User reviews

I enjoy horror films. I have watched hundreds of them, everything from the classic 1930s Universal titles like Dracula and Frankenstein, to some of the more modern high-tech efforts. In general they don't scare me. This film does. The amount of ignorance and cruelty portrayed in this film should warrant it an X rating. The truth is, I wasn't even sure at the beginning whether it was for or against its subject matter. You'd think in the 21st century that there would be more members of The Flat Earth Society than people who truly believe you can "pray away the gay." Obviously I'm wrong. In fact, the VP candidate of a major party is a strong advocate for that belief. So I'm not sure what this film really is. Is it a documentary? Is it a melodrama? Is it just a flat-out horror film? Whatever it is, it put me squarely in touch with the amount of ignorance and cruelty that exist in my fellow humans. We criticize other cultures who practice female genital mutilation, yet we - decent Christian folks - do this? If I go see a film about some shape-shifting mutant who eats human brains for dessert, I wouldn't be particularly troubled by it (other than the graphic FX). At the least, I know that there were no shape-shifting mutants in the theatre audience with me. I wish I I had the same confidence about who sat in the theatre with me watching this film on any given night. Folks like this are out there, and the unspeakable pain they subject others to in the name of their religious beliefs is truly frightening. This is a good film, competently cast and acted, and well written and directed. I hope it finds the audience it deserves. I hope it alleviates some pain and suffering somewhere, which is an odd mission for a horror film.

The son of an Arkansas preacher goes to gay conversion therapy, first willingly, then reluctantly. Therapy includes religious (casting out demons), pop-psychoanalytical (family tree, family anger), and behavioral (learning stereotypical male mannerisms). While demanding truth, the conversion leader insists that what his subjects claim to have experienced is insufficient to be truthful.

I have seen movies on this theme before, the most recent being The Miseducation of Cameron Post. However, this hews closely to an autobiography, and at the Toronto International Film Festival, the actual mother and son showed up at the Q+A.

Lucas Hedges and director Joel Edgerton are wonderful as the main protagonists - the son and the therapy leader. Nicole Kidman only plays a supporting role as the mother, still a role bigger than Russell Crowe as the loving but misguided father. This is very much an advocacy film against gay conversion, and has the star power to get to a general audience.

This adaptation takes a lot of liberties with the story from the book, which is certainly common enough and can lead to a more entertaining film. However, in this case, the seminars seemed facile and facilitators were caricatures, almost laughable rather than menacing. It's much more clear in the book that the point of conversion therapy is to crush participants' self-esteem and replace it with a slavish adherence to fundamentalist ideology. It is brainwashing, intended to destroy independence of mind. The "therapy" is truly scary and I don't think this was captured well in the film.

The other aspect of the book that is mostly missing from the movie is Garrard Conley's interior dialogue. The plot of the book is actually pretty thin; Garrard's self reflections and his insightful portrayals of the other participants make his book far more moving than the film.

And finally, the film ends with Jared's confrontation with his father. The movie makes it seem like the cowed teen is finally standing up to his tormentor, the author of his tragedy. In the book, I never perceived that Garrard ever views his father with anything other than love and respect, as a person of sincere and deeply held views. His book is dedicated to his parents. You wouldn't know that from the final scene in the film.

Boy Erased is the adaptation of Garrard Conley's memoirs published in 2016. Jared is nineteen years old when his parents learn about his homosexuality. He is then taken, more or less voluntarily, to a conversion center as part of a therapy called 'Source' during which he is subjected to a veritable mental torture to force him to change and correct his alleged deviance, within a childish and humiliating environment.

It is overall excellent, with a small damper: throughout the movie, all adult men are systematically as religious as obtuse. Jared will be accepted and understood by only one person: his mother. This context is excessively negative and the movie probably loses some credibility. Unless it's unfortunately the reality ... That being said, it's clearly a good movie.

Moreover, the author Garrard Conley is 34 in 2019, we can legitimately deduce that the film takes place in 2004. So, very recently, almost yesterday. Personally, I was absolutely unaware of such practices. Incredible and appalling!

