IMDb user comments for
Trois (2000) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Index

17 comments in total

---

5 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Had a lot of potential, 25 April 2001
Author: FstrGray82 from Virginia

One of my friends rented this movie last year. Honestly, being an NC-17, we naturally expected more than what we saw. The scenes in this movie weren't enough to get an R rating. The plot was good, and it was a good script. However, the performances were poorly executed. The actress who played the wife was dull and dry with the delivery of her lines. However, the ending had a great twist, and this was a good film, especially being on such a low budget, but some of the acting was low budget as well. A 5 at most.

---

3 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
On a budget of 200k, you can't beat this film., 3 September 2005

Author: FyreAndRain from Alabama

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

First, the bad: 1) The movie is mis-marketed by the packaging. There is a lot more to Trois than just the complications arising from the forbidden three-way tryst. The movie becomes a mystery/thriller/suspense and the shift is almost disconcerting if all you have to go on is the box art.

2) The lighting sucks and the camera work is simplistic. The filmmakers are young and had a small budget and it shows in these two areas. The lighting often makes the viewer feel they've mistakenly changed channels to a daytime soap opera and the camera work (with the exception of the excellent opening "home video" scenes) is nothing to boast about.

3) There are about three times in the film that the delivery of a certain line fails completely, and is so bad that it nearly sinks the entire scene in which it appears.

4) Is the number of sets used. Literally. Two houses, an office, and a bar. Four sets. That's about it.

Now, the good: 1) Excellent acting. The lead for this role does a fantastic job playing a young, ambitious, newlywed husband. All of the additional characters are strong. Every main character has at least one chance to really shine dramatically and they all step up to the challenge. A lame performance never ruins a scene, and the dialogue is (for the most part) delivered convincingly in a natural way.

2) Superb production value: "but wait a minute, you just said there were four sets and the lighting sucked!" True, but the budget for this film was $200k. If you handed $200k to the Steven Spielberg or James Cameron, I'm willing to bet they couldn't have managed half of the things this movie does on a shoestring. It's an excellent effort and the results they got for their money are astounding.

3) An intriguing, original plot. The story, which starts out relatively simple, takes a couple of twists and turns that actually create a complex web of confusion and deceit that makes the story work.

4) An excellent, tasteful sex scene. If you bought this movie hoping for porn, you'll be let down. The sex shots are tight, sensual, and mature. They propel the story forward and do justice to the topic without glamourizing it or taking the focus off the story to focus on the sex.

In short: if you feel like lately you've sat through one too many summer 'blockbusters' with the same old hackneyed plots, huge effects, and zero heart, this might be the movie you're looking for. Or if you laughed all the way through "Love and a Bullet" and thought it was excellent, you might like this one.

---

3 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
Trois Gets a Three, 3 April 2000

