Search

» » The Boys Are Back (2009)

Short summary

A sports writer becomes a single parent in tragic circumstances.
The Boys Are Back is a confessional tale of fatherhood. It follows a witty, wisecracking, action-oriented sportswriter who, in the wake of his wife's death, finds himself in a sudden, stultifying state of single parenthood. Joe Warr throws himself into the only child-rearing philosophy he thinks has a shot at bringing joy back into their lives: "just says yes." Raising two boys - a curious six year-old and a rebel teen from a previous marriage -- in a household devoid of feminine influence, and with a lack of rules, life becomes exuberant, instinctual, reckless... and on the constant verge of disaster. The three multi-generational boys of the Warr household, father and sons alike, must each find their own way, however tenuous, to grow up.

Trailers "The Boys Are Back (2009)"

The nine songs by Sigur Rós in the film were initially used as a temporary score. However, director Scott Hicks felt the music was so perfect for the film that he personally traveled to Iceland to get approval from Sigur Rós to be featured in the film.

Simon Carr and his two sons, the people the film is based upon, all visited the set during filming.

The house in the film was built at a property in Myponga Beach, South Australia and was planned to be taken down after filming. Owners of the property, however, persuaded producers to leave the house and surrounding areas intact and it has now been converted into the successful Bed and Breakfast "Brooklyn Farm - Joe's House".

This is the first time that South Australian director Scott Hicks has filmed a movie in his home state of South Australia since 1996's Academy Award winning Shine (1996).

Debut producer credit of actor Clive Owen who did producing duties as an executive producer.

It took eight weeks to construct the Warr's house for the film.

The German distributor Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures has scheduled a theatrical release for 28 January 2010, but they removed that date and replaced it with a direct-to-DVD release, because they expected too few ticket sales.

Source author Simon Carr's memoir about his wife's death and his subsequent challenge raising two sons was published in 2001 with the title 'The Boys Are Back in Town' with the book receiving critical acclaim.

Simon Carr, author and parliamentary sketch writer for UK's 'The Independent', originally contacted Peter Bennett-Jones, chairman of Tiger Aspect Productions, to seek advice on optioning his book for the screen.

Source novelist Simon Carr said he was "chatting" to executive producer Peter Bennett-Jones about his book being filmed asking if it should become a television series or possibly a sitcom?. And when Bennett-Jones suggested the book should be made into a film, Carr said, "the trouble with that is films never get made."

Six years after his first contact with producer Peter Bennett-Jones, on a chilly winter's morning, Simon Carr visited the film set of 'The Boys Are Back'. It was shoot day forty-seven of fifty-one shooting days. Carr stood on a platform at London's Paddington Station watching director Scott Hicks direct and actor Clive Owen act in a scene taken from his very own life. Carr conceded: "My pessimism has, so far, been utterly confounded by Peter's determination to get this project out and by the amazing job that's been done with it."

Source writer Simon Carr explained that his memoir was written originally "to tell what it was like for a single father to bring up two boys in an all-male household." Carr believes fathers are "rather undervalued". He said, "And I'm not sure that our role in the family has been well explored by novelists and filmmakers over the last twenty-five years and I think this is going to go quite a long way to make up for that. We do have feelings too!".

This film project was enthusiastically received at Tiger Aspect Productions from the earliest days of development. Greg Brenman, producer of the film and co-chairman of the production company said the story had appeal due to its "wildness of spirit and that sort of semi-feral way that men would bring up kids." Brenman explained that a comprehensive story had to be written to create a workable film from Simon Carr's source memoir but that the script had remained faithful to the essence of Carr's life. "He's such a larger than life, outrageous, intentionally contentious and provocative, charming, seductive guy that we tried to wrap up a lot of that spirit and essence and put it into the film," said Brenman.

The film was made and first released about eight years after its source memoir 'The Boys Are Back in Town' by Simon Carr had been first published in 2001.

The title of the film's source memoir 'The Boys Are Back in Town' (2001) by Simon Carr had a slight name change for this feature film adaptation, dropping the last two "in town" words of the title, and becoming 'The Boys Are Back'.

Scriptwriter Allan Cubitt was brought onto the project to adapt Simon Carr's critically acclaimed 2001 memoir.

During early drafts of the screenplay the story was relocated from New Zealand to Australia and the occupation of Joe Warr (Clive Owen) was changed from being a political journalist to a sports writer.

The occupation of Joe Warr (Clive Owen) was changed from political journalist to sports writer for this film adaptation. Screenwriter Allan Cubitt felt that if Warr was a political writer, the script would need to address the nature of Australian politics, which he thought was an "unnecessary sort of challenge".