Boy Erased could've easily been a seriously impactful & powerful film - considering the subject matter & its focus on the horrors of conversion therapy in the US - but it sadly lacks the emotional punch its trailers seemed to suggest it possesses; if anything, they were far more moving than the actual movie itself... It's littered with astonishingly bad, clichéd, cheesy lines of dialogue; ill conceived, constructed & directed scenes & a story which seems to wander aimlessly for nearly 2 hours - I've no idea if the blame lies with amateur writing or the director who failed to realise the potential in the concept / story. The performances are also frustratingly underwhelming & Troye Sivan's appearance acts as nothing more than a glorified cameo; he's usually seen looking bored in the middle of a panning shot depicting people's reactions, reflecting how I felt while watching throughout - obviously only there to promote his new music. Its only minor success I feel the compulsion to acknowledge is in capturing the absurdity & ridiculousness of people's religious practices & beliefs - & though the acting didn't really sell these sequences or make me believe they were real enough to emotionally invest myself in the events as they unfolded, it's worth commendation for the sheer bravery of an attempt.

As a parent of a gay man, I believe that this is a must-see film for all parents. It's a stark reminder of what was once widely believed (and sadly still is by too many) about homosexuality. It is said that when a person come out about their sexuality, they risk losing everything they have - their families, their friends, their homes... When I learned this, I realized that my son went through the same horrific fears a he prepared to come out. No one should have to endure that kind of suffering. I hope this film helps people realize that we have to continue to banish the old, harmful, and false beliefs that our society held. Amazing accomplishment by Joel Edgerton.

Boy Erased is based on the memoir of Garrard Conley with the same name. We follow his journey from when he started questioning his sexuality, to his time in conversion therapy and what comes next thereafter. It stars Lucas Hedges (the poster boy for the suburban teenager, e.g. Lady Bird, Three Billboards outside Ebbing, Missouri), singer-actor Troye Sivan, Joe Alwyn (The Favourite, but more famously known for now as Taylor Swift's beau) and good friends Nicole Kidman and Russell Crowe who both needs no introduction.

Author Conley declined to convert his memoir to the film because he felt ill-equipped to do so, and Joel Edgerton, for the most part, did an okay job. I'm curious if the movie did justice to the book because while it was good, it wasn't as hard-hitting as one is inclined to expect from an LGBTQIA+-themed movie. Maybe it doesn't have to be, maybe we're just wired to expect controversy then engage in long-hours' worth of debate, trying to raise consciousness and empathy for this sector of society that continues to ask for it. This movie just quietly slips by, just enough to make you ask questions on where you are on the kindness spectrum. Whatever the effect is, the hope is that we all become like that doctor that helped our main character in her own little way. She explained she held religion, on one hand, and science on the other. Religion (the organization, not to be confused with God) does not have the answer to everything, nor does Science. You can't deny one over the other. You can't say a sweeping statement about how God works in mysterious ways, letting someone die of illness when there is a cure that can be given by Science.

There's a scene in the movie where it says one is being selfish by continuing to sin just because you're gay. We were raised by a society that did not know how to look at the LGBTQIA+. We followed what was the first one to talk about it which was the Bible. The question is, how come we keep clinging to one or two sentences in the Old Testament that looks down upon them when there are hundreds of statements in the New Testament about loving unconditionally. So, imagine someone confused, looking for understanding and acceptance from the outside world because he hasn't found it in himself yet, and the world's response is to disown, to harass and to become violent towards them. Did we really expect those negative responses to change a person for the BETTER? Did we forget that violence, begets violence? So instead of making the world a better place, the Bible by way of how people interpreted it, contributed to the damaged society that we now live in. The only hope is that we're becoming better as each new generation comes in. Whether we're in the right direction is still up for debate. For years we have tried discrimination that has led to suicide, depression, abuse and many more. Let's see where love and understanding will take us.

As a gay man myself, this movie made me sooooo angry. Not because it wasn't made well, but it brought everything back up to the surface that I thought I was past. From growing up religious and believing that there was something wrong with him to the conversations he has with his father... It was like watching my life in a movie. Anyways, I highly recommend this movie, it's difficult to watch but it shows the reality that so many of us go through and are afraid to tell anyone.

