)

This movie is terrible. There are very few gay themed movies that I would recommend less then this one. Acting is awful, and many lines seem to be terribly improvised. The only saving grace is that there are a few nude scenes with very sexy men. Nothing you cant get by just watching a porn as the actors are gay porn stars. The worst character in the film is the woman. And the plot is so far fetched that nothing can be believed. I also don't understand why a guy who is supposed to be rich is driving around in a 1989 VW Jetta. Notice also that the main characters pathfinder has Honda badges all over it, weird.Save your time. Don't watch this movie!

This is the first gay themed thriller i have come across and it was thoroughly enjoyable. The characters are funny and likable, unfortunately they are also one-dimensional and there is very little character development and the acting could have been better. There is plenty of cute moments that make for very enjoyable watching between the leads. There is also a fair amount of nudity. The plot twist in the end made for some entertaining viewing but the film could have used a better script. The end felt rushed and everything just came together and worked out too easily. Overall it still is a great entertaining flick that is worth watching.