The Boy

The Boy is not a bad movie. Actually it really is entertaining and not boring. Usually, this kind of a movie is predictable and the story begins or let's say first third of the film, I though I knew what was going to happen next and it kinda did, but I could not really imagine the end of the film , so when the twist occurred, I was surprised positively.

The whole boy/doll thing was interesting and kinda creepy. I am not sure if this is a horror movie... Even though there are some scares and some killings, they are 'less horror and bloody' than million others in dramas and thrillers.

Although the twist towards the end is a big plus, as I did not see it coming, the very end of the film is kinda a bit of a let down as I expected that the boy story be explained... I know that there was no one left to tell the story, but maybe some police or an article from the old newspapers... Also, I am not sure we got to see / read the letters the boy's parents ( but aren't they too old?!) left/sent ...

All in all, I feel like there is going to be the sequel. Not only because the doll/boy is restored, but, those questions I was wondering about give the feeling they will be explained eventually.

Seven from me.

It is somewhat difficult for me to explain my viewing experience of this film, and in no way do I mean to sound condescending of uppity, so kindly bear with me... Usually, after years of "experience" with a certain hobby, one is able to differentiate objective criticism from lack of personal satisfaction. For me, The Boy is a perfect example, so I'll make sure to separate my personal opinions from what I perceive to be the makings of a fine Horror film.

I've always been a big fan of the Supernatural sub-genre, with a special liking to films portraying evil dolls (films like Dead Silence or Annabelle, NOT Chucky). After watching the trailer for The Boy several months ago, I've been eagerly anticipating its release. As presented in the teasers, the story is original and well told (hats off to screenwriter Stacey Menear), and the jump-scares (while still cheap) are sufficiently few and well made to add the occasional scare without damaging the experience. Music and cinematography are great, as is the acting (especially supporting actors Jim Norton and Diana Hardcastle as Mr. and Mrs. Hillshire).

Now for my problem... the plot twist is smart, surprising and in no way predictable (although some of you might have guessed it from the start, I personally was impressed). It adds a stroke of genius creativity and originality to an otherwise all too known pattern of a film. I just didn't like it... it felt too original, like trying to reinvent the wheel when the wheel works just fine. Objectively - great twist, great ending! In my opinion? A let down.

All in all, the eerie sense of suspense and fear is maintained throughout the entire film, and I would definitely recommend it to other "supernatural dolls" fans. However, personally, I couldn't help but feeling it was ultimately a let-down, and I wouldn't watch it again.

You ever watch a film, and at a certain point, you get the feeling that the final product is obviously a heavily edited (if not outright- butchered) re-working and simplification of an otherwise great idea? Like a studio-suit-type got their hands on a really cool and original script that defied convention... but then that same studio- suit got cold feet, and had a legion of ghost- writers re-work it into something more generic and "audience friendly"?

Yup. That's the feeling I got watching "The Boy."

Don't get me wrong, there's still fun to be had. And despite its rather obvious faults, I was thoroughly entertained and had a good time. It's just... so obviously a great concept that feels like it's been tampered with by studio committees and producer interference to dumb it down to certain level that can only be described as "lowest common denominator." At times I could even swear that the film feels like it was the product of two or three different scripts that were haphazardly mushed together in a last- ditch effort to try and make it more of a broadly-appealing (aka "generic") thriller than a unique spine- tingler.

The film follows Greta (the adorable Lauren Cohan), an American woman who has been hired to act as nanny for a prim and proper older couple's child overseas in the UK. However, Greta is taken aback after learning that the "boy" is actually a child-sized doll that is treated by his "parents" as if he was a real, living being. He's fed and taught lessons and kissed goodnight... a routine Greta is informed she must definitely follow. But when she begins to stray and ignore the rules set for her, strange things begin to happen, and it becomes all too clear that the doll might just be more "real" and "alive" than she could have imagined.

The film works for the most part mainly due to the charm of the two lead cast-members, and for the well-executed visual storytelling.