The primary intention going into 'Boy Erased' was to see if Lucas Hedges could solidify himself as an unquestionably talented actor and--for the first time--carry a film as its leading man.

He wasn't very compelling in 'Manchester By the Sea' (despite an Oscar nomination!). Alternatively, he was terrific in 'Ladybird' and 'Mid90s.' So what's the final verdict after seeing his latest performance? Hedges is undoubtedly a top-notch actor and his recent string of well-developed roles in equally fantastic films is no fluke.

Everything else about 'Boy Erased' is a bit more pedestrian than we had hoped, but we still remain appreciative of the fact that Joel Edgerton was able to bring such a important project to fruition as it's writer, director, and supporting actor. For those who really enjoyed this film, we also recommend seeing 'The Miseducation of Cameron Post,' which is the better version of the two.

BOY ERASED is a true memoir written by Gerrad Conley about his experiences with conversion therapy - that church oriented isolation of gay men and women intent on restoring them back from their sinful ways and Satan's influence. As adapted for the screen by Joel Edgerton (who also directs an plays a very prominent role of the man who is in charge of the conversion school), the film is intense and revelatory about a near cult-like 'business' of correcting the 'disease of homosexuality.'

As the synopsis states, This film tells the courageous story of Jared Eamons (Lucas Hedges), the son of a Baptist pastor Marshall Eamons (Russell Crowe) in a small American town, who must overcome the fallout of being outed to his parents - his mother Nancy Eamons (Nicole Kidman) is supportive of her husband's response. His parents struggle with reconciling their love for their son with their beliefs. Fearing a loss of family, friends, and community, Jared is pressured into attending a conversion therapy program. While there, Jared comes into conflict with its leader Victor Sykes (Joel Edgerton) and begins his journey to finding his own voice and accepting his true self.

The sessions in the therapy program dominate the film, with flashbacks of Jared in college and his rare gay acting out episodes with Henry (Joe Alwyn) and Xavier (Theodore Pellerin), misconstrued by invasive research by Sykes and his entourage. The fellow gay people are very well portrayed by Troye Sivan, Britton Sear, Emily Hinkler among others and one of the more realistic - about LGBTQ issues - characters, a Dr. Muldoon, is beautifully portrayed by Cherry Jones.

Lucas Hedges, Nicole Kidman, Russell Crowe and Joel Edgerton are all outstanding. The jolts of the film are many - including the facts about the characters as they are living now - and it is not an easy film to experience the truths about conversion therapy. But this is not only a fine film but also an important one for the public to learn about a process that still exists in some states.

Boy Erased is one of those films it seems almost churlish to criticise for its formal aspects, given that it obviously comes from a place of deep respect, has genuinely laudable intentions, and says something undeniably important. Written and directed by Joel Edgerton (who also stars and produces), the film is based on Garrard Conley's Boy Erased: A Memoir of Identity, Faith, and Family (2016), the true story of his experiences with conversation therapy in Arkansas in 2004. In a political climate where progressive thinking seems to be backsliding more and more, given the regressive beliefs of many of those in power, one should celebrate a film which highlights the barbaric concept of enforcing heteronormative social mores by way of psychological, and often physical, abuse. However, simply because a film has good intentions, it doesn't necessarily follow that it's a good film, and Boy Erased is such an example; a film whose aims can be praised, but whose flaws cannot be ignored. Whereas The Miseducation of Cameron Post (2018) approached similar subject matter from a perspective of irreverence and satire, Boy Erased is far more self-serious. And because of this, and its insistence on keeping the audience emotionally distanced from the characters, it remains underwhelming, never getting anywhere near the kind of emotional highs and lows one might anticipate from such inherently sensitive material.

Set in 2004, the film begins as 19-year-old Jared Eamons (Lucas Hedges) attends his first day at Love in Action, a conversion therapy program in Arkansas. The son of Southern Baptist preacher and car salesman Marshall (Russell Crowe) and his wife Nancy (Nicole Kidman), Jared is initially looking forward to the program, keen to be purged of his homosexual impulses. As he settles in, the backstory of how he came to be signed up unfolds achronologically, intercutting his increasingly unsettling time at Love in Action with incidents such as his first homosexual experience at college, with his running-partner, Henry (Joe Alwyn); how his parents found out about his homosexuality; and Marshall's decision to send him to therapy.

