The Boys in the Band (2020): A Review

 

THE BOYS IN THE BAND (2020)

The bitch (boys) is back. The remake of The Boys in the Band attempts to outdo the original film from fifty years earlier. In some ways better than the 1970 adaptation, in some ways weaker, will The Boys in the Band stand on its own or pale next to its counterpart?

New York City, 1968. Michael (Jim Parsons) is getting things ready for his frenemy Harold's birthday party. Arriving early is his friend Donald (Matt Bomer), with whom he is having a casual relationship. Michael gets a surprise call from his college friend Alan (Brian Hutchinson), who tearfully asks to come over. Reluctantly, Michael agrees to see him for a quick drink during the party even though Alan is straight and unaware of Michael's homosexuality.

Soon the other guests start arriving. There's Emory (Robin de Jesus), overtly flamboyant. There's Hank and Larry (Tuc Watkins and Andrew Rannells), a couple who are going through a rough patch. Bernard (Michael Benjamin Washington), the only black man at the party, brings some books for Donald to enjoy. At first, Alan calls again to say he can't make it, and the party commences. To everyone's surprise, Emory's gift to Harold of street kid Cowboy (Charlie Carver) arrives early. To everyone's horror, Alan arrives after all.

He does not say what happened to cause his breakdown. He also takes umbrage at Emory's suggestion that he is closeted, causing a fight to break out. Into this comes the guest of honor, Harold (Zachary Quinto), as bitchy and pithy as they come. With the party pretty much in shambles, they still manage a nice meal until they get rained out. Now, an increasingly drunk Michael, who has fallen off the wagon due to the overall stress and chaos of the night, forces everyone to play a simple party game.

They have to call the one person whom they have truly loved. Alan wants to leave but Michael won't let him. As the various guests make their calls, secrets are revealed until Michael gets confronted by both Harold and Michael himself. Will everyone get out in one piece emotionally or even physically?

At another time, I will do a comparison between the 1970 and 2020 version of Mart Crowley's play (which here, he coadapted with Ned Martel). One thing that both versions have in common is that every actor who appeared in the Broadway version of The Boys in the Band recreated their roles for the film adaptation. The film even has the same director from the Broadway play: Joe Mantello.

Was Mantello the right choice to direct the film version? I'm leaning towards no. He did a good job with most of his cast, though to be fair he had worked with them for months on Broadway. What makes me lean no is that at least early on, Mantello loved moving the camera. I also felt some of the flashback scenes, particularly with Bernard's reminiscence of a one-night stand with a high school friend, were too artsy for my tastes. Add to that the idea that they were a bit distracting, and I felt overall unnecessary. This remake runs a mere two minutes longer than the original film yet felt longer. I think the reason for that was, in part, due to those flashbacks. I get the aim was to make it more cinematic, but it did not quite work for me.

One stumbling moment was when Donald and Larry see each other at the party. Perhaps it was meant to be clear that they had also been sexually involved. However, with that being the case, the revelation of their dalliance does not have the impact and shock that I think it should have had. 

In terms of performances, I think they were hit and miss. A standout was de Jesus as Emory, who was flamboyant without being unbearably silly. His monologue about his great lost love was quite moving. Watkins and Rannells did not convince me as lovers caught in a tiff. Instead, they were actors speaking lines. Their fight over a menage a trois as a compromise for Larry's need for sexual freedom was rough to watch.

Carver as Cowboy and Bomer as Donald were fine in every sense of the word (audiences of both genders got an appreciation for the physical beauty of Matt Bomer). I also think that both Parsons and Quinto were trying too hard to be both dramatic and sarcastic. Neither was terrible, but I never thought I was watching two people who both loved and hated each other. Quinto's final takedown of Michael seemed, again, like he was delivering a monologue versus Harold speak almost spontaneously from his heart. Parsons worked hard to be the mean, drunk, bitchy Michael to others, and he did have some good moments. Other times, though, Michael's anger felt forced. Had I been Alan in this production, I would have pushed Mikey out of the way and left.

The Boys in the Band feels a bit like a period piece. I am aware that it is set over fifty years ago. However, despite it being a relatively new production, there is still something almost creaky about its presentation. By no means a horrible film, with some good performances in it, The Boys in the Band still feels long. I might not turn down the invite to Harold's party, but I am not enthusiastic about it either.

DECISION: C+