Dream Boy (2008) User Reviews

Ambitous, low-key gay love story

[preppy-3 · 7/10 · 23 May 2011]

Shy teenager Nathan (Stephen Bender) moves into the deep South with his parents. Right next door to him is teenager Roy (Max Roeg) who is out-going and friendly. They form a friendship which quickly turns into a physical relationship. Naturally they can't tell anybody. Half way through things about Nathan become clearer--and more disturbing--and the movie gets dark.

I read the book years ago and loved it but I hated the ending cause it's so ambiguous. I bought this movie cautiously because I didn't think it could be as good as the book and I was curious HOW they would end it. Well the movie IS as good as the book. It's low-key but the book was too. Bender and Roeg perfectly play two teenage boys in love--you can see the confusion and passion in their faces. The sex scenes are very tastefully done (nothing remotely graphic) and these two are so obviously not teens it's not disturbing to watch. I also like how their kissing and having sex is treated so casually--as it should. It (sort of) retains the ambiguous ending of the book. Like I said I hated that ending but I'm glad the movie didn't change it. All the acting is good--Roeg especially. He has the wonderful actress Theresa Russell as his mom and obviously inherited her acting abilities. There's some beautiful cinematography and a good music score too. Low-key and somewhat disturbing but effective. I give it a 7.

Movie fine until last 15 minutes (contains spoiler.)

[didier-20 · 6/10 · 8 February 2013]

This movie is fine until the last 15 minutes.

Some people here have said that the film could never capture the subtleties of the book. That may be so but the film does stand on it's own merit...until the very end.

I found the last fifteen minutes absurd and a difficult swallow. (No pun intended.)

Are we really to believe that Ray is willing to risk everything for a blow job in close proximity to his very straight and butch comrades ?

Are we really being compelled to believe that Nathan, who has obviously suffered sexual abuse from his father now dies whilst being raped by one of Ray's butch friends. Sorry, but it looks all too ridiculous on film.

Then the ending is fudged. Do they leave the body in the house undiscovered ? Did they show it to the father ? Did anybody find out ? Does Ray realize his blow-job has cost his lover Nathan his life as well as make his straight buddy a raping murderer ?

Do we assume it's Nathan's ghost that haunts Roy in the final sequence or that everything is back to normal and nothing actually happened ?

It all gets a bit Twin-Peaks at best with a big emphasis on the subject of being haunted, very muddled and confused and unbelievable for everybody else.

That's a shame as it had a thing going for it for the first 3/4s of the movie.

Powerful and underrated film

[Figaro14 · 7/10 · 16 February 2010]

I began watching the film with mild interest and very quickly was drawn into the quiet intensity of the film. One must avoid any discussion of specific plot elements, which would ultimately spoil the experience of the film. It is NOT as some have called it, a "Brokeback Mountain" about teenagers. It is different. It is unique. It is beautiful photographed, sensitively told and atmospheric. I was especially impressed with the performances of Stephan Bender as Nathan and Max Roeg as Roy. While I had no idea what the exact outcome of the film would be, there is a "foreboding" that overshadows the entire story; You get clues along the way that "something is wrong." But the final 20 minutes or so will probably really surprise you. There is much more going on here that can be easily summarized in a user review or with a catch line that describes the plot's formula. I think it's the type of film that will provoke a great deal of discussion and it deserved to be released on DVD.

This great American Movie deserves a major release

[endecottp · 12 June 2008]

Wow! What a nice surprise. Saw this gem at Newfest film festival in NYC June 12-08. Was drawn in from the very first moment. The film takes place in rural Louisiana in the mid 20th century. The film has a quiet intensity and power, is beautifully paced with excellent attention to detail, which gives it a very genuine feel. There is a simplicity and sparsity to the film that makes it feel like classic Americana, like the Last Picture Show, Hud or East of Eden or a Eudora Welty story. The two actors Stephan Bender and Maximillian Roeg that play the teenage boys are outstanding and should have very fruitful careers after this film. They give beautifully controlled nuanced performances that give the characters an honesty and depth. Diana Scarwid plays one of the boy's mother and is amazing. This actress is really underused in films and her performance here is a powerhouse and should be nominated for a best supporting Oscar. The singer Rickie Lee Jones plays the other boys mother and in a small part creates a memorable and touching character.Don't want to give too much away about the plot but the center of the story is about two teenage boys. One who just moves into town and the friendship that develops as they gravitate to one another. Keep an eye out for this film, it is a sleeper and true jewel.

