Once again we have a movie for straight people classified as "gay" because it has a gay character in it. This one even has a gay/straight theme, but if it was made by or for gay people they must be self-loathing gay people.

Who thinks it's funny to see a straight man turn gay? straight women. Who thinks it's funny to see a gay man turn straight? straight men. I guess there are also people who think magical role-reversal movies like Freaky Friday are hilarious and don't care what roles are being exchanged; and people who guffaw at extremely obvious lowbrow sitcom humor no matter what the subject is. As a gay man who outgrew adolescent squirming a long time ago, I find this kind of garbage annoying.

(I don't see how even straight people can find this relentlessly offensive and mean-spirited "humor" entertaining. The vicious treatment of a straight fat girl is especially appalling; she's completely irrelevant to the story and is stuck in only so her desperation can be savagely ridiculed.)

Being gay is wonderful. I love it. If changing sexual orientation were possible (and it's not), I wouldn't turn straight if you gave me a billion dollars, and I really mean it. Any gay man who thinks being gay is something that should make a straight man squirm and pee in his pants - who thinks switching sexual orientation is funny - either is an idiot or secretly (or not so secretly) wishes he weren't gay.

This movie is pretty well done for its inherently offensive kind, but if a single cent of gay money went into making it, the ones who invested that money should rethink their priorities.

A body swap comedy with a gay twist.

The acting and production values are pretty good for a lower budget film. Unfortunately the script is incredibly clichéd and pretty offensive to anyone not young, white, slim and straight.

I couldn't work out who the target audience was for this film and if the message was tolerance it got lost along the way. Was it deliberately offensive or was I left feeling soiled by sheer laziness? I'm not sure, but I do know after watching this film that the things that make straight men and gay men different are that straight men can fix cars with no prior knowledge of how to do so, drink beer and play air guitar; whilst gay men smell flowers, drink cosmopolitans and dance.

There are some genuinely funny parts to the movie, but the over-the- top stereotypes, clichéd situations and uneven acting make the overall result pretty poor.

We begin with the two central characters, Tony and Steve, portrayed as heavy-handed caricatures of the macho homophobe and the irritatingly in-your-face cringe-worthy gay man. Then, with the help of a magical Christmas tree ornament, the homophobe becomes gay and the gay character becomes hetero. To ensure we understand what the change has wrought, the newly transformed characters become equally cringe- worthy examples of a straight slob and an effeminate, silly gay who suddenly loves flowers, fashion and cooking.

Had they toned down the characterizations following the transformation to demonstrate that "becoming" gay or straight didn't turn someone into such unpleasant personalities, it might have been a bit more acceptable … but not by much. Some of the more seasoned actors, including Tom Arnold, Mike Starr and Dee Wallace, as well as some of the supporting cast, turned in decent performances. Even Nathianel Marston as Tony, when he refrained from over-acting, was reasonably good. Tom Archdeacon as Steve was definitely not a success and made the production seem more amateurish than it might otherwise have been.

Unfortunately the negatives overwhelmed the positives in this film. The humor was generally lame and, if there was meant to be a message in the idea of switching circumstances in order to see the world through the eyes of the other, it was lost by making the characters, both before and after the change, rather ridiculous.

I noticed that a few reviewers claimed it was a good movie for all the family to watch. It's sad to think that some people thought that the characterizations were fair & realistic and that the portrayals of both the straight and gay actors would do anything other than reinforce prejudices.

I caught the trailer on demand and meant to rent it, but just never got around to it...

Then, just recently, I saw Tom Arnold in another independent film. He was so funny, and it made me remember the trailer for this film, so I searched, found it and bought it.

I loved it! This movie has so much charm intertwined in the comedy. It also has a really strong message about Gay rights and Gay marriage that I think anyone will appreciate. It's doesn't beat you over the head.

Usually these lower budget comedies are too "silly" and have a lot of slow moments with bad acting. But I thought this moved really well, and the acting by the two main actors was excellent. Tom Arnold was no slouch either :)

This movie didn't work for me at all. I suppose part of the problem was the plot. I can see the lesson for a straight guy who learns what it is to be gay, but what lesson can there be for a gay guy who learns what it means to be straight? Really, there is nothing there. All you can do really is focus on the mechanics of what might happen to a gay guy who was suddenly into women. Embarrassing for his gal pals!

I guess I also reject the precept that men would change so completely just because of a change in sexual orientation. Sexual orientation and sexuality are not that important. Their whole characters would not have changed like that.

Another problem was the writing. The overt homophobia of the straight guys, especially good-looking white guys living in LA in 2011 (and their fathers), was just over the top. It was an unsophisticated imagining of what straight guys think and say. It made me uncomfortable because it felt forced and cheesy.

Another problem for me was that Nathaniel Marston was too sexy for his role. To me, it seemed unrealistic that a guy like this would be like this.

I didn't find the movie offensive (unlike other reviewers). I just found it lame.

There are small, independent films with gay themes that are gems, like 'Trick', and, 'But I'm a Cheerleader'. Sometimes these small films can be a bit amateurish, with poor lighting, sound, and sets but the movies are good so you can forgive the little issues. Unfortunately, 'Walk a Mile in My Pradas' is not in league with either of these films and the tech problems are magnified because the plot is so thin and the jokes so forced and unfunny. If you have seen the trailer for Walk a Mile in My Pradas then you have already seen the best jokes in the film. This movie uses a gimmick that has been used many times in other movies and works even less in this film. I gave it a 2 because that was how many times I actually laughed. I was expecting more.

Hey! Looking for a new holiday movie? Looking for a *gay* holiday movie? I mean they're a rare treat to find.

Well if you are, then PLEASE do NOT see-for your own sake-"Walk a Mile in My Pradas."

Oh, dear what a horrible film, and on so many levels. I can forgive the low budget. So many "gay" movies have a low budget. But this movie? Well, it bordered on downright offensive.

I mean the acting-and it really can't be called acting-was terrible. But I will get back to that....

So let's skip the acting. Let's say the writer was helping his friends and wanted to make this film and they all stepped in and did the job for free, including Dee Wallace and Tom Arnold (both who are very competent actors and who sucked in this movie). Let's go on to that script.

OFFENSIVE!

Here is the plot line. A magical Christmas ornament has the power to grant wishes. There is an obnoxious homophobic straight man who makes the wish that the gay guy was straight so he wouldn't be so disgusting and the gay guy wishes the straight guy was gay so he would know what it was like to be gay. Good premise? I thought so.

But it isn't that they change their sexual attractions. It's that they suddenly become hideously stereotypically "gay" and "straight." The gay guy stops on a walk and helps a man fix his car, picks up a board and pretends to play the guitar, hates his clothes, calls his lover "queenie," orders large meat lover's pizzas with pepperoni and meatballs (as if those don't come with meat lover's pizzas-and as if such pizzas are more "manly") puts on boxing gloves and shadow boxes, and shouts at TV screens showing sports. And the straight guy stops to smell roses, gets a manicure, acts prissy, holds out his pinkie while drinking cocktails, can no longer play sports, and decides Martha Stewart is wonderful and begins cooking souffles. And both make rude comments to people they're attracted to. As if what makes these men gay or straight is being stereotypical ("I'd like to bang her like a screen door in a hurricane.").

Now back to the "acting." I see movies with acting this bad and I just can't understand how these people got jobs. Here in Kansas City where I live, I go to local plays at such places as The Unicorn and the Living Room, and I am blown away by the local talent. So, if there are actors this good in the mid-west, surely there is some downright awesome talent in Hollywood where many films are made, right? And we all know there are tons of out of work actors waiting tables (and waiting for a job) and many would be *happy* to work for equity. So HOW are these simply HORRIBLE actors getting jobs? Would I offend you, the reader, by saying that I think there was some sleeping around going on?

Both the main actors (Nathaniel Marston as Tony and Tom Archdeacon as Steve) are beyond terrible. I had to check and see if they wrote and/or directed the film in order to get their parts. And yes, Tom Archdeacon was co-writer-he was willing to admit it! Mr. Archdeacon had about as much chemistry with his boyfriend (Emrhys Cooper) as a rock does with a tennis shoe. I would say Mr. Cooper is the worst actor I've ever seen, except there's their gay best friends (Eric Casaccio and Jabari Jones) who are so bad it actually hurts. I can only assume they aren't actors at all, and just stepped in to help out a friend (Mr. Archdeacon?). Tony's girlfriend Sarah (Kirsten Lea) is pretty horrible as well. Everyone was bad.

This movie could have been so clever! And instead it instantly degraded into offensive stereotypes. Mr. Archdeacon? For shame! For shame!

Even the music was bad, especially the songs. I mean I had to mute the movie while the songs played.

At least the ending sort of shapes up. It's almost as if someone else stepped in and rewrote the ending. But it's not worth it. Don't see this film. Save your time. And save your sanity.