Cohan is a lot of fun as our lead, and she's a great choice for the role of Greta... she's able to convey her initial annoyance over her situation, the paranoia of her character as the story progresses, and even has a lot of really good pathos due to her fairly good development and backstory. And co-star Rupert Evans (probably best known for his roles in the delightful "Hellboy" and the underrated "The Canal") is charming as can be as Malcolm, a local grocery man who delivers food to the home and develops feelings for Greta as the story progresses. They're the main focus for much of the running time of the film, and they're both perfect in their roles, creating a lot of care from the audience.

Director William Brent Bell also does a wonderful job in his visual storytelling, and he elevates the material. I honestly haven't been a fan of his work in the past... "Stay Alive" was a lazy and very condescending attempt to cash-in on the growing popularity of video-games over the last 20 years. And "The Devil Inside" was a terrible mis-judgement, with its infamous final act still viewed as a low- point in the world of horror. But here, Bell is actually able to get a lot of great work done, and show he does have the chops to make a good creep-fest if he really puts his mind to it. He revels in the atmospheric visuals of the old, enormous house and nearby woods. He glides the camera organically in slow, lingering shots that are a breath of fresh-air compared to the lousy "shaky cam" nonsense polluting other horror flicks. And he even for the most part strays away from relying too much on loud jumps and noises. I particularly admired a wonderful sequence where Greta tries to demonstrate to Malcolm that the doll can move on its own... great stuff there.

It's just a shame that the film is dragged down so badly due to its issues with the script and storyline.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised that if at one point in development, the film was more of a psychological drama about an emotionally damaged person forging a deep connection with an inanimate doll... because this film's best moments- and indeed the moments that feel the most complete and developed- are the sequences where Greta begins to learn about what's happening and become more and more attached to the idea that the doll just might be alive. It's wonderful in certain scenes, and it feels disturbing in all the right ways.

But then other sequences contradict this... particularly the scenes that play more as straight-forward horror. They feel like scenes out of a different film. And without spoiling it, the final act feels like it comes out of left-field in a very inorganic way... almost as if the climax from a completely different script was tacked-on and retro-fitted to feature the characters from this film. It almost gave me whiplash to see how much it changed in the third act.

If they had just ran with the idea of a woman in a house being forced to take care of a creepy doll like a real child, and explored the ideas of isolation and paranoia associated with the situation... it could've been a great film. (Almost a "horror version" of the wonderful indie flick "Lars and the Real Girl.") But the tacked-on scenes added to manufacture generic haunted-house thrills diminishes the impact... as does the frankly bizarre climax.

Still, the performances and atmospheric direction make it worth seeing for fans of horror, and I would by lying if I said I didn't get a kick out of it.

I give "The Boy" a slightly-above-average 6 out of 10. It doesn't quite come together 100%, but it's definitely a fun time.

I'm an avid IMDb user. This is actually my first time writing a review though. I felt inclined after browsing through other's reviews saying how horrible this movie was. It was actually a lot better than I expected. I wasn't in a huge hurry to see it, but I'm happy I watched it. I haven't been a fan of many newer horror movies with the exception of It Follows, but I recommend watching this with an open mind. There's a twist that makes it worth while and I must admit, I didn't see it coming a mile away. Perfect ending to my mini Friday the 13th marathon. -- -- -- -- ----- ----- -----—------------ -----—------—----------------------------- ---

Being Norwegian myself, I love everything English, their rich history and beautiful castles.

This is almost gothic, but set in modern times.

Lauren Cohan plays a nanny who relocates from the US to England to take up a position looking after an elderly couples son. Things become a bit weird immediately when it turns out her new charge is actually a lifesize porcelain doll named Brahms that they treat like their son.

Spooky scenery, gorgeous house, good story and fine enough acting.

I liked it. I did not predict the ending, which is always a plus when watching a movie.

If you must compare doll movies, its much, much better than the first Annabelle movie, (which frankly was awful).