For inspiration, screenwriter Allan Cubitt met with UK journalist Richard Williams who had started out in music press and later moved into sports journalism, for the sports writer character of Joe Warr (Clive Owen).

Despite the changes from Simon Carr's source memoir to movie screenplay, screenwriter Allan Cubitt said: "I've used Simon's lines and dialogue wherever I could" and that he had often gone back to the book to find moments he thought he needed in the film.

Screenwriter Allan Cubitt said that at the heart of the film is the question, "How does this man relate to these boys?". Cubitt said that for him, the film is really about fathering sons: "How do you bring up boys? How do you parent boys?".

Allan Cubitt, the film's screenwriter, felt a "great sympathy and empathy" with the character of Joe Warr (Clive Owen) from the beginning. He said it was an emotional experience writing the film, particularly the scenes where Joe's wife is dying.

Of script-writing, screenwriter Allan Cubitt said in publicity for this picture: "One of the tricks of being a writer of drama is to empathize with those characters and feel their feelings, their joy and pain and so on, so I am frequently in tears when writing," he explained. "In fact, if I am not actually crying while I'm writing then I worry it's probably not working."

Of actor Clive Owen portraying the central character of Joe Warr, screenwriter Allan Cubitt found the casting most appropriate. "There has to be an element of playfulness in the character so he is not just a bore, and not just a kind of unreconstructed man, but that there is an intelligence, an emotional intelligence at work as well, and so I think Clive captures that perfectly," he said.

Tiger Aspect Pictures had director Scott Hicks in mind as the director from the outset, said producer Greg Brenman. "One of the reasons we went for Scott Hicks once we had the script was because of 'Shine' [1996]. Scott conveyed to the world that he is a master at working with actors and a master at working with complicated chamber pieces - which is family life," he said.

Director Scott Hicks first read the movie's script about five years prior to production and was "thrilled by the material". Hicks was "intrigued" and worked closely with Tiger Aspect Productions and scriptwriter Allan Cubitt over the intervening years developing the material and planning the casting.

Of the film's screenplay, director Scott Hicks said that screenwriter "Allan Cubitt did an extraordinary job in adapting the story into a screenplay, I love the combination of emotion and humor . . . It happens that those sort of things engage me." Hicks added: "Often in our darkest moments, it is humor that gets us through. I think it a national characteristic of Australians and it is something of a feature of my work in the sense that 'Shine' [1996] was a film that, in addition to being very emotional, was also quite funny."

When star Clive Owen read a draft of the script he was immediately interested. After meeting with director Scott Hicks to discuss the film, he committed to the project. "I knew instinctively that Scott was the perfect guy for this movie," explained Owen.

"A very intimate family drama like this needs very delicate handling. It's about directors who can handle people and characters sensitively," said lead actor Clive Owen. "It's very clear when you meet (director Scott Hicks) that he's got that sensitivity and that patience and that understanding. Owen added: "I also knew instinctively that he wouldn't do the really obvious well-placed little cute family drama. And that it would be mature and smart and the perception and the perspectives of the movie would be very intelligent and smart because you see his films and you know that's what he's like as a director".

Of the casting of the lead actor, director Scott Hicks said: "Once Clive Owen got involved, his schedule and my schedule refused to align, so it took several years while each of us were completing various projects before we could get to this passage of time where we were both available." But Hicks said he has a "very Zen approach" and that "these things do seem to have their own time." And in this case the intervening years provided an opportunity for the writer, director and actor to meet and work together developing the story.

Lead actor Clive Owen says he often gets involved working on a script "once the thing gets going" but says that on 'The Boys Are Back' he spent a "serious amount of time" working in London with screenwriter Allan Cubitt and director Scott Hicks during the film's development.

Of developing the movie's screenplay, director Scott Hicks said of collaborating with star Clive Owen: "I spent longer with Clive going through this script than any other actor I've ever worked with. His attention to detail is painstaking."

Of one of the script development meetings with actor Clive Owen and director Scott Hicks, screenwriter Allan Cubitt said: "We all had a very good day together going through the script and listening specifically to Clive's take on the character and the drama and that's been really useful I think, arriving at a script that everyone feels represents the material well and is shoot-able."

A quote about this film from its film's director Scott Hicks says: "A household of boys in the absence of women, but as a unit: Very unusual, very irregular, but somehow it works... Is it all going to be easy?. Is it all going to be straightforward?. I don't think so. But that's life."

Debut theatrical feature film of actor Nicholas McAnulty who portrayed Artie, Joe Warr (Clive Owen)'s six-year-old son.

One of at least five film collaborations of actor Chris Haywood and director Scott Hicks. The films are: 'Shine' (1996), 'Freedom' (1982), the short 'No Going Back' (1981), 'The Boys Are Back' (2009), and 'Call Me Mr. Brown' (1990) in which Haywood had the starring role.

The rocky, precarious, yet insistently life-affirming journey of 'The Boys Are Back' began with the real-life story of a father facing his family's greatest crisis the only way he could; by sheer instinct, with unflagging humor and a dogged refusal to give up on the most primal basics of love and life no matter the daily battles ahead. In 1994, source novelist Simon Carr's wife Susie died after a gutsy bout against cancer. Up until then, life had been pretty darned good for the journalist. He was deeply in love, a respected workaholic, and a man with a spontaneous streak of adventure and dry wit. But suddenly, Carr woke up a single father without a single clue as to how to go on, let alone do the laundry.

Wrestling with an oncoming tidal wave of foreign emotions, source novelist Simon Carr nevertheless had to figure out how to re-invent himself, how to go from a shell-shocked widower to a hands-on dad with the wherewithal to bring his family back from the brink. It wasn't easy, and there was no map. He dodged all the do-gooder advice, and started his own experiment in what he called "free range" parenting. He proudly made every mistake in the book. And yet, somehow, day after day, struggle after struggle, Carr and his two sons found a way to grab onto momentary pleasures, "and each other", as they began to re-emerge as a stronger, different kind of family unit than they might have imagined. Though they called themselves "The Lost Boys", the father and sons found something vitally sustaining in each other and in the human spirit's capability to survive a world where nothing, ever, can be taken for granted.

In 2001, source novelist Simon Carr published his memoir, 'The Boys Are Back' to stellar reviews and a passionate readership. 'The Daily Mail' called it "achingly funny and almost unbearably moving" and "The Sunday Times' said "Carr's brilliantly written account of life as a single parent should be a required manual on parenting." For Carr, the book was a chance to not only come to grips with what had happened to him, but to write about family from a perspective that has long been a mysterious blank spot in literature and film: the "dad" POV [point of view], and especially how dads interact with their kids. "I wrote the book as an explication of what it was like for a single father to bring up two boys in an all-male household," he said. "Our role as fathers hasn't been all that well-explored over the last twenty-five years and I wanted to make up a bit for that, because we do it completely differently from the way that women do."

Source novelist Simon Carr generated controversy by writing candidly about his exuberant "Just Say Yes" policy that resulted in all kinds of unforeseen mischief, including the transformative day his younger son decided to leap off a window sill into their large bath tub. "Of course my first instinct was to say 'you can't, do that, you might hurt yourself,' Carr recalled, "but the truth is I will remember that evening the rest of my life. On my dying day, I will lie in my bed and look into the increasing darkness and remember the exhilarating joy on my son's face." It was that exhilarating joy - a welcoming back of life in all its messiness and unpredictability - that Carr hoped to share by telling his story with gritty honesty.

Of course, the film's source novelist Simon Carr could not have foreseen that his intimate confessions of how he simultaneously faced incomprehensible loss and fledgling fatherhood would one day result in a screen character brought to life with raw emotions by one of today's most sought-after leading men, Clive Owen, in an exposed dramatic turn. Carr's name would be shifted to Joe Warr, and details of his family's story would be changed, but when all was said and done, Carr was stunned to see the movie reflect back to him both some of the most devastating and most wonderful moments of his life.

Shortly after the publication of 'The Boys are Back' book, source novelist Simon Carr found himself in a surreal conversation with Peter Bennett-Jones, chairman of Tiger Aspect Pictures. Having fallen head over heals for Carr's memoir, Bennett-Jones told him outright that he thought it would make a terrific film. "My pessimism was utterly confounded by Peter's determination to get this project out," admitted Carr.

The team at Tiger Aspect Pictures was driven to make the film in part because they saw something fresh in source novelist Simon Carr's story that hadn't been brought to the screen. Tiger Aspect Pictures' co-chair man and producer Greg Brenman explained: "We felt the story had real appeal because it uniquely captures the wildness of spirit and the sort of semi-feral way that men bring up kids," he said. "At the same time, it's about the memorable experiences that we all have in childhood and in being parents."

At the heart of the story is the character of source novelist Simon Carr himself and re-named Joe Warr. "He's such a larger than life, outrageous, intentionally contentious and provocative, charming, seductive guy that we felt that his spirit and essence would make for an unforgettable lead character," said producer Greg Brenman.

Undeterred by source novelist Simon Carr's momentary skepticism, Tiger Aspect Pictures undertook a search for a screenwriter who could match Carr's seriocomic sensibilities and found exactly that in Allan Cubitt. Although best known for his work on the multi award-winning British mystery series 'Prime Suspect 2', Cubitt's work was diverse, ranging from adaptations of 'Anna Karenina' and 'The Hound of the Baskervilles', to the BBC mini-series, 'The Hanging Gale', about a family in the midst of the Irish Potato famine. It was Cubitt's passion for Carr's book that made him the winning candidate.

"I loved the book," screenwriter Allan Cubitt said. "There were so many things that struck me as true and interesting and funny. The challenge of it, though, was that it's a very much structured as a memoir, as a series of reflections on life and death and parenting and everything else that comes into Simon's orbit. We had to take that essence and find a way to make it work in a film narrative."

During early script drafts, screenwriter Allan Cubitt began to mold the character of Joe Warr, relocating the story from New Zealand, where Carr had moved as a British expat, to Australia, and changing his occupation from political journalism to a more action-oriented sportswriter. As he wrote about him, Cubitt began to form a great deal of love and compassion for the emerging character. "I felt great sympathy and empathy with Joe, and I hope he has achieved an independent life of his own," said Cubitt. "His joy and pain were both so real to me that I was frequently in tears while writing."

To garner further insight, screenwriter Allan Cubitt met with UK sports journalist Richard Williams to learn more about a sportswriter's lifestyle. "Sports is a really exciting thing to write about and I wanted Joe to write the sort of colorful, personal column that people enjoy reading so much. I had in mind someone like Martin Amis writing about tennis, " said Cubitt. "And when Richard said that he was often away for 265 days of the year, that seemed to me to fit well with who Joe is when his wife dies."

But the heart of the story for screenwriter Allan Cubitt lay in excavating all the nooks and crannies of father-son relationships at their most vulnerable and vital. "One of the big questions in the book is how do you bring up boys? How do you see them through trauma? And how does a man find a way to relate to his sons?. I wanted to expose on screen those things that men don't necessarily do when women are around, to explore the intimacy of their relationships, which are physical and sporty but I think also very touching and true," summed-up Cubitt.

With a screenplay that was equal parts exuberant and emotionally stripped-bare, as well as set in Australia, producer Greg Brenman had focused in on one particular director who seemed born for the material. This was Scott Hicks, who directed the critically acclaimed, multi Oscar nominated film 'Shine' (1996), a worldwide box office hit, which recounted the intensely moving, often funny story of an Australian pianist's breakdown and recovery, and garnered Geoffrey Rush the Academy Award for Best Actor for his richly human performance. "With 'Shine', Scott conveyed to the world that he is a master at working with actors and a master at working with complicated chamber pieces - which is the nature of family life," said Brenman.

Since 'Shine' (1996), director Scott Hicks had directed a number of Hollywood features, ranging from 'Snow Falling on Cedars' (1999) and 'Hearts in Atlantis' (2001) to the then recent 'No Reservations' (2007), but 'The Boys Are Back' would bring Hicks himself "back" - not only home to his beloved South Australia, but to the theme of family upheaval and the inner territory of personal transformations in the midst of an absurdly impossible situation.

Director Scott Hicks remembered being knocked out by the screenplay's distinctive tone. "I loved the combination of emotion and humor," he said. "Often in our darkest moments it is humor that gets us through. I think it a national characteristic of Australians and it is something of a feature of my work in the sense that 'Shine' was a film that, in addition to being very emotional, was also quite funny."

Director Scott Hicks read the source novel but screenwriter Allan Cubitt's adaptation impressed him even more. Hicks said: "Carr's book is extremely entertaining, and very moving but it's not a conventional narrative. Al [screenwriter Allan Cubitt] had the challenge of creating a story that could thread together all these family incidents and he did a remarkable job of that. My challenge was to then kind of unravel that and work out the choreography, the physical expression of the scenes - in a way that is alive and real."

As director Scott Hicks began working closely with screenwriter Allan Cubitt, he found himself more and more swept up in the Carr family's unusual trek towards reconciliation. "It's a very personal story about people trying to reconnect with each another and about all these ingredients, love, loss, humor, which make up our everyday existence," said Hicks. "As a father, I couldn't help but identify with the situations and emotional conflicts, which made it very close to home."

