VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,2/10
4612
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaBased on the novel "Dream Boy" by Jim Grimsley, this film chronicles the relationship between two gay teenagers in the rural south in the late 70's.Based on the novel "Dream Boy" by Jim Grimsley, this film chronicles the relationship between two gay teenagers in the rural south in the late 70's.Based on the novel "Dream Boy" by Jim Grimsley, this film chronicles the relationship between two gay teenagers in the rural south in the late 70's.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 2 vittorie totali
Maximillian Roeg
- Roy
- (as Max Roeg)
Rooney Mara
- Evelyn
- (as Tricia Mara)
Michele Adams
- Mother of Three Kids
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Robin Blanchard
- Cafeteria Worker
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Sean M. Blanchard
- Student
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Tony Lawson
- Teacher
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Jaci LeJeune
- Student
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Elizabeth Lynch
- Church Goer
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Bridget Nichols
- Cafeteria Worker
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Emily Nichols
- Student
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Recensioni in evidenza
People watch movies for different reasons. Some people like an elaborate, fast-paced plot. Others enjoy the visual and audio experience. I am the kind of movie watcher who enjoys a well executed and consistent tone and mood. In "Dream Boy," the mood is both melancholy and sweet and there is a constant, if not always apparent, hint of anxiety and apprehension that builds throughout the movie. Capturing a mood is very difficult, and it relies on a number of factors including acting, cinematography, and music. While the acting of the supporting cast in "Dream Boy" can be somewhat inconsistent, the acting of the two main characters, Roy (Max Roeg) and Nathan (Stephan Bender), is very strong. I was particularly impressed with Bender whose performance reminds me of Gabourey Sidibe in "Precious." While it is true that the awkward, inarticulate teenager is well-trod territory in gay cinema, I've never seen the role acted so flawlessly. I was completely convinced that Bender was Nathan. Here we have a rare example of the kind of role that doesn't seem "acted" at all; it's as if Bender embodies the character. Sadly, I think actors with roles that are over-the-top, histrionic, and melodramatic often get the most praise, but it seems equally if not more difficult to portray a shy, introverted character, and the actors who really nail these roles often don't get the recognition they deserve (re: Heath Ledger in Brokeback Mountain). I've read some criticism that Bender's performance was "wooden," and it strikes me that if you were not an awkward, inarticulate teenager you might not be able to identify with the performance, but if you were the kind of kid who stayed inside most of the day you will probably find the portrayal of your former self incredibly accurate and moving.
There is a lot of attention paid to subtle, non-verbal forms of communication - glances, stares, half-smiles, physical contact - all of which create a much more realistic depiction of young, gay love than the more chatty gay coming-of-age movies that I'm used to seeing. All of that being said, I understand the disappointment with the ambiguous denouement, but plots are relatively tangential for me. If the actors and director manage to depict a convincing mood, then that is all I need to be satisfied, and they have certainly done that with "Dream Boy."
There is a lot of attention paid to subtle, non-verbal forms of communication - glances, stares, half-smiles, physical contact - all of which create a much more realistic depiction of young, gay love than the more chatty gay coming-of-age movies that I'm used to seeing. All of that being said, I understand the disappointment with the ambiguous denouement, but plots are relatively tangential for me. If the actors and director manage to depict a convincing mood, then that is all I need to be satisfied, and they have certainly done that with "Dream Boy."
I typically do not like the "traditional" gay cliché genre where all relationships have to end in tragedy. But I COULD have made an exception here had the writer/filmmaker decided to go in the direction of a ghost story...which was alluded to about mid-way. Meaning, there were many elements of horror/psychological thriller, beginning with the character of Nathan's family life. Then, we see the tension between Nathan and one of Roy's "alpha male" friends, foreshadowing some negative story line. But all in all, this is just too linear and has a very "made for TV" feel (the sound-track gets very annoying). And the ending seems to make this just too "cutesy" and negates the entire horror/ghost story direction (it's almost as if the writer got stuck and didn't know where to go and wanted to end on some "feel good" note...just lazy). Also, there were several instances where either the writer or the director didn't seem to understand the setting they were portraying (Baptists in the South would NEVER have a crucifix on the wall...let alone in a church...that's Catholicism). In other words, a) do your research b) pick your "mood" and where you want to go and c) be consistent. The acting was in fact superb and I think the best thing about this...so I wish all involved an excellent career.
I was thoroughly enjoying this film, with its talented and attractive two leads, the evocative setting, and a decently realistic premise.
