Lost Boys of Sudan

Well made documentary focusing on two Sudanese refugees who get resettled in the United States. It's your basic fish out of water story with a non-fiction twist. I found it fascinating to see how Peter and Santino lived prior to coming to America and how they adapted once they arrived here (in Houston, Texas.) They expected a sort of heaven but found out that it's a lot harder than it looks to cope well in the states. They go from hopeful idealists to somewhat more realistic skeptics. Everywhere they go they meet bureaucrats with paper trails that most citizens may take for granted. They fret that they are blacker than the African-Americans here and don't feel accepted because of that. One of the "Lost Boys" manages to leave Houston to go to Olathe, Kansas, where he finds conditions slightly better but still less than ideal. There are people that try to help them as well as try to hurt them in this film. Not shown, but talked about, are those who put a gun to their heads and robbed them, leading one Lost Boy to comment negatively that "all black people in America are no good." I found it interesting, too, that they arrived in Houston in August 2001, a month before the World Trade Center was attacked by terrorists. I had hoped to see their reaction to this tragedy but it's not mentioned at all. Still, all in all, a really well done documentary with no narration. None is needed really. The "Lost Boys" do a fine job expounding on the events going on around them without any help at all, thank you very much.

this movie described an ordeal experienced by these boys and men that is difficult to comprehend. It's impossible not to sympathize with their plight but the fate of the girls (who merit token mention but no attempt at solution) remains an even greater unresolved tragedy.

Why aren't women and girls being offered these types of massive resettlement? While the Lost Boys have had a horrific experience, is what they have suffered worse than what the girls have experienced?

At any given time there are at least 20 wars raging on the African continent, these wars are being fought over control of the vast resources of Africa. The primary casualties of the conflicts are women and children. Calling the conflicts "wars" is probably a misnomer, a more accurate word would be genocide. Women are the strength and power keeping tribal social structure and self sufficiency alive, this form of life has has been disrupted and fractured by the West's exploitation of Africa, it now has no place in the modern world, so the women must be eliminated. Along with murder women also bear the brunt of sexual torture that is one of the primary weapons used by the agents of Western corporate interests. How many millions of women and children would welcome genuine help or resettlement to America to escape this?

Why are we focused on only the male suffering in this one atrocity?

The US government and mainstream media wouldn't be investing so much time, attention and money in an issue like this if there weren't some strategic interest involved, there's may not be much in Sudan that has value to the US but the regions proximity to key energy resources has kept the US very interested in the area. OK, that's fine but if the US wants to cultivate closer ties with the Sudan by exporting thousands of males to America, why are women not being included in the deal? The media information makes it sound like it's not possible to rescue any girls, it that really true? Reading between the lines indicates that it would have been more difficult to rescue girls, but not impossible. How much of the money used for resettlement of boys could have been used rescue some of the girls? Perhaps only a few hundred could have been saved but if even that many could have been saved maybe it would have been worth it. If the choice had been offered to the men and boys that if some of their sisters and mothers could be saved even if it cost them their own chance to go to America, would they take it? Was that a choice ever offered? If there was a choice of saving 3,000 boys or 500 girls I guess we take the 3,000 boys. More bang for the buck I guess. Boys have more value anyways, right? Perhaps we should ask 11 year old girls in forced marriages with older men, suffering early pregnancies, venereal diseases and sexual abuse. I'm sure they would agree with the choice. Taking a look at some actual reports posted on the internet it appears that more girls could have been resettled than the media reported, but very few were. Why? Is there something more intrinsically appealing about boys? Are they just plain "cuter" on camera? Are girls somehow unclean and dirty? I wonder if the specter of sexual violence makes females somehow poor candidates for public sympathy, much easier to describe the trials and tribulations experienced by the boys than the trials, tribulations AND sexual violence perpetrated on girls. Perhaps this is just a manifestation of a male centric culture that values men more than women.

Millions of men, women and children worldwide have suffered atrocities as bad or worse than what the Lost Boys have experienced. In many places of the world young girls are a commodity to be bought and sold, indigenous women and girls in the last remaining rainforests are routinely raped by government soldiers, many thousands of female babies languish in orphanages in China, women are burned alive and aborted during pregnancy in India, thousands of children of both genders roam the streets in major cities with no families or homes. Many of these children are boys but it is girls that bear the brunt of sexual violence. Where is the public outpouring of sympathy for these girls? Where are the demands they be brought to America to escape the horrors being perpetrated on them? Where are the celebrities championing their cause? Have any books or movies been made about these girls ever received the attention the Lost Boys have received? Are the US based churches, immigrant rights organization, and resettlement agencies planning on resettling female victims of violence on the same scale as males? Is this planned for the future? If not, why? If so, when? Tomorrow? Next Year? Never?

The following excerpts are from GBV (Gender Based Violence Report): "In the late 1980s, thousands of boys and girls fled their homes in Sudan because of armed fighting. They wandered around East Africa for years, with many dying on the way and the rest surviving as best as they could until, in the early 1990s, they eventually reached the Kakuma refugee camp in northern Kenya. The ordeal of the so-called 'lost boys of Sudan' received quite a lot of media attention. After several more years languishing in the camp, 4,000 of the boys, whose parents had either died or were missing, were offered resettlement in the United States. By contrast, no one highlighted the plight of the 'lost girls'. Among those who made it to Kenya there were several thousands girls aged 8–10. Most of them were absorbed by foster families in the camp, with many becoming little more than unpaid servants. No one offered them resettlement. In the refugee camp, the girls suffered from rape, early pregnancies, kidnapping, and forced marriage."

Lost Boys of Sudan was a movie following the lives of two men, by the names of Peter and Santino Chuor. They were brought to America after many tragic events that led to the lost of their families. The main story is about how they learn to live in America.

The movie's story is probably one of the best parts. It is really interesting and makes the viewer want to see what happens next. It makes you feel sympathetic, and really like the two characters.

The movie's music isn't really that great, but it did not bother my experience that much. The presentation is probably the worst part of the movie. It wasn't super terrible and eye-clawing, but it could have been a lot better. There was an overuse of shaky camera, and they didn't really use the "shaky camera" in any good moments. It just seemed they weren't able to get the camera on a tripod.

Overall the story is good, presentation is okay, and everything else is either mediocre or "kinda good but not really." In general, a good movie, but nothing amazing.

This documentary is not only one of the best documentaries I've seen, but also one of the most moving and quietly beautiful movies I've seen period. It follows the lives of two Sudanese young men, Peter and Santino, as they try to make their way into the American culture. Peter and Santino are friends at first, but they gradually drift more and more apart, as Peter goes to Kansas City, and Santino stays in Houston ("a land called Houston"). Santino's beauty is in his eyes. He takes people onto his back, he supports an apartment full of other Sudanese, paying the rent, doing everything for other people. He is a quiet sufferer. Peter looks out for himself, getting a high school education while playing basketball and making Christian friends. It seems that director Megan Mylan did not know what she was getting herself into with the beauty of this tale. Peter and Santino are amazing characters that move you. But the real strength in this movie lies in its commentary on American society. It is not judging. It shows the strengths and weaknesses of our world, and how difficult it can be to outside people. I suggest you find this film, and look at America through the lives of these two fascinating and beautiful people.

My grade: 10/10

If you have not heard of this film, it follows two Sudanese refugees from a refugee camp in Africa to America, where they convince themselves they will find success and riches. Life is harder than expected in the states, and this film beautifully captures the frustration felt when things are not going right. The lives are captured so well many moments seem scripted because they're so perfect. Whether it be on the job, at school, or the time in between, the two boys, Peter and Santino, are very honest with the filmmakers, and make some very thought-provoking comments about life in the states. It's one of the only documentaries I can recall that, when it ended, I wanted it to go on for another two hours. It might be difficult to find this movie cause it didn't get great distribution, but check your local "art house" or independent theater and give this one a go (side note, if you're reading this when it's already on video then definitely it's worth a rent). Rating: 28/40