House of Boys

I liked this film a lot. Admittedly there were some questionable parts, but overall this film does what it sets out to; reel you in with many bare torsos and shove reality in your face with a hard knock, amid a love story that ultimately has you caring about it by the end.

Layke Anderson is wonderful in this. I haven't seen him in anything else, but he's fantastic as the rebellious party-boy who finds his own heart. It's a shame he finds it with Benn Northover (whom I haven't seen in anything else either), who pales in comparison to pretty much every other performer in this film. He seems an odd choice next to Anderson, and his character is lost among the other, more colourful ones.

Udo Kier and Stephen Webb are good for the laughs, which are few, but effective.

House of Boys pulls no punches in depicting disease and the effects it can cause; this may be unsettling for some, but you'll be glad you sat through it. It's not life-changing, but see it for Anderson's performance, and Udo Kier in drag. Obviously.

There are many good, in some cases excellent, movies about the AIDS crisis, including recent films like The Normal Heart and Angels in America, and earlier work such as And the Band Played On. House of Boys is not one of the good ones. Another reviewer suggested anyone disliking this movie must be a homophobe. To the contrary, anyone who thinks this qualifies as a good gay-themed movie must have a fairly low opinion of what a well done gay-themed movie can be. Admittedly there has become some degree of fatigue for gay films that trade off the AIDS crisis, but again, referencing the two recent films mentioned above, when done well they are still well-received.

In this film there were too many terribly clichéd personalities. ranging from the world-weary aging "madame" of the House of Boys, to the straight woman rescued by said madame, to the somewhat mysterious wealthy American customer, to the assortment of boys working in the club and of course, to the film's very own Little Nell, the wide-eyed naïf, Justin … and nearly all of them with his or her own unsuitable or overdone accent.

With all this heavy traffic distracting us, it was impossible for us to develop any emotional attachment to any individual, least of all the annoying Justin. In fact, most of the characters' development depended more on our familiarity with their recognizable cliché than anything revealed in the story-line.

At times it seemed like a Dickensian soap opera, heavily over-dramatic and replete with all the trappings, including someone in the snow-covered street singing like an urchin beggar from Scrooge or Nicholas Nickelby. Unlike something written by Dickens, however, none of the characters in this story was very well developed nor did they engender much empathy or sympathy.

The actor playing Justin was a poor choice. He lacked talent, charisma or the sort of good looks that might have made us feel some emotional attachment to him. Most of the other actors were fairly good, but the whole enterprise just never came together. Towards the end, when the tears are flowing on screen, I doubt many were shed by anyone watching the movie. And the subject at hand really should produce tears with little effort. I guess it's a matter of distinction that this movie managed to render the whole HIV crisis as well as the death & love loss experienced by its lead characters, as something banal.

There are far better choices for moving, emotionally-draining and inspiring tales from this period in the gay community. You can give this one a miss.

I wasn't expecting much from this movie, based on the title alone. I'm glad to say that I was pleasantly surprised. Wonderful story, thoroughly engaging characters, And if I hadn't lived in that era and witnessed everything myself, I would find it hard to believe. Take it someone who survived the 80s during the plague and lived to tell about it, this movie hits all the right spots. If you were up in the 80s, and also our survivor, check this movie out...... You'll be surprised. Highly recommended.

"House of Boys" was the peak of the London Lesbian Gay Film Festival in April 2011. "House of Boys" stood in contrast to the usual assortment of dry documentaries and silly fluff films. I lost count of how many of the characters seem like real people -- stereotypes or not -- i know and love. It was like being with friends. So much so, that when drama ensues, you want to be there for your friends. I can't remember the last time i saw actors get into their parts so well. I won't give away any plot here: for this film, more than any other, please avoid reviews and trailers that give away plot. Let it develop for you after you get to know these boys, exactly the way Jean-Claude Schlim intends it. Btw, after reading the script, several of actors begged for a part, any part, in this particular film. When you see it, you will know why.

When I look at casting lists of movies and the name Udo Kier pops up, I know that that film can't be any good. Unfortunately House Of Boys didn't prove me wrong. Kier could never act. And even the lip-synching is horrible. But he is not alone. With one or two exceptions the whole cast of this film is challenged and overwhelmed with their task to act. So in the end this looks like a film d'auteur made for television with a lot of ambition and heart but lacking of craft and money. The three acts of the film end in a sob fest and Amsterdam at Christmas looks like a typical Zeffirelli production of La Bohème at the Metropolitan Opera House. No, this is not a good film, no matter how ambitious it may seem.