LuvSopr I could say the movie could have been more, but the basic idea was so rancid that no amount of tinkering would have made any real difference. Tom (the pouty Daniel Newman) is a kept man (although they regularly emphasize to us that he is still too emotionally immature to be a man) who kills his gangster "daddy" to save himself from rape (the only time we see anything with two men in this film involves rape and violence). He then flees with a hapless American couple. He grows close to the American woman while corrupt cops and crooks are on his trail, complete with a grotesque scene at a gay bar where, if memory serves, they rape someone who works there. While the American man goes off about the car, Tom and the wife give into their attraction. This is juxtaposed with graphic torture and murder scenes involving the husband, a clumsy way to remind us of the horrors to come. And so they continue coming, finally leading up to another grisly, excessively violent set piece, with the conclusion being that Tom is back where he started, that without the love of a good woman, he has no hope. As the icing on the anti-gay cake, we also get a heavy implication of just what "caused" him to be gay. There's a difference between showing the reality of a life of a rent boy, or even telling a story about how abuse and homosexuality sometimes intersect, and idealizing heterosexuality to such a strong degree - to the point where the woman in question is not even a character, but rather a thinly sketched out martyr and sexual savior. Beyond the message itself, the mechanics of the film are crude and coarse. No amount of nice scenery or noir lighting are enough to compensate. The one scene in the film that has a poignancy to it is the scene that the whole movie is about - Tom, essentially, finding healing and peace through his first sexual encounter with a woman. The shy vulnerability that defines him as he slowly strips (hesitating before he removes his underwear, as he knows he can't go back after that last step) contrasting to his pure joy and release as he kisses and tastes the upper body of the woman who is there to show him what his life is supposed to be, as he makes love to her, in the missionary position, as she exists as a missionary to what the film wants him to be. They may have been better off just releasing this scene and ditching the rest.

Richard von Lust It is no wonder that Gary Wicks who wrote, cast and directed this effort has found his career limited to low key gay productions ever since. This film suggests a peculiar personal bent which has little relevance to the wider public whether gay or straight. A rather cute rent boy is retained by a wealthy gangster to be exclusively available to him in a posh West End apartment. He uses the lad to service business clients or entrap business rivals or debtors. Sessions are filmed for subsequent blackmail use.The gangster himself is turned on by violence and rape and we see the youth seriously abused on several occasions. Plainly there is little humanity in his treatment. Eventually a series of deaths occur as the plot evolves into a search to retrieve blackmail tapes hidden by our attractive young hero. The camera work is both artistic and indulgent for admirers of boy beauty. Daniel Newman, a prolific 90's UK child star with elfin good looks and a well tuned physique, is filmed in every glamorous method. Soft lighting, superb make up, imaginative angles, explicit full frontal and frequent erotic posterior shots provide the viewer with a definitive 'soft porn' experience that has probably made the young actor into masturbatory fantasy image for millions of gay men ever since. But did Daniel Newman ever realize the motivation of Gary Wicks to produce this effect? The young man probably had to spend hours on set stark naked for the 'artistic' pleasure of his employers. And what we see in the finished film is probably just a censored fraction of the full unexpurgated footage taken during shooting. Gary Wicks went on to produce an intimate portrait of real life boy porn star Johann Paulik and, unless Dan Newman was entirely unmoved during the filmed sex scenes, I expect there is an archive of XXX material depicting him somewhere. In short I got the distasteful impression that an innocent former child star was hoodwinked into appearing in a soft porn production that ultimately wrecked his career. He has done very little since, despite the fair reviews of his acting performance, and runs a fitness center in Wimbledon today for his living. Type cast as an effete boy prostitute with nothing of his body left for the public to imagine, there was very little future in the industry for him and he was just put on the sidelines. This film portrays homosexuality as a sick violent disease, boy prostitutes as 'trash' figures without any sense of self esteem and women as the only qualified givers of worthy love - even though they betray their husbands to sleep with boy prostitute neighbors that happen to need their help. I give the actors top marks for this production - especially Dan Newman who probably suffered a lot for it - but the film itself is nothing more than soft porn masquerading as respectable drama.

Funkydaisy Endgame is gritty, sexy, dramatic and sympathetic. We all have our opinions about the genre, definitely not a movie for children; however to not see it would be a shame. Endgame may not be everyone's cup of tea, it is slow in places but this sets the mood and it does get better, and has some lovely camera work. Overall I enjoyed it, all actors need starter movies and it is the relatively unknown faces which make this movie. I am not going to spoil the film for viewers, but be aware Endgame does touch on some delicate subjects, abuse, rape and life on the streets. Filmed around Wales, UK, some of the scenery is absolutely stunning! So rent it, view it, enjoy it what have you got to loose!

rwnyack I don't think I would be as harsh as the previous reviewer, although, he raises many good points. But, I found the movie to be "ok". It always helps when one of the main characters is really hot to help you get through some of the bad parts of the movie. ;) I thought the acting was decent, but most of the characters typical. Newman as Tom was pretty good. The actor who portrayed Max was also pretty good. But, many stereotypical parts...the old "the character is gay because he was abused as a child" bit really is old.I must admit though, I really am sick of gay movies about f***ed up gay people. Does every gay character have to be a prostitute, abused as a child, drug addict, sex addict or some combination there of? How about a movie about a gay character where the guy is actually normal and relatively happy? That's why I loved "Trick" so much. Just a couple of normal, relatively happy guys living relatively normal lives.Endgame is not awful. How's that for a ringing endorsement? ;)