Boy Erased reviews

User avatar
Precious Doll
Emeritus
Posts: 3609
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Boy Erased reviews

Postby Precious Doll » Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:06 am

Gay Conversion Therapy also known as Pray Away the Gay is a subject matter not often tackled by filmmakers and the only films that come immediately to mind that have (But I'm a Cheerleader & The Miseducation of Cameron Post) have tended to treat the subject more light heartedly inviting the audience to laugh at the misguided villains of the piece whilst juggling the serious aspects of the fabric of the films.

What sets Boy Erased from the others films is that it is never played for laughs, though there are a couple of chuckles along the way, completely unintentional I'm sure. I was surprised how watchable the film is and director Joel Edgerton moves things along at a good pace. Whilst it does fall into using cliches, it also avoids a whole lot as well. I just think its subject matter that is really difficult to mould into great cinema. Oddly enough I don't recall ever seeing of even being aware of any documentaries made on this.

But despite the short comings of the film it does indeed fall under the category of well meaning, efficiently put together (Kidman & Crowe do the best that can be done with underwritten roles) and whilst Lucas Hedges doesn't reach the acting heights of Manchester by the Sea, his not working with material anywhere near as brilliant at that.

Really, it doesn't deserve any Oscar consideration but I can certainly understand the goodwill critics have shown to the film.
“Those Koreans. They’re so suspicious, you know, ever since Hiroshima.” Constance Langdon (Jessica Lange) from American Horror Story: Season One

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4252
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: Boy Erased reviews

Postby The Original BJ » Fri Oct 05, 2018 12:32 am

Sabin wrote:Same question. How do you think this thing will do? Actor, Supporting Actor, Supporting Actress noms, no wins?


I'd say acting noms are possible but not certain for anyone, depending on how the competition from more enthusiastically received vehicles shakes out.

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7495
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Boy Erased reviews

Postby Sabin » Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:45 pm

The Original BJ wrote
Wesley Morris put out a great piece in the NY Times today that addressed this subject, discussing the way it's become challenging in the current cultural environment for many to separate analysis of whether pieces of art are good creatively, or just "good for us," and is well worth reading.

Remarkable piece of writing.

Same question. How do you think this thing will do? Actor, Supporting Actor, Supporting Actress noms, no wins?
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4252
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: Boy Erased reviews

Postby The Original BJ » Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:29 am

Mister Tee wrote:I'd be curious if others react to the Variety Debruge review the way I do. It strikes me as closer to an analysis of how effective the film is as political tool than a review of it as a piece of art. This is something I think is creeping into criticism overall of late, and, while I think it's being done with the best of intentions, it seems a move down a slippery slope.


Wesley Morris put out a great piece in the NY Times today that addressed this subject, discussing the way it's become challenging in the current cultural environment for many to separate analysis of whether pieces of art are good creatively, or just "good for us," and is well worth reading.

As for Boy Erased, I thought it was a solid enough piece of work, though definitely more in an eat-your-vegetables kind of way than one in which the material felt shaped by the unique eye of an artist. It's a pretty sobering sit -- one in which moments of humor are few and far between -- but I thought Edgerton and his cast did a good job finding the humanity in all of the characters involved. The parents played by Crowe and Kidman are clearly causing great pain in their child's life, but it's obvious that's because they love him deeply, no matter how misguided their actions may be. And while the film doesn't shy away from the clear damage the conversion facility does to its patients -- and the hucksterism involved for those profiting off it -- it resists too-obvious vilification. (Even Edgerton-the-actor in his character's most despicable scene feels motivated more by what he truly believes is a sense of decency, no matter how warped.) And individual moments bring out ideas the film happily doesn't feel the need to articulate in text -- the way Hedges's character seems to enjoy therapy at first because he's actually getting to interact with other gay people for the first time, the way this culture of oppression fuels sexual assault among young LGBT people in a manner that's different than for straight people, the way so many of the parents believe wholeheartedly in the efficacy of this therapy until a certain (arbitrary) point gets crossed and then they start drawing the line.

And yet, despite being sensitively handled and generally powerful -- with Hedges, Kidman, and Crowe all getting some decently emotional showcase scenes -- I struggled to feel like the film was providing any kind of fresh take on the subject matter. In plot terms, the movie doesn't go in too many unexpected directions, which I know feels like a weird quibble for a film based on a true story, but is an artistic limitation nonetheless. And in terms of its ideas, well, I don't ultimately feel like I was left with anything I didn't already know about the conflict between religious families and their LGBT children, and the damage conversion therapy can do to people. To bring things full circle to Mister Tee's comment about the Variety review, the movie's purpose for existence seems mostly to make a political statement against conversion therapy, which isn't a BAD reason for existing, but doesn't, to me, elevate it much in terms of a work of filmmaking.

Oh, and it does feature Mister Tee's least favorite biopic convention over the end credits...

User avatar
Precious Doll
Emeritus
Posts: 3609
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Boy Erased reviews

Postby Precious Doll » Sun Sep 02, 2018 1:00 am

Solid but with some minor quibbles. High praise for the actors from THR

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/revie ... ew-1139231
“Those Koreans. They’re so suspicious, you know, ever since Hiroshima.” Constance Langdon (Jessica Lange) from American Horror Story: Season One

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15830
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Boy Erased reviews

Postby Big Magilla » Sat Sep 01, 2018 8:53 pm

It doesn't read like a strong endorsement of the film.

Indiewire is even more down on it.

https://www.indiewire.com/2018/09/boy-e ... 201999799/
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6586
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Boy Erased reviews

Postby Mister Tee » Sat Sep 01, 2018 4:51 pm

The Variety review is so far the only one posted. Will add more if they become available. (ON EDIT: Hollywood Reporter added.)

I'd be curious if others react to the Variety Debruge review the way I do. It strikes me as closer to an analysis of how effective the film is as political tool than a review of it as a piece of art. This is something I think is creeping into criticism overall of late, and, while I think it's being done with the best of intentions, it seems a move down a slippery slope.

https://variety.com/2018/film/reviews/b ... 202924201/

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/revie ... ew-1139231
Last edited by Mister Tee on Sat Sep 01, 2018 9:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “2018”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest