The Boys in the Band (1970)

You won't be disappointed!

one of my absolute favorites!

From my favorite movies..

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

I too am of the generation this movie portrays even though the actors in the film were born in the 1930's and even 1920's. In watching it again recently I like other reviewers was struck by how many of these characters still exist today in the gay community. Today's young gays would probably think of them as old trolls but they are being dishonest if they do not admit that they are essentially the same way - bitter and self-loathing. We still for example, hear stories of the gay boy who gets run out of his small town or his family or commits suicide. And true, there may not be as many bath houses or tea rooms around but the internet hasn't stopped the promiscuity one bit. And it's still all about looks and youth and petty jealousy and backbiting and yes, racism too. Gays still talk about chocolate queens or rice queens or taco queens, etc. The only real change I can see is something that most gays do not want to acknowledge. The character Alan makes a statement that he really does not care what people do in the private lives as long as they don't force it on others. I think that is true today for many, many people. However, today, it does appear that gays ARE forcing it on society in a way that is unnecessary. I do not know anyone who doesn't think gays are not human or that gays do not deserve rights or who wants to beat gays up, etc. but I do know many who quite frankly are sick and tired of being told that being gay is fantastic or that two men (or women) raising children from infancy is perfectly "normal" and even preferable. In other words, the gay agenda has in many ways sought to supersede the heterosexual. All in all, the film is disturbing and it is sad to see how depressed the characters seem to be but I do not buy the idea that gays are all that happy today either and I really do not think it can all be blamed on society's treatment of the subject either.

I do not believe one must be a "fan of gay films" to enjoy this movie. This is a movie for anyone smart enough to get it. The setting, the script, the acting - superb. I do not feel, in any way, that this film portrays gay men negatively. I think it portrays gay men in 1970...each with their own personality - men who are gay, but are more importantly friends. This film addressed some heavy issues in 1970 and as far as I am concerned, it was a grand slam. Yes, some characters are funny, brutal, flamboyant, intelligent, reserved, critical, lonely, happy, sad, fun loving, caring, angry...again, these men are individuals who happen to be gay. This is still (after 40 years) a thought provoking film, full to the brim with details - the set, the characters, the "language"...this is a special film.

Like Harold Pinter's The Birthday Party, director William Friedkin brought another controversial adaptation to the screen with Mart Crowley's seething gay drama: The Boys In The Band. Ironically, The Boys In The Band also uses the facade of a birthday party as a catalyst to comment on its themes. This film comments on contemporary gay life. Actors from the original cast of the stage play recreated their roles for the big screen. The cast is uniformly excellent, but I suppose it might depend on one's impression of gay men. The characters ultimately turn on each other in a way that suggests they're only treating each other in the way society treats them.At least three members of the cast appear to be gay stereotypes: Michael, the pathetic lead character (played by Kenneth Nelson), Larry (played by Keith Prentice), and Emory (played by Cliff Gorman). Some critics may argue that Kenneth Nelson as the self-loathing Michael, Cliff Gorman as the flamboyant flaming Emory, and Leonard Frey as the verbally aggressive Harold are all over-the-top. Ultimately, none of the characters is even remotely appealing as a person, especially the repugnant Leonard Frey as the guest of honor, Harold.That being said, Crowley's scathing dialog is the highlight of the film, drawing each of the distinctive characteristics out of the actors while continuously moving the story forward. Friedkin films nearly the entire film on a single stage set inside Michael's loft. The claustrophobic set works well with the theme of gay men feeling trapped in a society that disallows them to function as accepted members as well as feeling trapped amongst each other at Michael's place. Friedkin pulls the camera in and out and changes his focus on each of the characters in a well-paced manner, and the film never seems as long as its nearly two hour running time. Perhaps it was just enough to get Mart Crowley's play on film at the time, but without the great script, the film would surely have degenerated into a laughable fag-fest of stereotypes that would have seemed even more dated now than some of them do. Crowley attempted to present the various types of gay men in his circle at the time, and several viewers commented these types, while stereotyped at times, are not so far from the truth today still. This is rather unfortunate.The last half of the film imitates the merciless "truth game" scenario of Who's Afraid Of Virginia Woolf? When the guests partake of an unrelenting exercise in disgrace and humiliation orchestrated by Michael the host, Michael's catharsis fails to provoke empathy or sympathy, making him a tragic figure. Obviously, it's not a film for all tastes, but it's a worthwhile film about subject matter nearly impossible to film in a meaningful way at the time. ***1/2 of 4 stars.

A birthday party among gay friends turns into a harrowing emotional experience. Writer Mart Crowley was obviously influenced by Who's Afraid Of Virginia Woolf - a deeper, funnier, and more disturbing play and film.The jokes in The Boys In The Band mostly fall flat, because it's so obvious they were written. The drama is much more effective. Hank and Larry have a realistically complex relationship, and their turn at the game of "telephone" is the film's most moving scene. And the prototypically acid-witted Harold could easily have been a caricature, but somehow Leonard Frey makes every bon mot and theatrical gesture come from a genuine place.Speaking of theatre, I rarely forgot that this film was based on a play, but that didn't prevent it from being engaging. Director William Friedkin is in large part responsible for this. His judicious decisions throughout - from well-chosen reaction shots to a good sense of dramatic timing - facilitate the viewer's emotional involvement.The Boys In The Band has been controversial among the gay community for portraying gay men as psychological disasters. I think this criticism is invalid. First, only one character (Michael) is a true mess. The problems of the others are more ordinary in nature. Second, it happens to be true that being gay is damaging, because from birth, we are taught that homosexuality is wrong. Even if no one says that in so many words, homophobia is impossible to avoid. It's been deemed acceptable behaviour for so long that it's become subtextual in everyday life. This leads to the self-loathing depicted in the movie, and to its too-baldly stated message: "If only we could just not hate ourselves quite so very much."