Offering a window into the world of conversion therapy, the film shows how Love in Action preach such things as "you cannot be born homosexual. It's a choice" and "God will not love you the way that you are". At the same time, the students are tutored in "masculine" physicality (don't cross your legs when seated, don't slouch, always shake hands firmly), discouraged from anything that deviates from heteronormative behaviour (Jared has pages from a notebook of short stories torn out and discarded), and advised on what not to read (when the program's lead therapist Sykes (Edgerton) learns Jared's college course includes such titles as The Picture of Dorian Gray and Lolita, he suggests that Jared shouldn't return to his studies, committing instead to Love in Action full-time).

Although the film admirably resists the urge to vilify Marshall or Nancy, even Love in Action itself, Edgerton is unequivocal in condemning a system that compartmentalises anything with which it disagrees as "taboo". Love in Action is predicated on making young people feel guilty regarding the "sin" of their sexual impulses, whilst at the same time reinforcing the infallibility of church doctrine. This instils a deep-rooted sense of torment for young people who are already confused about what they are feeling - if a person's predilections are directly in contradistinction to church dogma, then such predilections must obviously be immoral and against God.

In terms of acting, as Jared, Lucas Hedges has a difficult task, playing a character that becomes increasingly withdrawn and emotionally shut down as the film progresses. From the very beginning, Jared is somewhat distant, making it difficult to determine if his muted emotions are part of Hedges's performance or a weakness in that performance. That it could be a weakness can be seen if one compares his performance to that of Xavier Dolan (as fellow attendee Jon), who exudes desperation and existential panic every second he's on screen. Of course, Jared is very much a passive character, with only one notable example of him asserting his own agency and breaking through the emotional paralysis which has stifled the character (and the actor). When this scene does come, it's quite powerful, with Hedges playing it in such a way as to suggest the release of long-gestating pressure. On the other hand, in a scene where he screams and throws rocks at a glass-encased picture of a male model, the performance comes across as a performance and doesn't ring emotionally true.

Kidman plays Nancy as a woman who very much subscribes to the notion that the man is the head of the household, accepting Marshall's decision to send Jared to therapy without openly questioning him. However, it's obvious from the start that she's not entirely comfortable. Later, as she starts to learn some of what is going on behind the closed doors of Love in Action, her attitude becomes more and more adversarial. She has a particularly good scene where she finally persuades Jared to allow her to read Love in Action's manifesto, and is equal parts shocked by the content and amused by the spelling mistakes (she finds one particular reference to "Almighty Dog" especially funny). As for Marshall, instead of playing him him as the token villain, Crowe plays him as fundamentally conflicted. He loves his son deeply and is devastated by what has happened. He genuinely wants to help Jared, and even more so, he wants to understand, but is prevented from doing so by a lifetime of faith and his absolute conviction of his own moral certitude. Crowe's quiet and restrained performance elicit a degree of sympathy for a man who is clearly out of his depth, unable to overcome the indoctrination which is now making a relationship with his son an impossibility.

However, despite the strong performances from both Kidman and Crowe, the film fails to depict the texture and nuances of the family dynamic. All three family members are, to a certain extent, types rather than fully fleshed out individuals. Along the same lines, none of the Love in Action students are granted any kind of arc or personality beyond that of the archetype they represent and the film often falls back on the generic tropes of the pseudo-prison film - hypocritical authority figures; a sadistic authority figure who is abusive beyond the parameters of the program; the "inmate" on the verge of complete psychological breakdown; the focal character resisting the mandates of the institution. Regarding Sykes, a postscript describing his own sexual preference casts his character in a completely different light, and would have made for fascinating material had it been incorporated into the narrative. Granted, this is Jared's story, not Sykes's, but that doesn't change the fact that more information on his background would have been very welcome.