Reality and Dreams and Where They Intersect

[gradyharp · 7/10 · 27 August 2010]

Back in 1995 Jim Grimsley published DREAM BOY, the second novel of his continuing examination of the coming of age in the South and followed by the equally popular COMFORT AND JOY, BOULEVARD, FORGIVENESS, MY DROWNING etc. It took many years of for James Bolton ('Eban & Charley', 'The Graffiti Artist') to decide to adapt this story to the screen, and while Bolton elected to replace much of the lyricism of Grimsley's prose with extended periods of non-verbal communication in the screenplay, the story of two high school kids coming to grips with a mutual attraction in the dank repressive aura of the South manages to still come through intact.

Nathan (Stephen Bender) is a quiet, reclusive sophomore in high school who is settling in to yet another move by his alcoholic, Bible-pounding, abusive father (Thomas Jay Ryan) and his sympathetic mother (Diana Scarwid). Next door lives handsome jock Roy (Maximillian Roeg) who befriends Nathan, shares homework, and when he is not with his girlfriend, offers Nathan rides in the school bus he drives. Exchanges of glances and the growth of mutual attraction between the boys lead to a very private but sincere physical relationship: Nathan does not share with Roy that he has suffered sexual abuse from his father. Roy and his buddies - Burke (a very promising Randy Wayne) and Randy (Owen Beckman) - begin to join the boys on swimming gigs and finally a camping trip that includes visitation of an old deserted and possibly haunted plantation house. What happens in this mysterious place provides the climax of the story - a brutal surprise ending that then transports the film into another dimension - a region the viewer must decide is satisfying or not.

There are some fine moments in this little low budget movie and the presence of Maximillian Roeg, Diana Scarwid, and Randy Wayne lifts the cast to a higher level of competence. Whether or not the viewer is willing to go along with the ending will make the vote for or against the film. Bolton does have a fine touch with stories about the coming out of young men in his films and his ability to capture the Gothic atmosphere of the South is solid.

Grady Harp

Good movie, though not as good as the novel

[iza8868 · 7/10 · 28 March 2012]

I liked this movie. It wasn't exactly a masterpiece, having some issues, but it's unexpectedly warm and tender moments,the acting (especially Max Roeg) and the soundtrack (why so many people find it annoying is beyond me..) made it worth watching. I think it's major issue was the ending and most of the movies second part. I read the novel (I loved it and it's definitely better than the movie), so I tend to compare the movie to it. The novel's ending was more ambiguous, interpretable, bittersweet, very moody indeed, while in the movie's case it was way too abrupt, not exactly faithful to the book (while the rest of the movie was, mostly)and rather undecided. First, we are given the fact that Nathan is dead, and the next moment we see him walking up to Roy and then sitting on the bus, the way he used to..It's not that I didn't get it-it was an attempt to recreate the novel's ambivalent final, but it just didn't work. While in the book, there was a subtle mix between reality and dream, the movie failed at this point, giving us just something confusing instead of something dreamlike. The horror tale part didn't fit in the movie either- Jim Grimsley managed to masterfully create a truly eerie and terrifying atmosphere in the second part of the novel, but in the movie version, the part about the haunted house looked like it was taken from an average teen movie.

The rest of the the movie was very well crafted, managing to depict the fragile love of the two boys, that seems almost unreal. I loved the fact that teenage love was depicted (both in the novel and the movie) exactly the way it is: clumsy, awkward but of incredible depth and intensity. The love scenes are reserved, but they were one of the most romantic ones I have seen so far. Although there are some (love) scenes in the novel which weren't included in the movie (and they would have added so much to it!)they were able to portray the aching tenderness and profound love that the boys developed for each other. It was heartwarming to see that love scenes can be made without graphic nudity, picturing just two lovers cuddling and caressing each other. The only objection I have regarding the love scenes is that maybe Nathan's character could have been a bit less shy-there were moments when it looked like Nathan was rather obeying the infatuated Roy and not reciprocating his feelings.

