What makes Boy A so compelling is the acting (or perhaps the illusion of NON-acting might be more appropriate).
Andrew Garfield, Peter Mullan and Katie Lyons, the three principal characters in the film, are so believable that they become 'invisible' -- they 'disappear' -- as actors. Many directors have said this kind of immersion into a role is the ultimate compliment actors can pay to them.
Boy A is an anti-Hollywood film, in that it eschews the usual glamour in favour of REAL people. Garfield is on the wrong side of plain-looking, Mullan is a balding, paternal working-class stiff ridden with familial conflicts, and Lyons is a plump, anti-glamorous non-heroine who is pitch-perfect in her role. Garfield, as the well-meaning young man desperately seeking a second chance in life, offers a towering performance.
It's been awhile since I have seen such a powerful film. It asks the central question: is it possible for society to offer redemption to a 24-year-old rehabilitated man who 14 years before -- at the age of 10 --helped to murder a 10-year-old girl? This film examines the question with such a profound depth of feeling that if you let your mind wander a moment, you might think you're in the midst of a documentary.
Boy A won a cartload of awards (direction, acting, writing, photography) from BAFTA, BAFTA Scotland, the Berlin International Film Festival, and the Irish Film and TV Awards. Last night (22Feb09), the Academy Awards were announced, with all the usual bumph for movies that were cynically (and deliberately) made for Oscar nominations. If the Academy Awards REALLY considered films for their sheer power, cinematic skill and philosophical point of view, Boy A deserved serious consideration.
Director John Crowley, screenwriter Mark O'Rowe, and a terrific ensemble of actors deserve great credit. This is a splendid film.
Andrew Garfield, Peter Mullan and Katie Lyons, the three principal characters in the film, are so believable that they become 'invisible' -- they 'disappear' -- as actors. Many directors have said this kind of immersion into a role is the ultimate compliment actors can pay to them.
Boy A is an anti-Hollywood film, in that it eschews the usual glamour in favour of REAL people. Garfield is on the wrong side of plain-looking, Mullan is a balding, paternal working-class stiff ridden with familial conflicts, and Lyons is a plump, anti-glamorous non-heroine who is pitch-perfect in her role. Garfield, as the well-meaning young man desperately seeking a second chance in life, offers a towering performance.
It's been awhile since I have seen such a powerful film. It asks the central question: is it possible for society to offer redemption to a 24-year-old rehabilitated man who 14 years before -- at the age of 10 --helped to murder a 10-year-old girl? This film examines the question with such a profound depth of feeling that if you let your mind wander a moment, you might think you're in the midst of a documentary.
Boy A won a cartload of awards (direction, acting, writing, photography) from BAFTA, BAFTA Scotland, the Berlin International Film Festival, and the Irish Film and TV Awards. Last night (22Feb09), the Academy Awards were announced, with all the usual bumph for movies that were cynically (and deliberately) made for Oscar nominations. If the Academy Awards REALLY considered films for their sheer power, cinematic skill and philosophical point of view, Boy A deserved serious consideration.
Director John Crowley, screenwriter Mark O'Rowe, and a terrific ensemble of actors deserve great credit. This is a splendid film.