It's also somewhat problematic that the only homosexual sexual activity depicted in the film is a rape. It's a powerful scene in and of itself, brilliantly shot in a single static take which forces the viewer to watch what is happening unmediated by editing or blocking. However, it's unsettling that Edgerton never shows us any consensual and pleasurable homosexual content. True, the film is not about sexual activity, so to only show one scene of such activity is fair enough in theory. But it remains problematic that the only time we see a homosexual character acting on their impulses is a rape scene. What is one supposed to take from that? Presumably, the scene is supposed to balance against a scene where Jared spends the night with art student Xavier (Théodore Pellerin) without becoming physical. However, this scene is given far less time than the rape, and the character who rapes Jared is given far more characterisation than Xavier, creating a noticeable imbalance.

Another problem is that, as a whole, it's an extremely cold film, remaining always distanced, either unwilling or unable to really get into the fear and psychological trauma inflicted upon the attendees. Perhaps Edgerton was trying to avoid exploitative or manipulative emotion, but whatever the case, he has made a film that is itself emotionless, undercutting the harrowing story it tells by always keeping the audience one or two steps removed. Jared, in particular, is never depicted with anything resembling emotional specificity. We never feel his torment or loneliness, with his character depicted only to the extent necessary to drive the plot, and far too distanced for him to emotionally impact the audience.

Boy Erased is a laudable film dealing with an important subject, but it's also quite a poor film, with a disjointed narrative and paper-thin characters, redeemed only by fine performances from Kidman and Crowe. The biggest problem is that it insists on pushing the audience away, presenting the story clinically rather than emotionally. Edgerton's even-handedness is certainly to be commended, as is his refusal to cast the parents, or even Love in Action itself, as the villains, and his avoidance of emotional manipulation is praiseworthy up to a point. However, there comes a moment in the film where you realise that you're as close to these characters as you're going to get, yet they have still only been summarised. The film will probably go on to be an important document in the ongoing attempt to eradicate this cruel practice. It will probably open the eyes of a lot of people who didn't know much about this subject. It is well-intentioned, and comes from a place of compassion and respect. It's just not an especially good film.

I struggled with fanatical religious family members as a gay person so I can totally relate to this film. It isn't so accurate in my opinion and obviously hollywood-ized but still does a decent job.

I saw this film especially for Lucas Hedges. And, yes, after the end of Boy Erased, this motif was the fair one. A film about family and fears / obey/ shame of parents about their son sexual orientation. The conversion therapy, so familiar from other films about same subject. And a real case inspiring the movie script. But , in high measure, that are only details. The film is good for the fine performances and for a story sustain by small pieces defining large slices of loneliness near isolation. And, no doubts, Lucas Hedges is more than a young good actor. So, maybe a warning, manifesto or confession/ testimony. Not the film is remarkable but the pieces constructing it.

How can a movie with a great subject matter and top-notch actors like Nicole Kidman and Russell Crowe be so lackluster and tedious. Really disappointing but kudos to the young star who did a great job

Never have I been so uncomfortable so long a period of time. Normally movies have a scene that shifts into the distressing/uncomfortable and you're like "wow, what a great scene."

That's the whole movie. Except for about 3 light moments scattered throughout the subject matter of conversion therapy and the environment our protagonist Jared is literally TRAPPED in is awful. The homophobia and control that the Love In Action conversion program enforces over the poor souls inducted into this brainwashing camp becomes increasingly extreme. The way it causes distress and breaks people is shown differently through the various side characters and none of it is good. This is a tragic story of the real abuse of LGBT people happening in the US (and gay conversion therapy isn't explicitly banned everywhere in Aus either).

I was on the edge of my seat, deeply breathing, sighing, putting my hands to my face in awe and distress, the whole way through. Just when I thought this movie couldn't get more uncomfortable it finds a new height.

It achieves all this through plot and intimate performances. Everything else is so stripped back and naturalistic. There's barely any music, or at least not very noticeable background music (with the exception of the song Revelation by Troye Sivan/Jonsi, which will likely vie for a nomination for best original song). It looks like they almost didn't have a lighting crew for more of the film, instead relying on house lighting for a dark, moody, or contrasting aesthetic. The whole thing feels not like a stylistic piece of cinema, but a realistic look at a person's life. Which is the point given it is inspired by the real experiences of someone who suffered through the abuse of conversion therapy. This film is so well put together.

