Cr. Scott Everett White/NETFLIX ©2020
Tuc Watkins, Robin de Jesus and Matt Bomer all hit a new level of street cred with the 2018 revival of Mart Crowley’s The Boys in the Band.
The historic play follows a group of gay men over the course of a party in a single evening in 1968. In those days, of course, homosexuality was still kept behind closed doors. The alcoholic Michael (Jim Parsons) hosts the party, a birthday celebration for his close friend Harold (Zachary Quinto). As the evening drags on, tempers explode, threatening to shatter the longtime circle of friends.
Now he three actors reach a culmination of that work: the new film version of The Boys in the Band lands on Netflix September 30.
We chatted up Watkins, de Jesus and Bomer about their characters, the issues the play addresses, and the first-ever all gay cast of a motion picture. The Boys in the Band lands on Netflix September 30.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
masterwill7
I’ve just seen it, but it’s not strong, and then I am very mild… haha Did see a naked Matt Bomer though, it makes it worth every minute of it! 😉
Dick Gozinia
I’ve seen the original 3 times. This new version is excellent, but for some reason I found it less believable than the original, maybe because it didn’t seem like 1968 with all of current cast. Nowadays, it’s hard to believe that anyone would want to be friends with such a sad, angry alcoholic as Michael. It’s also less believable that everyone would stay at that party after Michael started insulting his guests, after Alan punched Emory and certainly not when Michael suggests that awful game. In 2020, I think most guests would have left at various points in the evening as things got uglier.
Dymension
Think about it though, if you were gay in 1968 those were probably your only “friends.”
Joshooeerr
That’s not necessarily true. Even if you lived in a city where there were gay bars, many gays didn’t feel comfortable going to them. Some feared being publicly identified and losing a job, or simply being arrested in what were sometimes frequent raids. Or beaten leaving one by gay bashers. So there was a lot more private socialising, and a greater likelihood of only knowing and socialising with other gays through a cluster of local friends and acquaintances. If anything, with the rise of Grindr and similar apps, a lot of gay guys today are probably much more isolated.
boufano
Thoroughly enjoyed it though of course, it can’t be compared with the original. The performances were all noteworthy with huge kudos to Jim Parsons. He devoured the role and Robin de Jesus was also terrific. One of my favorite side-stories to the original is that the actor who played Emory in the original Off-Broadway production and subsequent film, Cliff Gorman, was quite the stand-up guy. When the actor who played Cowboy, Robert LaTourneaux fell ill with AIDS in the early 80s, it was Cliff Gorman and his wife who took him in when he had nowhere else to go and nursed him through till he passed away. Extraordinary humanity.
Jeduc
This is an extremely unpleasant relationship between “friends”. Nothing healthy as friendship and less as a reflection not even partial of most gay groups. To much bitterness.
Jeduc
Tonys as validation of a bad stereotype?, I do not believe in its validity.
Josh447
I watched the show last night and found it to be a seriously deep and moving piece. I thought each character had its own gay issues except maybe for Charlie Carver’s hooker character. He seemed the most emotionally clean and free from projection and depression about being gay.
Exquisite movie. I highly recommend it
JRamonMc
I know I’m the acception here, but I hated every minute of this self loathing storyline. Acting was exceptional though.
Donston
The movie still felt very stage bound. And I just don’t know if this type of story told in that way is needed in today’s times. However, it was almost as well done as the material would allow. Parsons’ performance was the highlight.
Lilopt
I know I will be dating myself, but I was the translator for Portugal of the original film – we use subtitles. And I remember I had a riotous time translating the very camp oneliners into Portuguese… camp(?). Anyway, what I am trying to say is that the play, and the film, have aged immensely! What was daring 40 odd years ago no longer is, and I am certain that the new generations will be baffled by sentences like “If we could only stop hating ourselves…” There is a huge gap – an abyss – between what life was then and now: gay marriage? adoption? gay pride? All this is to say that I really do not see the point of this remake! And I sincerely believe that the original was better. But that may be just me.
davey14
I like all the versions. For some reason the Netflix one reminded me of a gay “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?”
Ginger Tom
Yes, that’s exactly what I thought when I saw the original film.
Josh447
Noone peeled paint better than Elizabeth Taylor.
trsxyz
I’ve seen both versions of the film. It struck me how closely the remake resembled the original movie. Scenes, costuming, camera movement and overall cinematography… pretty much the same. Perhaps that’s to be expected of a period piece (and as has been mentioned above, the whole affair is rather “stage bound”). Has it’s moments. But it’s always baffled me why our community should be supportive of a play & film that present such unflattering portrayals.
natriley
LGBTQ liberation has made this movie difficult. I’ve had the pleasure of seeing Boys in its original Broadway production, the revival and on film. What people failed to understand is Matt Crowley depicts people dropping their mask. In ’68 people pretended to be straight all day long and it was rude not to do that. The harsh criticism and nasty remarks exchanged were sighs of relief. We did not criticize people for misbehavior the way it is normal today. What we shared was a common pain for some misery for others relief and a source of humor. What is experienced as rude or impossible behavior was just the gamut of behavior gay men experienced. Boys is about a bittersweet joy.
Donston
I don’t feel this is anywhere near a great film. And the source material has aspects that haven’t aged all that well. But one of the reasons this story is still remembered and still getting adapted is because of its unabashed presentation of flawed, contradictory people. It’s un-compromised, confrontational. It isn’t caught up in trying to palatable to “straights” or trying to be “good ‘queer’ representation”. That doesn’t make it great. But that type of fearlessness is missing today.
adamwest
I would really love to see this concept SET in Todays times ,,this story has so many undertones still left un answered was the straight guy actually straight or was that the reason he left his wife ? did she know about his affair with Stuart ? was there actually an affair ? what was the tension between Micheal and Harold had they been past lovers ? ……A mopdern day version would have to update the characters maybe add a Drag queen and a Bear
Wheelerman
I saw this revival on Broadway and enjoyed it very much.
Watched the movie today and enjoyed it very much, also. It is a period piece. It was well acted by all.
My only issue was a contunuity one with Andrew Rannels big scene where his hair kept changing. It was down in his eyes, then next cut, was combed back, then next cut was down in his eyes, then combed back.. It was distracting to me. Did the film editors not see this???
Vera Delmar
While watching this movie about these friends conversing and socializing I was thinking about how my gay friends are when we get together at parties or social gatherings, and noting that things are indeed different today than they were in 1968. The big difference is that for the most part we all love who we are and what we do, and how we relate to each other. Furthermore, and speaking for myself, I think our lives today are more mundane to a certain degree, and not as dramatic and self-loathing as they were portrayed in the movie for these friends.
Cam
To me it makes a huge difference to have the new film played by a bunch of out and proud actors, rather than the original where the actors were straight or closeted.
It becomes less self hating and more of a period piece or a snapshot of a time. I thought they did a great job.
Geo
I enjoyed the movie for the most part but I also kept asking myself why anyone would stick around for such verbal abuse. I thought the acting was strong with the exception of Zachary Quinto. I found his portrayal to be very one dimensional and grating on the nerves. I normally love all his work but was disappointed by this performance.