Then came the final act.
What happens in the ending is both poorly written and a waste of a potentially fantastic film. In a story that felt so natural and real, the entire third act comes seemingly out of nowhere in effort to force the characters into a specific type of ending. An ending which, though I would have preferred otherwise, could have been achieved much more organically with story pieces already in place (the father) instead of driving an underdeveloped secondary character into an unjustifiable decision, and forcing a main character to passively accept their fate with no fight.
Awful. Truly awful.
Then came the final act.
What happens in the ending is both poorly written and a waste of a potentially fantastic film. In a story that felt so natural and real, the entire third act comes seemingly out of nowhere in effort to force the characters into a specific type of ending. An ending which, though I would have preferred otherwise, could have been achieved much more organically with story pieces already in place (the father) instead of driving an underdeveloped secondary character into an unjustifiable decision, and forcing a main character to passively accept their fate with no fight.
Awful. Truly awful.
Shy teenager Nathan (Stephen Bender) moves into the deep South with his parents. Right next door to him is teenager Roy (Max Roeg) who is out-going and friendly. They form a friendship which quickly turns into a physical relationship. Naturally they can't tell anybody. Half way through things about Nathan become clearer--and more disturbing--and the movie gets dark.
I read the book years ago and loved it but I hated the ending cause it's so ambiguous. I bought this movie cautiously because I didn't think it could be as good as the book and I was curious HOW they would end it. Well the movie IS as good as the book. It's low-key but the book was too. Bender and Roeg perfectly play two teenage boys in love--you can see the confusion and passion in their faces. The sex scenes are very tastefully done (nothing remotely graphic) and these two are so obviously not teens it's not disturbing to watch. I also like how their kissing and having sex is treated so casually--as it should. It (sort of) retains the ambiguous ending of the book. Like I said I hated that ending but I'm glad the movie didn't change it. All the acting is good--Roeg especially. He has the wonderful actress Theresa Russell as his mom and obviously inherited her acting abilities. There's some beautiful cinematography and a good music score too. Low-key and somewhat disturbing but effective. I give it a 7.
I read the book years ago and loved it but I hated the ending cause it's so ambiguous. I bought this movie cautiously because I didn't think it could be as good as the book and I was curious HOW they would end it. Well the movie IS as good as the book. It's low-key but the book was too. Bender and Roeg perfectly play two teenage boys in love--you can see the confusion and passion in their faces. The sex scenes are very tastefully done (nothing remotely graphic) and these two are so obviously not teens it's not disturbing to watch. I also like how their kissing and having sex is treated so casually--as it should. It (sort of) retains the ambiguous ending of the book. Like I said I hated that ending but I'm glad the movie didn't change it. All the acting is good--Roeg especially. He has the wonderful actress Theresa Russell as his mom and obviously inherited her acting abilities. There's some beautiful cinematography and a good music score too. Low-key and somewhat disturbing but effective. I give it a 7.
I began watching the film with mild interest and very quickly was drawn into the quiet intensity of the film. One must avoid any discussion of specific plot elements, which would ultimately spoil the experience of the film. It is NOT as some have called it, a "Brokeback Mountain" about teenagers. It is different. It is unique. It is beautiful photographed, sensitively told and atmospheric. I was especially impressed with the performances of Stephan Bender as Nathan and Max Roeg as Roy. While I had no idea what the exact outcome of the film would be, there is a "foreboding" that overshadows the entire story; You get clues along the way that "something is wrong." But the final 20 minutes or so will probably really surprise you. There is much more going on here that can be easily summarized in a user review or with a catch line that describes the plot's formula. I think it's the type of film that will provoke a great deal of discussion and it deserved to be released on DVD.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizRooney Mara's feature film debut (portrays Evelyn).
- BlooperThe story is set in the 1970s, but the car shown in the opening scenes is a Buick Roadmaster station wagon, which was produced from 1991 to 1996. Also, the refrigerator shown is a modern model, not one from the 70s.
- Colonne sonoreMoment
Written and performed by Richard Buckner
Vocals by Patty Griffin
Additional recording by Craig Ross
Mixed by Jon Marshall Smith
Published by Richard Buckner (BMI) administered by Bug
Patty Griffin appears courtesy of ATO Records
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Dream Boy?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Момак из снова
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 1.200.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 6534 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 2243 USD
- 28 mar 2010
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 6534 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 28min(88 min)
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti