The characters in Three left much to be desired. With such an intimate premise exploring a threesome between friends, viewers expect the relationships and interactions to feel authentic. Yet the connections between those involved felt artificial and stilted.
Christopher, Tresure, and Vanessa played their parts without any meaningful chemistry that might make their scenarios compelling. The motivations and personalities of each character felt shallow and one-dimensional, too. Beyond clumsy exposition through stilted dialogue, little insight was provided into who they were and what bonded them together.
With richer development of the characters and dynamics between them, the intimate themes may have resonated more deeply. Unfortunately, the flat characters made their story hard to invest in.
Writing & Directing
The writing and directing in Three left much to be desired. The film dragged on with scene after scene of stilted dialogue that did little to move the plot forward. Time after time, characters simply rehashed the same subjects to no real end.
With so much talking yet so little actually said, it became a bit of a slog at times. Beyond just rambling conversations, the story itself felt underdeveloped and rushed through major plot points with little grace. The characters never felt fully fleshed out or true to life, either. Their development was shallow and stereotypical.
As a director, Nina Stakz also failed to bring the best out of the cast. Their performances often came across as stilted and unnatural. Technical issues like muffled audio did no favors. With sharper writing, stronger direction from the actors, and more depth given to character and story, Three could have been a compelling drama. But as it was, the sloppy execution prevented viewers from connecting with the intimate themes.
Also Read
Technical Execution
The technical aspects of Three left something to be desired. While its availability on a free service like Tubi is nice, some flaws really took away from the experience. The sound quality, in particular, could use some work.
On more than a few occasions, muffled dialogue made it tough to follow what was being said. It interrupted the flow of important scenes. The settings also didn’t do the film any favors. Most scenes were shot indoors on what appeared to be a limited set.
This added to a rather stage-like quality and took away from realism. More dynamic locations may have livened things up. And when it came to portraying intimacy, the lack of explicit content was noticeable. Sex scenes like the pivotal threesome scampered away rather than letting the moment breathe.
A bit more creative handling could have balanced entertainment while respecting the film’s mature themes. While lower budgets come with limitations, polish in these technical areas may have helped Three work better overall.
Poor Pacing
The sluggish pace of Three proved a real hindrance. At over an hour and 45 minutes, it simply dragged in parts. Scene after scene played out with dialogue that added little momentum to the storyline. Too often, it felt like characters just rehashed the same subjects without advancing the plot in a meaningful way.
This caused major lags that disengaged viewers. Better structure and editing could have tightened it up. Some subplots, too, seemed inserted weakly and went nowhere. Trimming unnecessary material would have kept the audience more absorbed.
With a sharper focus on moving things along at a brisker clip, those extra minutes may have been better spent fleshing out character and relationships instead. As it was, the plodding nature worked against viewer retention of this intimate drama.
Questionable Themes
Three attempts to broach intimate subjects but handle them clumsily. The depiction of certain relationships indulges in stereotyping rather than complexity. For instance, the developing connection between Ashley and Tiffany reinforces the fantasy of lesbians secretly pining for their straight friends.
And Jayson’s objectification of Ashley as a semi-willing participant in his porn scenario sets an off note. Where the film intends to bring thrills, it risks sending the wrong message.
Regrettably, a twist in the closing stages douses the whole endeavor in moral dubiety, undoing any goodwill built up to that point. While tackling taboo topics can push creative boundaries, this felt like a misstep born of poor representation that leaves the viewer with an aftertaste of concern rather than insight.
Skippable Viewing
In the end, Three proves to be a movie best avoided. With so much else readily available, there seems little reason to spend time with something exhibiting such fundamental flaws. The technical issues alone make sitting through its plodding runtime an unenjoyable hassle.
But when weak direction, a meandering script, and stereotype-ridden themes are piled on too, the whole thing collapses under its own weight. Vanessa D. Fant emerges as the sole bright light, her talent barely visible through the murk.
Perhaps down the road, Nina Stakz will learn from her mistakes and deliver a film more worthy of viewers’ time and respect. For now, however, Three offers little reward for the investment. Other streaming options are sure to serve movie lovers far better. This one is most definitely skippable.
The Review
Three
Three is an overly long, poorly crafted drama that traffics in stereotypes and wastes a promising premise. From technical issues and weak acting to questionable thematic choices, the film disappoints on almost every level. While it tries to broach intimate subjects, Three handles them with stunning ineptitude. With so much room for improvement, this feels like a misfire that's best skipped over by most viewers. Three is an incoherent mess that underserves its audience.
PROS
- Features LGBTQ relationships and characters
- Tackles taboo subject of threesomes
CONS
- Technical issues like audio problems
- Plodding, excessively talky dialogue
- Leans into stereotypes about sexuality and relationships
- Weak characterization and acting
- Plots spiral into nonsensical territory.
- Lacks nuance or insight into its subject matter
