The two guys could be either.  If they are just interested in Kissing, and being "Bros", then they are most likely just Queer.  If they want more, then they are more likely to consider themselves Gay.

Queer, in modern terms, is more the same as Metrosexual, except they do express some interest in the same sex.  There is an attraction, but it is limited in scope.
Twenty or so years ago, the terms were more interchangeable.  In the 90's, Queer was more an expression for anyone outside of the main stream.  It was typically recognized in the same way that LGBT is now.  The problem arose, when some began to believe that it was a negative label, referring back to the older meaning of "odd", "different", or more often "insane". This was partly due to the association with HIV/AIDS that was occurring at the time.
If I am following correctly, in the later part of the 00's, the new generation reclaimed the term, and rebranded it.  So over the last 5 to 10 years, it has once again become a term for the border.  It also over the last couple of years has come to be more associated with the Gender Fluid movement, though where that will lead is anyone's guess.

@JohnEryn:

Yes, but I would prefer the power to be asexual.

I really need to ask, Why?
Being near the asexual end of that spectrum, I often find the world a rather strange place.  I studied psychology, sociology and a little biology, and sort of get the constant interest in sex, but don't really understand.  When asked to explain what it is like, I generally find it difficult, so Why?
Oh, and if I could, I guess Yes, but only so I could figure out what I seem to be missing, at least for a couple days.

Been there, and done that.  My Parents "love" me, but will go out of their way to change the topic of discussion, if they think it might go anywhere near that.

In my experience, it is simply that they don't understand, and are not wiling to take the time to examine their own issues with it.  My parents have made comments to the effect that they don't really want to talk about it, because my brother is in a crazy church, and they aren't sure how he and his wife would deal with it.  Okay, I get my brother is in a church that is a little odd.  I accept that my sister in law would have issues with it.

One of my last vacations, I was trying to talk to my parent about the fact that my job was being "downsized", and I was likely going to have to move to find a new job.  Every time I tried to open the subject, my mother would start to talk about the people she used to work with, and derail any attempt on my part.  Finally, after being put off about a dozen times, I just stopped trying.  Now, three or four years later, they are wondering why I don't talk them much.  I do still visit them, for the holidays, or occasional weekends, but I don't really enjoy it, and spend most of the time just letting them do the talking.  When I do answer questions, I only say as much as I need to, and don't really give any details.  "oh your house is so nice"  "It's a place to live."  They don't seem to have noticed, and I can't say that I care.

I realize that there is a piece of my life that is "missing", but it isn't the part I am looking to fix right now.

I was at a group meeting a couple of days ago, and heard a story.  The teller had met someone and fell in love.  This led to him being able to finally admit to his family who he was.

His BF took him on vacation, and told him to "wear it on his sleeve".  In other words, the BF knew that now he wanted to tell EVERY BODY, which according to the teller, he did.  After about six months, it was no longer an issue, and he just learned to live with who he was.

He also said, if someone asks, he tells them, if they don't, then he doesn't.  He is happy, and still with his BF after nearly 20 years.

My family, on the other hand, gave me the "we still love you", followed by the cold shoulder.  After a couple of years, they now want to try and be close, as long as I NEVER say anything.  I don't talk to them but rarely, visit a couple times a year, and the rest of the time enjoy being myself.

So I guess what I am saying is, it may be the hardest thing to do, but it may also be the most rewarding.  Gee, that really wasn't as helpful as it sounded in my head before writing it!

Dino Thunder Red Ranger, Something Napier.  Totally all over the wannabe California Surfer.

Actually, I had seen him in something else, and started watching the Rangers because of him.

"V" is in there for the one noticeably gay character.  Bath Robe and Eggs ring any bells?

I haven't seen the movie lately, but I want to say it was Stephen Fry?

Interest or Desire?

Just because some one is smoking hot, and constantly putting it on display, doesn't mean they are someone you would want.  I spent time in the military, lived with a bunch of guys, shower, eat, sleep, and work.  There was one that I am told was the "most gorgeous man on earth" by more than one person.  He has the personality of a brick, and was about as bright.

Would I watch a video of him getting down with another guy, Yes.  Would I want to be the guy, NO.

For the original poster, I am guessing that none of these guys see you as anything more than a friend, and more likely just another team player, and that is the reason you show interest, but not desire.

Sexuality is sort of a sliding scale, and can only really be gauged by the individual.  That  being said, I would guess your Friend thinks he is Straight, so he is.

Kinsey showed that no one is really either one or the other, but some shade of grey in the middle.  So I would have to say he is more Bi, or possibly "heteroflexible".

You indicate that there is not a strong emotional component, which would seem to indicate that he is in fact mostly/only interested in you.  Arm Chair Pysch, I am guessing that you were both the others first, and that is the connection.

The porn is a bit more interesting.  I would have to say he is attempting to down play his interest, because he doesn't want to get your hopes up.  He is interested, but mostly because he is a guy, likes sex, and finds the actors attractive, with the added benefit that it turns you on.  He doesn't want you thinking he might be "secretly" gay, and just keep waiting for him.  Being slightly on the jaded side, I would say that he like knowing that when he needs a little something to tide him over, either between girlfriends, or when the current one isn't meeting his needs.  Though don't take that to mean that his intention is to take advantage of you.

That is my take on the situation.

For my 2 cents, I would credit Social Evolution.  As one of the others commented, the taste in actors has appeared to shift over the last decade or two.  As public attitude has begun to shift, and acceptance has been on the rise, the community feels more at ease trying to be "normal".  In the past, Camp was often a way to find others of a like interest, or to "hide" in plain sight.

Over the last hundred years, the way to meet the "right kind" has changed, and finally doesn't have to be kept hidden away.  From secret clubs, to language code (friend of Dorothy, anyone?), to acting in certain ways.  By the 50's, movies and the beginning of TV, our community was seen as being the comic relief.  Jokes about the Bachelor Uncle, who was a little funny, were widely seen.  Being credited with having the creative souls, we of course adopted every bad trait that the entertainment world could come up with, and then took it a step further.  This is much the same as African Americans adopting all of the bad traits from movies and TV (Martin Lawrence, Whazzaup).

As we have begun to see the wider social changes, we are now looking at becoming more of a non-item, and not having to create a stir, just to be accepted for who we are.  Rejecting the more Camp members of our community is merely another step in our Social Evolution.

Emile Zola, a French writer over 100 years ago, wrote a trio of Books called the Three Cities.  Lourdes, Rome and Paris are the cities he discussed, in a narrative form.  He was talking about the slow death of religion, and the need to the Roman Church to reinvent itself if it even intended to be relevant again.

In the States, religion began to die a slow and inevitable death starting around the 1950's when Workers began moving to the suburbs.  This is also the beginning of the argument that TV was killing religion (and making kids stupid).

Should I mention the Crusades, when the Europeans began to try and find ways to make religion relevant in their time?  How about the Renaissance, the so called end of Religion, and the beginning of "enlightenment"?  The Printing Press, Common News (i.e. cheap papers), Penny Dreadfuls and Pulp Fiction?

My point, and I am beating a dead horse, Religion has been dying out for about the last 1500 years.  The Internet is just another reason for crackpots to claim the end of the world, and try to bring people back to religion, mostly so they can milk them for all the money they can.

Jonestown?