UPDATE!: I said I could forgive this movie's low budget...but then I checked. It was TWO MILLION dollars? Where they spent it I can NOT imagine!

My brother came out to me 20 years ago and I wish there were films like this back then, because through humor, this movie just shows in the end we are all the same. I thought the acting was really good. I was never a huge Tom Arnold fan but I absolutely loved him in this film. and the lead actors are as talented as they are good looking, though I'm probably old enough to be their mother lol

It was great to see Dee Wallace and she was very funny. Her character reminded me of one of my aunts growing up.

the film reminded me alittle of In and Out and the Bird cage in that it seems like all kinds of audiences would like it, gay or straight. I'm going to get a DVD for my brother for his 40th birthday coming up, I think he will really enjoy it.

Last night, my family and I enjoyed watching this movie. My cousin gave this DVD as a present to my sister, and I just borrow it. After we finished watched it, we kept in mind some of those scenes. So, we decided to buy this movie, and keep it in our family movies collection for Christmas season. It is perfect for those who still have the macho mentality. We are living in a new society where we need to learn, and respect our own choices. This movie was funny and very well done. Some time, I laugh so loud that my wife had to quiet me, so I don't woke up the neighborhood. They also have a really good cast. Each of them made a good performance. I will recommend this movie to everyone. I hope see more movies like this in the future.

I was given this DVD as a Christmas gift and I finally watched it last night. The only actor I'd heard of in it was Tom Arnold but once I started watching, I recognized several other actors and they were all really good. Despite it being a switching places type of movie I found it very original. I found myself laughing out loud several times but there were also parts that were very moving. Had I known how good it was, I wouldn't have watched it alone and I would have opened a few months earlier! I'm surprised this movie wasn't in theatres, seems very commercial for an independent film. My favorite character was Sister Betty ...brought back painful childhood memories lol that actress looked very familiar. The two leads were very good as well and believable. A lot of really funny scenes. I will probably watch it again when it gets closer to Christmas.

I thought this movie would be funny, but it was horrible. It took every cliche and stereotype and put them together in an bad attempt to be funny.

I really enjoyed this film.

I though it was one of the more original pieces I have seen in years. And it comes at a time when it seems like comedies are getting more stupid, ridiculous and crass. This film is really funny without being overtly dumb.

It has a clever theme, and a very original way of delivering an important message.

Although most of the actors are unknowns, this film is really well acted (for the most part). I thought Nathaniel Marston and Tom Archdeacon were really great, both separate and together.

Very well done, I would definitely, and have recommended this to friends.

This is a really strong example of independent film making. With the exception of a few older cast mates, ie. Tom Arnold and Mike Starr, these actors are basically "No-Names", but I have to say that they pull this comedy off very, very smoothly.

It is a very funny film, and a lot of that credit has to go to Mr. Tom Arnold who steals every scene... However, it is also a very touching movie and I have to give that to the writing, directing, and the acting of the films leads.

I had a lit of fun watching this film, and without giving anything away, I wasn't sure how I wanted things to turn out in the end.

I definitely recommend watching this film.

I found this to be one of the truly more enjoyable films I have seen in a very long time.

It was fun without being obnoxious, and it had a lot of feeling and heart.

The acting, writing and directing were superb, even though it appears to be a lower budget indie film.

I was half way through the film when I realized that Tony's mom was in fact the mom from Cujo and E.T. - Dee Wallace. She is such a great actress.

If you get a chance to see this film, definitely do so.

I had so much fun watching this movie. I don't understand why I never saw it come out in theaters??? Luckily for me I am in love with Nathaniel Marston from One Life, and follow what he's up to or else I would never have found this gem. He was great in this fast paced, comedy. I really didn't know he could be so funny. The whole movie was really funny and well made. I thought Tom Arnold was hilarious, and the acting was great over-all. The Actors who play the parents are fantastic, and the other lead guy was great as well.

I don't know a lot about writing and direction, but it seems like these guys hit the bulls-eye.

Great stuff!

This film was really funny, AND SMART.

I am so very impressed with the way this subject matter was handled by the writers... Nothing too offensive, nothing too preachy, just really well done.

And, watching it from an actors perspective... You guys rocked it! I am speaking about Tom (Archdeacon) and Nathaniel (Marston - not that there is another Nathaniel in the film). Tom Arnold was great too.

Knowing that you guys were working with very limited resources... You should be proud of yourselves.