The Boys in the Band

Funny, compelling, and emotionally resonant; "The Boys In The Band" shines and continues to inspire tons of viewers fifty years later.

In this drama based on the award-winning play, a birthday party takes place in 1968 New York, when a surprise guest and a drunken game leave several gay friends reckoning with unspoken feelings and unknown secrets.

An A+ cast lead by an incredible performance from Jim Parsons really puts the icing on the cake. Mart Crowley's screenplay is sharp, evocative and draws you in from the start. I'm a huge fan of films that take place in one setting and feature a killer script. "The Boys In The Band" is that film. There's no chance you'll want to steer away because you'll want to know what happens next. Even though set in the 60s, everything is still relevant today. It's an excellent look at gay men and the struggles they face daily. I really loved this film.

Follow @snobmedia for all reviews!

Love how this was shot and it was extremely emotional. Beautifully acted and I loved some of the directing choices and music choices. Respect to all the 'boys' they were all fantastic.

A bunch of queens together in 1968 is still the same as a bunch of queens together in 2020. Full of gin and regret.

While the actors were all very convincing in their roles, and the art direction was satisfying, I still don't think I got the point of this film. So, regrets and arguments abound amongst a group of gay friends, how is this the fodder of film? Maybe I just don't get "slice of life" scripts. It kind of left me feeling empty.

I'm sure some might find this film "outdated", too depressing and pessimistic. But it must be taken into consideration that it depicts gay life and identity in 60s. If it had depicted them from a very 21st-century point of view, it would probably have betrayed the authenticity of the period. Here, the characters are trying to come to terms with their identity, to find their place in a society that mostly rejects and bashes them, and remain a closed group of friends despite their personal differences. It touches upon issues like beauty, aging, depression, self-rejection, self-hatred,relationships (romantic and friendly), religion, race as they all relate to gay identity. Nine characters all representing different aspects of gay identity, when brought together, present a comprehensive and multi-faceted understanding of being a gay man in the 60s. The acting is good and the roles really fit the actors playing them. (Matt Bomer is such an eye candy, I wanna see him more in movies!!!) The dialogue of often witty and sassy. I must admit that while the overall sassiness was quite fun for the first half of the movie, in the second half, where things get pretty serious and dramatic, it felt a bit cruel. I have also seen the 1970 Friedkin version. What new elements does the 2020 one offer? It has scenes ourside Michael's house. The film opens with little scenes depicting each of the characters in their lives and contributing to character development from the start. During the phone call game, the film also has flashback scenes, which make the past memories somewhat more concrete. It also has a few sexually explicit scenes. Other than that, the story and dialogue are pretty much the same. Lastly, we must not expect all queer stories to tell empowering, optimistic stories. Yes, this film is very dark and depressing, but it is just another prespective on life and individual experience. No queer character represents or talks on behalf of the whole queer community, nor do the characters in this film. They mostly manage to feel real within themselves, which is more important.