Both actors did a good job, although it was Max Roeg that I liked the most. He really shined in his role, and even without much dialog he managed to portray his character's confusion and sentimental turmoil marvelously. He made the character look very real, a handsome and popular farm boy leading a normal life,whose world is suddenly turned upside down by the feelings he has for his shy schoolmate,feelings he cannot identify at first.

All in all, it's a movie that worth a watch,not as good as the book though. It's complex and subtle, but lacks the eeriness and dreamlike atmosphere of the novel, the mix between a touching love story and a Gothic horror tale. I definitely recommend both the movie and Jim Grimsley's novel - it's a haunting story of first love, that will definitely haunt you for a while.

I would love to give it a 9 - BUT

[david-3165 · 7/10 · 19 September 2015]

As far as gay themed movies go, for the most part this is a beautiful and endearing love story handled with tenderness and all together quite amazingly done. The two leads are fantastic, the pacing, script, music and photography is outstanding. It has a rather American Beauty feel about it. About half way through it is obvious Nathan is hiding a torrid secret which could have been explored further, tackling a great social issue. This movie could have could have taken this theme and launched into being one of the best gay films of the decade. BUT, then it takes a predictable, boring and lazy path which made me VERY angry. I guess you see it coming but why oh why do so many American gay themed films have to kill off the innocent gay kid in a traumatic and horrid way. Is this some kind of recompense to get the film made? Financed? Some kind of self loathing from a writer director who needs to justify making a gay themed filmed? I am so bloody angry that this has once again occurred when blind Freddy could have taken the last 20 minutes and helped Nathan out of his shitty life and into love and light. But no, he has to be raped and beaten to death. What does this achieve for gods sake? I am very bloody angry about this.

The potential for a good story that just got lost

[Coralknight · 5/10 · 7 October 2017]

I typically do not like the "traditional" gay cliché genre where all relationships have to end in tragedy. But I COULD have made an exception here had the writer/filmmaker decided to go in the direction of a ghost story...which was alluded to about mid-way. Meaning, there were many elements of horror/psychological thriller, beginning with the character of Nathan's family life. Then, we see the tension between Nathan and one of Roy's "alpha male" friends, foreshadowing some negative story line. But all in all, this is just too linear and has a very "made for TV" feel (the sound-track gets very annoying). And the ending seems to make this just too "cutesy" and negates the entire horror/ghost story direction (it's almost as if the writer got stuck and didn't know where to go and wanted to end on some "feel good" note...just lazy). Also, there were several instances where either the writer or the director didn't seem to understand the setting they were portraying (Baptists in the South would NEVER have a crucifix on the wall...let alone in a church...that's Catholicism). In other words, a) do your research b) pick your "mood" and where you want to go and c) be consistent. The acting was in fact superb and I think the best thing about this...so I wish all involved an excellent career.

Near perfect depiction of young, inarticulate love

[timothyjasonarnold · 9/10 · 18 September 2011]

People watch movies for different reasons. Some people like an elaborate, fast-paced plot. Others enjoy the visual and audio experience. I am the kind of movie watcher who enjoys a well executed and consistent tone and mood. In "Dream Boy," the mood is both melancholy and sweet and there is a constant, if not always apparent, hint of anxiety and apprehension that builds throughout the movie. Capturing a mood is very difficult, and it relies on a number of factors including acting, cinematography, and music. While the acting of the supporting cast in "Dream Boy" can be somewhat inconsistent, the acting of the two main characters, Roy (Max Roeg) and Nathan (Stephan Bender), is very strong. I was particularly impressed with Bender whose performance reminds me of Gabourey Sidibe in "Precious." While it is true that the awkward, inarticulate teenager is well-trod territory in gay cinema, I've never seen the role acted so flawlessly. I was completely convinced that Bender was Nathan. Here we have a rare example of the kind of role that doesn't seem "acted" at all; it's as if Bender embodies the character. Sadly, I think actors with roles that are over-the-top, histrionic, and melodramatic often get the most praise, but it seems equally if not more difficult to portray a shy, introverted character, and the actors who really nail these roles often don't get the recognition they deserve (re: Heath Ledger in Brokeback Mountain). I've read some criticism that Bender's performance was "wooden," and it strikes me that if you were not an awkward, inarticulate teenager you might not be able to identify with the performance, but if you were the kind of kid who stayed inside most of the day you will probably find the portrayal of your former self incredibly accurate and moving.

