Gli animi si logorano e il vero sé viene rivelato quando un eterosessuale viene accidentalmente invitato a una festa omosessuale.Gli animi si logorano e il vero sé viene rivelato quando un eterosessuale viene accidentalmente invitato a una festa omosessuale.Gli animi si logorano e il vero sé viene rivelato quando un eterosessuale viene accidentalmente invitato a una festa omosessuale.
- Premi
- 4 candidature totali
- Photo Model
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Pedestrian
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Recensioni in evidenza
To begin with, I should say that I was born one month before the Stonewall riots and, of course, entirely missed the era this movie portrays. I have read countless reviews insisting that this is a dated film, and a time capsule of a long gone age of self-loathing. But, speaking as a single gay man living in Manhattan now, all I could think was that this movie hits closer to home than a lot of folks would like to admit. For every character in the movie, I could think of at least one acquaintance of mine of my age who could easily step into those shoes. I have met numerous "Michaels" who shrug responsibility, live off credit cards and (try to) drown their insecurity in endless parties; Walk into any bar in Chelsea and you'll see at least a dozen snide, contemptuous "Harolds" skulking around radiating disdain for everyone around them; and let's not get started on the legions of airhead pretty boy "Cowboys" out there!
This is not to say that all the gay men I know are like this. I certainly don't share the P.O.V. of Michael, Harold, etc. In fact, I know just as many well-adjusted, happy and likeable gay guys, and I'd bet money there were similar folks like that in 1968, when the original play came out (no pun intended). But it seems very p.c. to write this movie off as a history lesson and I can't. The whole tone of the movie, the suppressed anxiety the characters feel about themselves, and the bitterness they feel towards each other, the resentment the gay men feel for the (possibly) straight guy, and above all the need for the characters to bury their self-esteem problems by getting drunk and partying with abandon happens too often among people I know to dismiss as long ago and far away.
The reason that I liked it so much then, and even went to the trouble to hunt down a very hard to find copy for a weekend mini-film-festival that some friends and I held two years ago, is that it is a brilliant play about people. You could substitute a group of straight folks, set it in downtown Shanghai or Moscow or Rome and nearly every line would still ring true. Good art must be universal or it is just advertising! "The Boys in the Band" is very good art. It portrays the everyday, not particularly larger than life, not particularly unique everyday flaws and quirks of people. The message of this film is "What the hell, were all the same under these cheesy facades we polish so brightly and value so highly and couldn't justify for two seconds in the light of any true intelligence and logic."
I don't mean to hurt anyone's sensibilities or detract from the real ground breaking value of this film. This was a big first. Gay guys right up there on the silver screen just like Rock Hudson and Doris Day, BUT admitting it. In a sense, being a "Period Piece" is the highest compliment that you can pay to a production based on "social commentary." Of course it looks like 1970, Folks, it was 1970. Now if you want a period piece, I just saw "Endless Summer" on AMC the other weekend. Talk about dated!
As far as filmed stage plays go, the production effort on "The Boys in the Band" is not really fabulous, but it isn't bad enough to detract from the story or it's impact. As literature I rate this film a solid 10. As a movie I rate it as a 7.5. Compared with other similar efforts of the time, "Butterflys are Free" or Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf" for instance it stands up.
If you can find it (which ain't easy), rent it. It is well worth an evening.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizStars all of the same actors from the original play. Producer/author Mart Crowley insisted that the entire original cast of the off-Broadway production be used in the film.
- BlooperThe telephone in the living room is a 1A2 model for multiple lines with a hold function. Michael has at least 2 lines as noted in the action. The line cord to the phone is a standard cord for single-line phones. The 1A2 requires a larger line cord with more pairs of wires to operate both lines, lights on the phone and the hold function.
- Citazioni
Michael: You're stoned and you're late. You were supposed to arrive at this location at eight thirty dash nine o'clock.
Harold: What I am, Michael, is a 32 year-old, ugly, pock marked Jew fairy, and if it takes me a little while to pull myself together, and if I smoke a little grass before I get up the nerve to show my face to the world, it's nobody's god-damned business but my own. And how are you this evening?
- Versioni alternativeTV prints are 11 minutes shorter than the theatrical release and are redubbed and re-edited to remove all objectionable dialogue.
- ConnessioniFeatured in Sneak Previews: Changing Attitude Toward Homosexuality in Movies (1982)
I più visti
- How long is The Boys in the Band?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- The Boys in the Band
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 1.250.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 2695 USD
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 2695 USD