这个帖子也发到了声色电影那个板块，但是人太少了，很好的一个美国的连续剧，很值得看的：


如果大家想知道这个片子具体的介绍，可以上wikipedia去寻找这个片子的评价，写的很中立的，介绍了这个片子的issue: such as the drug abuse, discrinmination, church, artificial insemination, child adoption, same-sex marriage 等等。

网址如下： http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer_as_Folk_(U.S._TV_series)

部分评论节选如下：
Cultrual implicatoin：
Initially, most of the actors kept their real-life sexual orientations ambiguous in the press so as not to detract from their characters, causing much speculation among the viewing audience[citation needed]. Since that time, Randy Harrison, Peter Paige, Robert Gant and Jack Wetherall have stated that they are gay, Thea Gill has stated she is bisexual [1], and the rest of the cast have stated they are straight (i.e, Gale Harold, Michelle Clunie, and Hal Sparks) or have avoided public discussion of their orientation.

Controversial storylines which have been explored in Queer As Folk have included: coming out, same-sex marriage, recreational drug use and abuse (cocaine, methamphetamine, ecstasy, GHB, ketamine, cannabis); gay adoption, artificial insemination; vigilantism; gay-bashing; safe sex, HIV-positive status, underage prostitution; actively gay Catholic priests; discrimination in the workplace based on sexual orientation, the internet pornography industry and bug-chasers (HIV-negative individuals who actively seek to become HIV-positive).


Criticisms of Queer as Folk
The American series was groundbreaking on many social levels. Because of this, many gay critics and audience members, citing their under-representation in the past, have all made public claims that the show had a certain level of social responsibility. This feeling is perhaps the strongest reason for much criticism and controversy within the gay community concerning Queer as Folk's portrayal of gay and lesbian issues.

Like the original UK series, Queer as Folk has been strongly criticized by some in the gay community for what they feel is an unrealistic portrayal of actual gay relationships and/or gay life. The producers of the show have stressed from the beginning both in a written statement that appeared at the end of each show (Seasons 1-3) and in the press, that they were not attempting to make any representations or generalizations. However, many in the gay press have nonetheless charged that this would be the effect on many viewers, whether desired or not. A few gay columnists have therefore taken issue with what they feel are unrealistic portrayals as well as "hidden agendas" within the show's content. Examples used have been the lack of non-whites on the show, the unrealistic (overly attractive) portrayal of patrons at bars/clubs, the overabundance of public sex at the bars (which is illegal in most places in the US, including Pennsylvania), and finally, the vilification of certain aspects of some gay men's lives (such as bareback sex), yet complacent treatment of hard-drug use and infidelity which, as critics have charged, is a taking of sides on controversial issues within the queer community and fails to "non-represent."

The lack of the realism of the setting has also been criticized, since the program depicts the gay scene in Pittsburgh as much more urbane and arguably sophisticated than it actually is. Resembling a scene you'd more likely find in a more cosmopolitan city like San Francisco, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Boston, Houston, and/or Miami.

Still, others claim that while the depiction of drugs and sex is realistic, its portrayal is a counter-productive airing of "dirty laundry" to the larger community, to whom the gay community is appealing for legal protection of their civil rights.

Others in the gay community have praised it for its reflection of previously-taboo aspects of their lives, whether realistic or romanticized. On balance, many vie