There is a lot of attention paid to subtle, non-verbal forms of communication - glances, stares, half-smiles, physical contact - all of which create a much more realistic depiction of young, gay love than the more chatty gay coming-of-age movies that I'm used to seeing. All of that being said, I understand the disappointment with the ambiguous denouement, but plots are relatively tangential for me. If the actors and director manage to depict a convincing mood, then that is all I need to be satisfied, and they have certainly done that with "Dream Boy."

This Film is Great if You Only Watch the First 50 Minutes

[mgold-8 · 7/10 · 4 November 2014]

WARNING, SPOILER ALERT.

I read the book when it first came out almost 20 years ago, and I despised it because of the ending. I don't really care what psychobabble mumbo jumbo symbolic whatever the author was intending to convey by ending the book the way he did. To me it's nothing more and nothing less than the usual typical gay-themed book or film where the gay character has to die in the end. Yes, obviously real life isn't all gumdrops and rainbows but regardless of the author's intentions, did the world really need to see a movie where this kid gets brutally raped and murdered? Personally I think not.

In any event, I had no intention of ever watching this movie, having read the book and strongly disliking it as I mentioned above. But then quite by accident I stumbled across this totally beautiful video http://tinyurl.com/la7w4mq which gave me the hope that perhaps the screenwriter re-wrote the book by getting rid of all the violence and death and ambiguity. Unfortunately that's not the case at all, but in fact if you watch the first 2/3 of the movie and then just shut it off, it's a really beautiful love story and you can pretend that the 2 boys live happily ever after.

Missed opportunity

[foxc-2 · 4/10 · 16 May 2011]

I'm a gay man so I can speak with some credibility about the portrayal of the main characters in this film. There is no chemistry portrayed here and although the leads are cute and the situations realistic, for the most part (teenagers take every moment for personal connections no matter how inappropriate or imprudent they may be) we are left with a coming-of-age story that while sweet and tender against all apparent odds is betrayed by a thin-as-paper, muddled plot that is formulaic and unsatisfying. The adults are cardboard and the parallelism with "Brokeback Mountain", hyped on the cover, are obvious and contrived. Nowhere do we get the deeply religious/conservative milieu of the 70's Deep South in which the primal and quite beautiful emotional drive of these two boys is cast, beyond episodic church scenes with flatulent pastoral murmurings. So much could've been made of the story but it's a wasted effort I'm afraid.

Intensely Powerful & Genuine

[akeith106 · 9/10 · 9 July 2010]

Set in what appears to be the 1970s, this film is a powerful portrayal of 2 teenagers who seem to gravitate towards each other and develop a close bond. There is a sense of mystery overshadowing the storytelling that there are problems at home for one of the boys, which seems to push them closer together. Their friendship develops into a budding relationship. The last 20-25 minutes of the film was shocking to me, and left me wondering what the actual outcome was.

Overall, this is an amazing piece of storytelling that has not gotten the credit that it deserves. It is beautifully shot in a location that screams Americana. I would highly recommend seeing this film, even if the subject matter is a bit risqué for your liking.

Very Nice Movie Spoiled by Overbearing Music Soundtrack

[xscd · 6/10 · 15 September 2013]

I enjoyed the atmospheric, thoughtful and sensitive slow pace of this movie, but the dialog in important parts, and especially during the climax, was drowned out by some of the worst, most inappropriate, extremely annoying, repetitive, cloying and very loud music I've ever heard in a movie soundtrack.

The dialog volume should have been turned up and the music _way_ down in this movie, and absent altogether in parts where the dialog was of utmost importance for revealing the plot. As it was, there were parts in which I could only guess what was being murmured because the music was deafening by comparison. I almost stopped watching this movie, despite liking the story and characters, specifically because of the awful "background" music that was much too often in the close foreground. Extremely poor choices regarding the music. Everything else was fine.

Bitter Sweet, Disturbing and Melancholy...

[skattyus-211-25082 · 3/10 · 16 February 2013]

I was expecting a cute gay love story, but it felt more like a disturbing version of Twilight. If you want something like that, you will like this movie but otherwise you will probably hate it.