I never want to watch it again. Which is weird for a film I love so much. But this movie is harrowing. It haunts me. I don't get very emotional over film but this subject and execution was just so deeply uncomfortable for such a long period of time that I don't feel the need to ever subject myself to that again. Which is a great recommendation if you want something to make you feel sad/distressed for nearly 2 hours straight.

It was a bit boring, half way through I started looking at my phone as it didn't hold my interest

It is scary what we do to ourselves and our families. This is a dramatization of a real life horror. Well written, well acted and well directed.

Good story, much-needed topic, phenomenal acting. The way Jared feels about the conversion program changes subtly but gradually, and it bursts out as climax. The only problem is that 'Boy Erased' is too dry and placid for me. It is not captivating or charismatic enough to be a 'great' movie. I know the director and writers intended to discuss conversion therapy program and how it affects vulnerable teens especially. However, what hits me more is later part of Jared and his relationship with his parents. His mother finally stepping up for her son is touching and emotional; his strained relationship with his pastor father is very realistic.

Firstly, Joel continues to inspire me. Each movie he stars, writes, directs only gets better. I love this man's work & he is definitely underrated, which is what i've been saying for a while now.

Boy Erased (2018), based on a memoir of the same name, touches on important issues that are relevant to today's society. It puts forth an important message which definitely leaves with you after the movie. Without giving anything away, there is one scene in particular that was quite shocking, & I wasn't expecting it. It was good shock value, but it could have been fleshed out more directly, in a way. Nonetheless, the acting was top notch from all of the main cast. I expected nothing less from Nicole Kidman, Russell Crowe and Joel, but also Lucas Hedges, whom i've become a fan of, the more I see his movies. Lucas will definitely be going more places. His nomination for Manchester By The Sea (2016) was well deserved & a sign for many more things to come. I'm also looking forward to his other projects like Mid90s (2018) & Ben Is Back (2018).

In my opinion, the cinematography is done so like your average drama movies. The cinematographer is Eduard Grau, who also worked on other projects with Joel - The Gift (2015) & Gringo (2018). Moreover, also Buried (2010), A Single Man (2009) & Her (2013). A Single Man was beautifully done compared to this, as I felt that more could've been done in terms of depicting emotion with certain shots and scenes. But nonetheless, it doesn't take away too much, if anything, from the film.

This was, as a whole a good movie. However, I feel it could've benefitted from being longer (despite the almost 2 hour run time). I haven't read the book, but being at the Sydney Q&A with Joel made me wonder what he wished he had adapted from the book which he left out, or if there were any deleted scenes he wish he'd kept in the movie. There are other things I felt could've been improved upon in this movie, hence a 9/10, although, those are not too major. Overall, it is well worth the watch!

Thanks to anyone who took the time to read this :-)

PS. Unrelated, but ALMOST got a pic with Joel, hahaha! *internal crying* (jokes!)

• 9/10.

While Boy Erased tells you about the sickening gay conversion therapies happening in southern USA it often seems uninspiring and dull. 114 minutes runtime feels really lengthy and some editing should've been done to trim it. The performances were good and overall its a decent film which you can watch once.

If that matters to you. The movie is a very shallow, over dramatic, over hyped, LOOSELY BASED representation of the memoir no doubt aiming to once again, pump up the LGBTQ+ community. The book being more about the internal spiritual struggle of Garrad - the struggle between wanting to love his family and God and cling to what he's known his whole life as a preacher's kid, and consistently denying this strong desire of his until he ultimately gives in and accepts it for what it is. Its tragic and beautiful at the same time - but hey, I guess Hollywood got it's big ex-gay therapy movie, right? Just another plot for them to run wild with. SO many scenes misplaced, omitted, added and just all over the place that I can hardly call this a book to movie adaptation. If you want a decent drama with great performances to watch then, sure, check this out. But don't go looking for too much truth (or context, for that matter) in it - read the book instead.