MovieChat Forums > The Boys of St. Vincent (1992) Discussion > What did you think?

What did you think?

posted 19 years ago by TracesOfLove
13 replies | jump to latest

I just rented this on Netflix. I saw it at a friend's house a couple of years ago but never got a chance to see the second part. The first part is a masterpiece that could stand on its own. You wouldn't even know it was a made- for-TV movie! The second part does look more like a TV movie. But although it's weaker than the first, it's still good to watch. Especially for Czerny's performance! His scene telling the psychiatrist of his childhood almost makes me understand him bewilderingly enough! And that's saying something when you think about part one! Another thing that really surprised me was reading the user comments on here. Not one bad review! I thought this movie would get pounded for those scenes with the kids. Even I was shocked! Because I don't remember seeing any movie before this one that got so close to pedophilia before! AND SHOWN on public TV! I guess most people who would complain wouldn't have seen it. But I believe 5 of the 7 positive comments were from Americans. We're probably the only six Americans who can handle it! LOL! Seven counting my girlfriend who also loved it!

If I had a nickel for every cigarette your mom smoked, I'd be dead.

[–] nyy203551 19 years ago

Count me in as number eight. This movie will always be one of the most shocking films I've ever seen. I saw it when I was relatively young, around twelve, I guess. I think it's an important subject that should be talked about more. Sexual abuse and pedophilia are things that happen more often than I'd like to believe, and stories, facts, movies and books should come out.

The acting was outstanding all around in this movie. I was a little surprised at how the acting was far better in the first one, though. Czerny did a magnificent job in both, and I really felt bad for the guy at the end of Part 2, which is amazing in itself since I really hated him in the first part. Morina did a wonderful job, too. I have a respect for any child that can portray a character that is abused. It's a heavy subject, but someone's gotta do it to get awareness out there.

[–] JoeyJoeJoeJr 19 years ago

I'm from the town where this movie was shot and based on, St. John's. Some of my friends were in the movie, though in small roles.

It's still one of the most devastating movies I've ever seen, even to this day. I guess it's probably because of how raw and real the story is, and how some of the poor kids involved, though dramatized for the movie, still live in my hometown to this day.

But yeah, Czerny is amazing in this movie. I almost feel for him by the end. Almost.

[–] screenwriter_rick 19 years ago

I purchased the dvd of this film after having been told by a friend about the powerful acting within the frames of this small-screen production.

What an incredible film. I applaud director John Smith for this effort. This entire issue of child molestation has become rampant in the United States, particularily with the Catholic Church.... yet to think that this movie was filmed 13 years ago! Had this film been made available to the United States major networks (without editing - - uh huh... not in America), I am certain that the exposing of paedophile priests in such a stark, outright manner, could very well have prevented the victimization of many other young boys during the 1990's and at the turn of the century. (There was an American made-for-tv movie depicting the abuse of a young boy by a Catholic leader, in the 1990 film "Judgment", but it doesn't even begin to compare with "The Boys of St. Vincent").

I agree with the previous comment, that it is indeed remarkable to see all positive comments about this film. Perhaps some may think the portrayel of abuse is too vivid, or the scenes of nudity involving these young boys.... but it is obvious that such is necessary in giving the viewer a true depiction of the horror and trauma that these young orphaned victims experienced.

Johnny Morina and Henry Czerny are the two who I believe deserve "some" type of award for their roles in this film. Granted, the casting is nearly perfect... and a list of special honors would be vast in its length.

[–] berzelmayr 19 years ago

It's probably one of the most hypocrite film of all times. I don't know how this garbage should be named, maybe "indirect child porn substitute". Yeah, that fits for such a sensationalist production.

[–] guypomca 18 years ago

I saw this on TV in french when I was 15. I do remember finding the nudity scenes in the shower a little disturbing, but I think we've all been in the shower after gym class no? If you found these scenes were "indirect child porn substitute" I think you're pushing it a little too far. My uncle was a catholic abbot and god I wish he was alive back then so I could have had a discussion about it. I just hope the church is going to open its eyes and do something about this.

Anyway the story is just too strong for the movie to be ignored.

[–] cjb_cello 18 years ago

but I think we've all been in the shower after gym class no

Some of us were in the girls' locker room...

[–] gue_gg_ila 18 years ago

I think its a great film, well done, well acted and a very powerful shocking story..highly controversial

Every parting from you is like a little eternity.

[–] fernandooo7 18 years ago

Now, I don't support the brother's actions or any kind of harm to children, obviously, but it really bothers me that this society has such problems with nudity. If u consider those scenes pornography...I mean, IT'S JUST NUDITY! Nothing more. The whole first part of this movie is amazing, especially because of the kid's (the boy named Kevin) performance.

[–] mikeyg24 18 years ago

It's not just nudity...maybe you guys saw a cut version but I watched it last night and right at the begining the main Brother opened the little kids shirt and started kissing and touching his body and face. I'm sorry but if kids in puberty can get off to shampoo commercials then this is a child molesters paradise.

[–] daddyd-2 18 years ago

The differences in what is allowed on television in the U.S. and other countries is extremely opposite. The restrictions here in the U.S. will not allow graphic stories like this on our broadcast channels. You may see it on cable but not network.

This film, whether people want to admit it or not, is truly beneficial and should be viewed by all. Although dealing mainly with the sexual abuse of children, let's not forget one of the priests got his jollies by beating the children.

As for the nudity, well I guess some of those who found it offensive have never watched National Geographic. The nudity was done in a clean and sensitive way and never in a sexual way. All the scenes depicting the sexual abuse were done in a way to try to prevent offense to anyone but at the same time to show the true nature of abusers. In fact, by NOT showing the full abuse, we are left to only imagine how bad it really got. The descriptions by the boys to the police are extremely powerful and make strong points.

Here in America, we will not allow our children to watch films such as this but then we expect them to understand and know when someone is literally abusing them or attempting to abuse them.

And for those who don't believe there are cover ups when child sexual abuse actually does happen, read the linked page completely and make your own judgment.http://www.johnnygosch.com/cos.htm

[–] mikeyg24 18 years ago

But my point is very simple. Children were still used in a way that they couldn't possibly understand. I mean in that boys mind what's the difference in an actor doing it or his dirty uncle. The crux of the point is that innocence is being taken from kids who don't understand the difference between touched and kissed inappropriately for a movie or for some scumbags "jollies", and using the excuse that it is necessary to inform people is in my view exploitation.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cowboy12156 17 years ago

Here, here! too bad there aren't more people like you Chancery Stone. Why don't we just not have minors in movies or t.v. shows at all. Havng a 30 year old play Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz would of been cool,or a better example would be all adults would play 12 year old kids in "The Lord of the Flies". Of course it wouldn't have made any money seeing a bunch of old men running around in their underware and heaven forbid, in the nude. You get my point? Peace out!