I never was quite sure what was going on. It's clear that homophobia was rampant in the little southern town and that his father was a crazy drunk. Exactly what drove his father to get drunk all the time and for his mother to give away all sense of control away was unclear to me.

Also, why they would perform gay sex acts in a tent next to the other boys or randomly in an abandoned house where there was clearly imminent danger to them being caught was confusing to me. How could homophobia be so present yet the characters give no indication of their fear of being caught?

The overall tone of the movie revolves around the two boys' pent up love for each other and the ensuing emotional tension. Sporadically their love/lust overcomes whatever was holding them back. Eventually they are caught and then one of the older boys who catches them rapes and murders the one boy.

I watched this entire film with the hope that it would turn around and get better, but honestly it just ended in utter tragedy with not much resolve. I just felt icky and disappointed. Perhaps it teaches some important lessons and artistically presents some interesting ideas, but I can't say that I enjoyed it at all.

Can active and passive roles define sexual identity?

[atlantis2006 · 20 July 2010]

Dream Boy (2008) Rural dynamics can be tough… especially for those who have a hard time adapting to it. That's what happens with newcomer Nathan. And in the process or readjusting to this new environment he finds out there is one boy he can trust: Roy.

Is Nathan just a harmless and defenseless kid that seeks out protection? Or is he a very troubled boy, haunted by traumatic events that he never dares to share? Two elements are made obvious in the movie. One: the devastating effects of father on son incest. Two: the even more catastrophic consequences of excessive passivity. Nathan, just like his mother, is of a very submissive nature.

Some of the most classic psychoanalytic theories associate submissive-passive behavior with the figure of the abject. Abject is understood as the vilest and lowest position conceivable. It is of course imputed to male on male homosexual intercourse. What remains of interest about this theory, though, is that the abject works in terms of passivity. The male who allows himself to be penetrated is then the vilest and lowest; penetration is understood as the worst of the worst. But even these theories, in all their mighty psychological mumble jumble, seem to confuse the active position with the heterosexual identity. As a result, the straight guy who happens to "top" a gay guy can still brag about it, something he could never even disclose publicly if he had chosen to be the one in the passive position. This, of course, goes to all lengths, it can create hierarchies (for example, who penetrates who in jail), it can serve as an excuse for gay intercourse while maintaining a heterosexual façade, etc.

Throughout the film problems are avoided as long as Roy remains in his active position. Roy is the leader of a group of boys and he messes around with a girl, up until this point he could still claim he is straight despite his sexual encounters with Nathan. But when he assumes a more passive position regarding Nathan everything crumbles to pieces and tragedy ensues. When his friends catch him off guard practicing oral sex to Nathan he loses all power and authority. And because of that, his friends are now enabled to partake in abuses they might have not considered before. Consequently, one of Roy's friends will feel encouraged to rape Nathan and then to attack him violently and brutally.

There is also an important approach to Jacques Lacan's concept of symbolic death. There is an in-between place. There is an impasse between symbolic death and actual (real) death. Perhaps James Bolton correlates passivity with death. Or perhaps the film simply imbricates the repercussions of real death versus the significance and emotional strength involved in symbolic death.

"Dream Boy" has a very sad and touching end. It does give conclusion to the premises established since the opening shots. And moreover, it makes the viewer realize how deeply human and fragile the protagonists are. Bolton's bold narrative surpasses the novel's qualities and delivers a stunningly beautiful film.

After-school-special for gay teens ends with clichéd, homophobia

[adammrosenberg · 6/10 · 24 April 2009]

If only I were a teen today, I'd be all over this mess of a gay romance fantasy thriller. The two leads are to-die-for cute, and the tons of romantic eyes, passionate looks, making out, and simulated sex almost make up for their somewhat stiff acting and the stilted direction. It's a queer Tiger-beat delight! With some social service messages about repressed, incestuous hypocritical Christian fundamentalist fathers, homophobic teen friends (all this stems, of course, from repressed homosexual desires and jealousy), until the last act it seems a wholesome, sexy fun, more thrilling for it's gay romantic idyll, than believability or gripping plot.

Unfortunately, in act four the plot takes a turn for the worse, morphs into southern Gothic supernatural thriller, and enacts classic homophobia: gay love can't be show without being punished horribly, in this case with rape and murder. Topping this off with a ghostly eternal love ending is the kind of red dye number 2 maraschino cherry only a teen could possibly swallow -- and it still wouldn't be good for him.

