ÉVALUATION IMDb
6,8/10
11 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA sports writer becomes a single parent in tragic circumstances.A sports writer becomes a single parent in tragic circumstances.A sports writer becomes a single parent in tragic circumstances.
- Prix
- 6 nominations au total
Avis en vedette
Clive Owen shines once again as husband and father dealing with loss. Although the story seems like the familiar one we have seen before in many films like this, the direction, script and acting really do go through the many complexities of the characters. Scott Hicks shows us how flawed the father is. Allan Cubitt's script works great because of all of Owen's input and ideas to it. The young George MacKay gives a standout performance as the teenage son dealing with many issues. George actually has the most important and revealing scene towards the end of the movie. Would definitely recommend this film.
At its core The Boys are Back is nothing new; tales of heartache and sorrow, and the plethora of emotions experienced after a loved one passes away, are a staple of the drama genre. It's thanks to novelist Simon Carr and screenwriter Allan Cubitt that Boys manages to feel fresh - albeit with slightly annoying characters, more on that soon – their book and adaptation, respectively, is in the higher echelon of 'mourning' dramas. The two plots – firstly Joe's new found responsibility to Artie then to his other son Harry, both under different circumstances – mould together seamlessly and never does it appear like they went for too much. Even the small subplots, which can so often be unnecessary, are natural and help boost the already exceptional story.
There is an issue though: the major players can be aggravating on occasion. Joe, a supposedly intelligent person, makes some parental decisions which – grieving a lost one or not – come off as just plain stupid and dangerous; mother-in-law Barbara needlessly spits out some manipulative dialogue; young Artie, possibly due to no fault of his own, at times behaves like a spoilt brat; and every now and then Harry is too whiny, even for a teenager. But hey, don't all family members have their faults? Unfortunately some of these are heightened after a life-changing event.
Greig Fraser's astounding cinematography must be given a mention. The rural South Australian setting is nothing short of breathtaking as Fraser's light green and orange palette gives the location warmth and calmness. The SA government would be well served using some of Boys material, the festival state's tourism would skyrocket. Complimenting the visuals is Hal Lindes terrific acoustic score, his music captures the mood perfectly for the opposing upbeat and pensive moments.
Overall director Scott Hicks has delivered a worthy picture about mourning, adapting and moving on. Would have been excellent if it weren't for the characters intermittently grating on your nerves.
3.5 out of 5 (1 - Rubbish, 2 - Ordinary, 3 - Good, 4 - Excellent, 5 - Classic)
There is an issue though: the major players can be aggravating on occasion. Joe, a supposedly intelligent person, makes some parental decisions which – grieving a lost one or not – come off as just plain stupid and dangerous; mother-in-law Barbara needlessly spits out some manipulative dialogue; young Artie, possibly due to no fault of his own, at times behaves like a spoilt brat; and every now and then Harry is too whiny, even for a teenager. But hey, don't all family members have their faults? Unfortunately some of these are heightened after a life-changing event.
Greig Fraser's astounding cinematography must be given a mention. The rural South Australian setting is nothing short of breathtaking as Fraser's light green and orange palette gives the location warmth and calmness. The SA government would be well served using some of Boys material, the festival state's tourism would skyrocket. Complimenting the visuals is Hal Lindes terrific acoustic score, his music captures the mood perfectly for the opposing upbeat and pensive moments.
Overall director Scott Hicks has delivered a worthy picture about mourning, adapting and moving on. Would have been excellent if it weren't for the characters intermittently grating on your nerves.
3.5 out of 5 (1 - Rubbish, 2 - Ordinary, 3 - Good, 4 - Excellent, 5 - Classic)
A brilliant movie with emotions perfectly emoted by characters very well etched by the writers. That's what I would like to say about this movie in one word. The director has blended all the factors into one...be it the shots, the music, the characters, the story...all into one. And he has done it in a brilliant way that I felt that I was with those characters living with them. Clive Owen, Laura Fraser, Nicholas McAnulty, George Mackay all did a wonderful job. I did not have any expectation while going into the cinemas to watch this...and when I got out i was feeling very refreshed... A good movie...I recommend it to all.
this was a very interesting film to watch but by no means gripping. Certainly a lighter role for clive Owen after Duplicity and The International and he is of course faultless in his execution of the role as journalist Joe Carr showing great vulnerability in his relationship with women in general, notably his two wives and then his two sons Arty and Harry who live apart. There are a lot of sensitive moments and much is overplayed, though personally the death of his wife I think is not played enough and the grief of the family seems somewhat hollow to me. Laurel seemed too available and not involved enough in the story and can someone explain what the party was all bout at the house when Joe Carr was away. Who were the uninvited guests and how did they get into the house? Didn't get that at all, not at all! Another film which promises a lot but delivers little, touching on serious family issues but not really addressing them.
There is much to admire in this film.
The acting is superb. In fact it is Oscar worthy, whether from Clive Owen or either of the young actors playing his sons. (I fear the 6 year old will get all the praise, but the 14 year old's performance was simply brilliant and more difficult.)
The story is honest, fresh, and touching. This isn't a, "What happens if..." movie. This is not just a true life story, it is a true to life story. You can see that Scott Hicks had one goal, honesty. He succeeds at every level and this is perhaps the most honest film you will ever see.
So why did I debate giving this film a 6 or 7 and not an 8 or 9 or 10? Because in this quest for truthfulness, it often fails to satisfy. It is, in many ways, a movie that only asks questions and provides no answers. They did their best to reach inside this story and create a beginning, middle, and end, but the truth is that at the end you are left without any of your needs met. I absolutely did not want Hollywood elements tossed in, but the story is simply incomplete. It is real. And real stories are incomplete. I suppose I want to praise this movie for being brave enough to not satisfy while warning friends, "Look, this is a very good film, but it's focus is honesty even if that means ignoring your needs as an audience."
Perhaps over time I will come to see this as brilliant. The characters are often not getting their needs met, and neither does the audience. But how do you recommend someone pay $10 to not have their emotional needs met? At the screening I attended, there was a Q&A with Scott Hicks and Clive Owen. Many people joked about a sequel with their questions, because clearly there could never be a sequel. Even Clive joked about sequel titles. You know what? I believe all the sarcasm about a potential sequel came from the truth that this story is unfinished.
So...
If you feel like seeing honesty and emotional truth, if you want a break from Hollywood BS, if you want to see a slice of real life without any pretense or falsehood, rush to this movie. And I do hope you enjoy it more than I did because of these warnings.
The acting is superb. In fact it is Oscar worthy, whether from Clive Owen or either of the young actors playing his sons. (I fear the 6 year old will get all the praise, but the 14 year old's performance was simply brilliant and more difficult.)
The story is honest, fresh, and touching. This isn't a, "What happens if..." movie. This is not just a true life story, it is a true to life story. You can see that Scott Hicks had one goal, honesty. He succeeds at every level and this is perhaps the most honest film you will ever see.
So why did I debate giving this film a 6 or 7 and not an 8 or 9 or 10? Because in this quest for truthfulness, it often fails to satisfy. It is, in many ways, a movie that only asks questions and provides no answers. They did their best to reach inside this story and create a beginning, middle, and end, but the truth is that at the end you are left without any of your needs met. I absolutely did not want Hollywood elements tossed in, but the story is simply incomplete. It is real. And real stories are incomplete. I suppose I want to praise this movie for being brave enough to not satisfy while warning friends, "Look, this is a very good film, but it's focus is honesty even if that means ignoring your needs as an audience."
Perhaps over time I will come to see this as brilliant. The characters are often not getting their needs met, and neither does the audience. But how do you recommend someone pay $10 to not have their emotional needs met? At the screening I attended, there was a Q&A with Scott Hicks and Clive Owen. Many people joked about a sequel with their questions, because clearly there could never be a sequel. Even Clive joked about sequel titles. You know what? I believe all the sarcasm about a potential sequel came from the truth that this story is unfinished.
So...
If you feel like seeing honesty and emotional truth, if you want a break from Hollywood BS, if you want to see a slice of real life without any pretense or falsehood, rush to this movie. And I do hope you enjoy it more than I did because of these warnings.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe nine songs by Sigur Rós in the film were initially used as a temporary score. However, director Scott Hicks felt the music was so perfect for the film that he personally traveled to Iceland to get approval from Sigur Rós to be featured in the film.
- Bandes originalesIllgresi
Written by Jon Thor Birgisson (as Jón Þór Birgisson), Orri P. Dyrason (as Orri Páll Dýrason), Georg Holm (as Georg Hólm), Kjartan Sveinsson (Universal Music Publishing Ltd.)
Performed by Sigur Rós
Licensed courtesy of EMI Records
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Boys Are Back?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- The Boys Are Back
- Lieux de tournage
- sociétés de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 809 752 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 49 342 $ US
- 27 sept. 2009
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 3 252 136 $ US
- Durée1 heure 44 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Mes garçons sont de retour (2009) officially released in Canada in English?
Répondre