Author: IboChild from View Park, California, USA

First of all, let me make one thing crystal clear. When I paid my money to see this movie, I didn't walk into the theatre expecting something worthy of Academy Award consideration. However, what I did expect was a story that had some semblance of logic (and perhaps a few cheap thrills). I also expected a film that in some way dealt with the often avoided issue of Black sexuality. But once again like several recent Black "thrillers," I was left disappointed. What's the deal with these independent filmmakers? You make a film that presents itself as a steamy erotic thriller, but with PG-rated sex and no nudity to speak of. What's the point? Audiences would have been better served by renting an old copy of FATAL ATTRACTION or even SHE'S GOTTA HAVE IT, than paying their hard earned money to see basically the same thing that you could catch for free on a network daytime drama. An erotic thriller without any steamy sex or nudity is like a western with no gunfight or a romantic comedy with little romance and no comedy. On another level, the poorly structured story makes absolutely no sense. Without giving away the ending, the writers set up things that don't pay off later in the script and "pay off" with things that were not properly set up. By doing so, they break a cardinal rule of any type thriller or mystery story by not playing fair. Also, the scenes are not arranged for maximum dramatic effect. It lacks the escalating tension that made FATAL ATTRACTION so effective in its examination of infidelity. There are also several subplots in the film which serve to trivialize important issues (e.g., physical abuse, child care). Additionally, the film relies too heavily on stereotypes, particularly as they relate to the lesbian/bi-sexual character of Jade. In terms of acting, Gretchen Palmer stands out with her over-the-top performance as Jade, which occasionally gave the film some much needed camp appeal. On the other hand, Gary Dourdan as Jermaine was weak. He's so cold and insensitive, one wonders how his wife, Jasmine (Kenya Moore in a typical B-movie performance) agreed to his "indecent proposal" in the first place. If independent filmmakers are going to compete with big budget studio fare such as FATAL ATTRACTION, they must be willing to "push the envelope." Instead, TROIS along with a series of other recent independently produced sexual thrillers insist on playing it safe by toning down the sex and the more provocative elements in their films. For what reason, who knows? Hopefully, some other filmmaker will "step up to the plate" and really deal with Black sexuality rather than skirt around it. On a positive note, despite it's many flaws, TROIS is still better than Rob Hardy's anemic first feature, CHOCOLATE CITY. The film is also to be commended for its small scale, but reasonably effective grass-roots marketing champaign. As a gesture in support of Black independent films, I have delayed submission of this critique until the film has all but left the theatres. For those who haven't seen it, check it out on video and express your own views.

---

4 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Best Black Sexual Thriller I've Seen, 15 December 1999

Author: ava-8 from Los Angeles, CA

I caught this film at the Acapulco Black Film Fest. I think Trois successfully captures something that we rarely see on the big screen --Black sexuality. It's not raunchy, but not tame by any means. It doesn't take itself too seriously, but delves deeply into the politics of marriage, fidelity and lust. And there is a cool, unexpected twist at the end ala Fatal Attraction. I liked it. Kenya Moore and Gretchen Palmer are beautiful. And the men are wonderful... two of the hottest looking Black actors out there -- Gary Dourdan and Bryce Wilson. I hear this comes out Valentine's Day 2000 or somewhere around there. I'd recommend checking it out.

---

6 out of 10 people found the following comment useful :-
absolute garbage, 14 December 2001

Author: Cabral Richards from Toronto, Canada

This is absolutely the worst film I've ever seen. Not only does it

contain some of the worst acting, dialogue and directing ever

burned onto celluloid, it is nothing but pure trash. It amazes me that money was actually used to fund this project. I can't imagine how anybody thought this was something worth

making based on the horrendous script and premise. Soloman K. Smith delivers probably the worst performance in

history as does Gretchen Palmer. This is embarassing. NEVER EVER watch this movie.

---

1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Strange but entertaining, 27 January 2002

Author: Dominique from Port Charlotte,Florida

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I seen Trois last summer and I thought the movie was pretty good.The acting wasn't Academy Award winning,but somewhat suitable.This movie contained one too many spoilers.First the not so raunchy love scenes could have been worked on more to make it look realistic and at the same time,steamy.Next,Kenya Moore's role was so stupid.Why in the hell would she except an offer like that from her husband and then gets mad when she finds a videotape of her husband and some other woman in her car doing it?Her character was so unrealistic and unconvincing.Next,the role of the husband played by Gary Dourdan was so cold,Gretchen Palmer's character was okay and Solomon K. Smith's character was probably the most dumbest of them all.He was so wacky and just as unrealistic and unconvincing as Kenya Moore's character.And the twist.There were way too many twist in the story.The characters,the sex scenes,and the confusing twist could have been more complex.Would I recommend this to anyone?WATCH AT YOUR OWN RISK!!!! 5 OUT OF 10

---

2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
Terrible, 12 August 2001
Author: kenandraf from Honolulu,Hawaii

Very badly made film in terms of directing,screenplay,script and acting.It does not even have much originality as it is a rip off of FATAL ATTRACTION.Still,it could have been much better in it's promise to be a good sexual thriller but alas,the movie was just handled poorly.Yes,the lead actors were very good looking but they had very amateurish skills,just like the poor skills of the movie makers around them.Avoid this one at all cost......

---

2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
Cheap thrills and guilty pleasures, 16 February 2001
Author: jbratter-2 from United States

Trois is a sexy thriller about the before and after-math of a threesome (two girls and a guy). The participants are a young Black married couple in Atlanta who seek to spice up their love life and an openly bisexual woman who wants to keep custody of her son. This film admirably attempts to explore the complex dynamics of monogamous sexuality, from sexual preference to sexual power. The gravest downfall is the attempt to combine too many twists and turns that don't pay off or gel well with the story's initial tone.

---

3 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
Utter crap unfortunately, 18 February 2003

Author: Robert Nicholas (Rob-77) from Perth, Western Australia

This movie was so painfully bad, that despite all my better judgment I actually made it through to the end. All that can go wrong in a movie did- utterly terrible acting, predictable ending, discontinuity, did I mention that my dog can do a better performance? Finally, for a movie whose title is quite obvious in meaning, the actual "trios" is over in about 30 seconds, shot in what seems like soft focus and barely warrants the rating the film got.

I highly recommend this film if you have obnoxious family members visiting (or friends), who refuse to leave your home, as a last ditch effort to retain your sanity.

2 out of 10.

---

5 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
Trois Gets a Three, 3 April 2000

Author: IboChild from View Park, California, USA

First of all, let me make one thing crystal clear. When I paid my money to see this movie, I didn't walk into the theatre expecting something worthy of Academy Award consideration. However, what I did expect was a story that had some semblance of logic (and perhaps a few cheap thrills). I also expected a film that in some way dealt with the often avoided issue of Black sexuality. But once again like several recent Black sexual "thrillers," I was left disappointed. What's the deal with these independent filmmakers? You make a film that presents itself as a steamy erotic thriller, but with PG-rated sex and no nudity to speak of. What's the point? Audiences would have been better served by renting an old copy of FATAL ATTRACTION or even SHE'S GOTTA HAVE IT, than paying their hard earned money to see basically the same thing that you could catch for free on a network daytime drama. An erotic thriller without any steamy sex or nudity is like a western with no gunfight or a romantic comedy with little romance and no comedy. On another level, the poorly structured story makes absolutely no sense. Without giving away the ending, the writers set up things that don't pay off later in the script and "pay off" with things that were not properly set up. By doing so, they break a cardinal rule of any type of thriller or mystery story by not playing fair. Also, the scenes are not arranged for maximum dramatic effect. It lacks the escalating tension that made FATAL ATTRACTION so effective in its examination of infidelity. There are also several subplots in the film which only serve to weaken the main plot and trivialize important issues (e.g., physical abuse, child care). Additionally, the film relies too heavily on stereotypes, particularly as they relate to the lesbian/bi-sexual character of Jade. In terms of acting, Gretchen Palmer stands out with her over-the-top performance as Jade, which occasionally gave the film some much needed camp appeal. On the other hand, Gary Dourdan as Jermaine was weak. He's so cold and insensitive, one wonders how his wife, Jasmine (Kenya Moore in a typical B-movie performance) agreed to his "indecent proposal" in the first place. If independent filmmakers are going to compete with big budget studio fare such as FATAL ATTRACTION, they must be willing to "push the envelope." Instead, TROIS along with a series of other recent independently produced sexual thrillers insist on playing it safe by toning down the sex and the more provocative elements in their films. For what reason, who knows? Hopefully, some other filmmaker will "step up to the plate" and really deal with Black sexuality rather than skirt around it. On a positive note, despite it's many flaws, TROIS is still better than Rob Hardy's anemic first feature, CHOCOLATE CITY. The film is also to be commended for its small scale, but reasonably effective grass-roots marketing champaign. As a gesture in support of Black independent films, I have delayed submission of this critique until the film has all but left the theatres. For those who haven't seen it, check it out on video and share your own views with the moviegoing public.

---

---

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Amazon.com summary	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Official site	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user comments	Your vote history