I encourage those video savants out there to edit this down to a festive mix of the romance, love, and bootie scenes, preferably as background for parties and gay bars.

Keep The Book Ending

[azzabar2003 · 6/10 · 17 April 2020]

This would have been a much better and NOT confusing movie at the end had they kept the books ending. Who in their right mind thought the end of this movie was a better decision to make than the book????? Bad choice.

Needed more depth, but otherwise, a good love story.

[Miss_NightHawk · 6/10 · 6 March 2014]

Truthfully, I really enjoyed the movie. However, I found the beginning a bit slow moving, which caused me to debate whether it was worth my time numerous times during the first twenty minutes or so. But once the story got rolling, it was quite interesting and kept me hooked. Of course, I believe Nathan Davies (Stephen Bender), our protagonist of the film, was a bit too awkward at the start of the movie, although maybe in his situation (a molested teenager in a secret relationship with his boy-next-door classmate) his overly awkwardness is justified.

Maximilian Roeg did a good job playing Roy, although the audience may get mix feelings about the boy-next-door throughout the film because of his quick brutality and also his soft spot for Nathan.

Finally, the ending becomes a bit confusing, what with a ghostly apparition of Nathan's father, a creepy plantation seemingly just thrown into the movie to spice things up, quick short clips of Nathan being raped, and then the funeral. It is difficult to decipher what happened in the last ten or so minutes of Dream Boy, but one thing is clear. An innocent boy lost his childhood and his life to molestation and finally rape, all because people couldn't accept the relationship between Roy and Nathan, as well as stand up against Nathan's father. For these reasons, as well as the fact that the relationship between Nathan and Roy was overly quick, and the way the parents seemed underdeveloped, I give this movie 6 stars.

Wasted 90 minutes of my life I'll never get back

[piste-cruiser · 1/10 · 19 April 2020]

This starts off promisingly as a sweet love story between two inexperienced young men, then disintegrates into a horror story with a confusing and tragic end.

The last fifteen minutes are particularly terrible. I am baffled as to why the two leads who are shown as reserved and cautious throughout the film, would suddenly engage in a sex act while their straight mates are roaming next door! Then one of the allegedly straight, butch guys ends up raping then bludgeoning Nathan (the lead character) to death. Now why would a butch, straight guy engage in a sex act with another man? It suspends disbelief.

I've been renting a lot of independent LGBT films like this for a while now but I'm quickly becoming sick of the poorly written stories that almost always end tragically with the lead character dead. I will drastically scale back watching LGBT movies all together unless they have a comic angle. It's the only way I will be guaranteed a gay oriented film with a happy ending for once.

The difference between the movie and book

[d4nzel · 9/10 · 8 December 2019]

The movie departs from the novel and leaves the impression that Nathan is truly dead, and that the previous scenes were a wishful dream sequence of one of the two boy lovers, presumably Roy. In the book this scene does not take place. The book has the boys meeting in the yard of Roy's church, running together into the woods to talk things over, and deciding to run away together since Roy has been seen kiss Nathan by both Burke and Randy, and both boys will surely be outed to their families and the whole community. The book ends with: "They hear the voices of people searching for them in the woods. They stand and go. They never look back."

cute & cuddly

[mlpaleochef · 6/10 · 4 October 2022]

The acting in this film is poor especially on the part of Nathan's parents-the acting between the young lovers, on the other hand, lacks true depth and feel of emotions (other than love). Script leaves much to be desired and some of the screenplay is just really odd.

With regard to nearing the end, when Nathan was walking down the stairs you kind of get the gist that you know what Nathan meant when he said that he had the feeling that he would never leave the abandoned house. Then the end is somewhat unclear; in the last scene on the bus, the makers utilize a flashback to, I suppose, make it cryptic but it just comes off as another sub-par element of screenplay.

Meh of a movie

[holden_dog · 2/10 · 1 September 2010]

I found this first half of the movie to be alright. There isn't a lot of talking and the small amount where someone does pipe up is hardly profound, this coupled with the worst music selections EVER! The lack of talking would have been better if the acting was better, I just found the acting to be incredibly awkward.

The second half of the movie left me thinking to myself, 'What just happened?' But not in a good way. The supernatural vibe at the end came out of no where, and the move between the dream world and real world plus the flashbacks was just too much. I was highly bemused by the whole movie. I understand this was a book so maybe taking something out of the book and turning it into a narration wouldn't have gone astray.

A Tragic Love Story about Two Gay Teenagers

[anna-heine · 10/10 · 13 May 2015]

I thought it was very well written. True to life on how homosexuality was look upon in that time period across the country in general, and especially in the deep south. I loved the fact that they didn't write the story with the attitude that coming of age and self discovery isn't always sunshine and rainbows. That growing up is hard enough, let alone if growing up with a very troubled family. I thought it addresses realistically the torment and fear of abuse can cause. Still being able to find the courage to reach out and get close to someone enough to fall in love. I loved the way it showed that the two boys loved each other. Both boys knew exactly how they felt about each other without actually speaking the words. It also touches on how hate crimes were just simply overlooked during that time period. I absolutely loved this movie. I would also definitely recommend people to watch it. It definitely tugs on the heart strings.

Don't waste your time.....

[hsture · 1/10 · 12 December 2013]

There are so many things wrong with this film it is hard to know where to begin, but I shall start with the poor excuse for a script, at first it was difficult to decide whether it was the acting that was bad or the script, and then after about half an hour I realised it was both. Persevering in the hope that it would improve, I proceeded to waste another hour watching this poor excuse for a film, the sad part is it had the potential to be good, if only the script had done something other than hint at the issues it was attempting to deal with, barely scratching the surface of what in reality is a very serious issue. The awkward acting (Stephen Bender) portraying an awkward, and mostly cringe worthy portrayal of a teen struggling with not only his sexuality but his horrendous home life, to be fair it isn't his fault though, the weak writing left him little to work with, and very little dialogue, other then the odd feeble response to a question, and fain glance here and there at his co-stars there really was not a lot he could do. The depth of characters were about as deep as that which you would find in an episode of the hills, by the end of the film, other than the shoddy, and sloppy scene depicting his father attempting to abuse him we knew nothing about these characters as individuals, much less how they came to have such an 'intense' relationship, how they went from riding the school bus with each other to pulling each others clothes off in a grave yard is a mystery I think even Sherlock himself would struggle to fathom, yet we were supposed to believe in this relationship and it's struggles and somehow the emotional turmoil he was going through at the same time. To say the ending was a disaster would be an understatement, four boys on a camping trip, find a scary old house...all seems pretty cliché right? but to add in a rape scene for shock value seemed, vulgar, pathetic and illustrated just how poor the writing of this movie was, the fact that once he was dead his eyes moved several times as his co star was supposed to be sat mourning his loss was almost laughable. My review may seem harsh but I think if you are going to make a movie about something on this subject, and do it so poorly, you are opening yourself up to criticism. The writers were obviously trying to build themselves up as your typical quirky, indie film, edgy and mysterious, the only mystery in the end being how the hell it got made in the first place. Weak, poorly written and poorly executed, an insult to those who have actually gone through anything like this.

Well-made, imperfect, multilayered gem

[moiestatz · 9 August 2012]

The direction was exquisite in portraying the allure of the initial phases of attraction. With the skillful editing and the above-average to beautiful cinematography, the movie had a well-paced, rich, atmospheric delivery.

The director, James Bolton, handled the actors deftly. Bolton carefully spent enough time on the characters to let us know the possible layers of meaning of the way they gaze at each other. The two leads were quite effective. Stephen Bender especially provided an intriguing aura to the character. Diana Scarwid and Thomas Jay Ryan were remarkable in their few scenes. Even Randy Wayne, Owen Beckman, and Rooney Mara delivered.

The soundtrack was good but had mixed applications. At the music's best, it delivered subtle meaningful tonal contrasts. At its worst, it was obtrusive and distracting.

I haven't read the book, so I'm judging the screenplay on its own. A gay growing-up story has been told over and over again ad nauseam. This movie had all the clichés. What was interesting was the surreal shift with the potential for multilayered interpretations. Not everyone will like this. Personally, this makes me want to read the book. I was satisfied enough with the delivery of this aspect, but I agree it could have been better. The ending was a unique and thought-provoking way of escaping gay media triteness.