Director Scott Hicks said: "I found Joe's story so very touching, the way the trauma of his wife's sudden death forces him to wake up emotionally and realize that he has to pay attention or he will lose his sons. It's something I think a lot of people will relate to. People's lives are so frenetic now and raising children is so hugely attention consuming. It's a dilemma that so many people face. How do I balance everything else in my life with my family? I think that's really the center of this story. And it's the stuff of great drama, because it deals with people's vulnerabilities."

Director Scott Hicks also viewed the story as a romance, not your typical love story, but rather, about the romantic ideals of creating a sustaining family, no matter how unconventional. "The real love story of this film is about a father and two sons," commented Hicks. "The family undertakes a kind of human experiment - a household of boys in the absence of women - and yet somehow it works. The thing I wanted to get across in the end is that, with all the mistakes and the mess and the blunders, Joe [Clive Owen] brings his family back together. Is it all going to be easy and straightforward? I don't think so, but that's what life is like, and that's the feeling I wanted in the film."

As the team continued to work, producer Greg Brenman also brought on board Australian-based producer Tim White, who was enamored with the finished script.

Director Scott Hicks was acutely aware that, much like 'Shine' had, this film's entire essence would hinge on a singular performance, that of the actor playing Joe Warr, who had to all at once be falling apart, raging against the darkness, indulging in black humor, covering the finals showdown at the Australian Open, and re-connecting with his sons on the most primitively playful level. It would take an intense performance from a highly skilled actor and Hicks thought early on of Clive Owen, who had never taken on a role quite like this one, but clearly had the depth to do so.

Even though Clive Owen had never played someone like Joe Warr, a family man whose journey in film takes place almost entirely under the skin, director Scott Hicks intuited that Owen would get to the bare core of the role. "Clive has a tremendous strength on screen, a great stillness about him that speaks of under-the-surface emotions. He is enormously subtle in his expressiveness so much of his performances comes from his eyes and the thoughts that radiate out of them, which make him very compelling to watch," said the director. "He is also someone who clearly enjoys life and has a great sense of himself and, again, that radiates out of him. And like anyone who is at the top of his game at that level, he makes it all look easy."

Star Clive Owen was drawn to how the story seemed to weave the fabric of our everyday family lives into something illuminating. "It's a very beautifully written script and every time I read it, I was practically in tears," he commented. "The idea of losing a partner and being left with the children is devastating, and leaves Joe trying to navigate the ups and downs of being a single parent, as well as trying to re-calibrate what their family life is. It's all very complicated. Grief is complicated. Parenting is complicated. And I thought this script explored that as well as any I've read and that's why I wanted to do this movie. It's a really compelling mining of what parents feel."

Equally intriguing to actor Clive Owen was the personality of his character Joe, which makes his struggles with trying to set his family back on course even more evocative. "Joe is a very fallible character," observed Owen. "He's not naturally very good at family life and this is a crazy, upside-down, volatile time for him. There are moments when things get really out of hand and he does make some big mistakes, but ultimately, you see that he's trying to do the right thing in his own way."

From the start, actor Clive Owen was 100% committed creatively, joining director Scott Hicks and screenwriter Allan Cubitt in probing conversations about the screenplay. "I spent longer with Clive going through this script than any other actor I've ever worked with. His attention to detail is painstaking," said Hicks. Producer Tim White recalled: "I remember Clive sitting down in a windowless hotel room with Scott, Allan, Greg Brenman and myself and spending eight hours just talking about the nuances of his character. We all walked away feeling very privileged to have an actor who was that devoted and who brought such a considered, insightful approach to taking this character from the page to the screen."

On the set, actor Clive Owen had an exhilarating experience, working, in a complete turnabout from his recent romantic comedies and action thrillers, almost entirely with two child actors. "I think the spirit of the movie lies in the children and how they perceive the world and how unpredictable they are," commented Owen. "I found it really interesting as an actor because kids really test you, since they're not exactly acting themselves. They're not conscious of what they're doing, while adult actors obviously are. So it's challenging and also very exciting because every day you have the raw, real thing coming back at you."

Producer Greg Brenman observed: "Clive became the ideal Joe Warr because he made Joe his own. You see him being cantankerous, difficult, lacking sensitivity, yet also being extremely vulnerable and really learning to put his kids before his own feelings. In bringing all of that out, Clive made the journey of the film even more moving."

With Clive Owen cast as Joe Warr, finding a couple of young actors to take the roles of his two disparate sons was an even more daunting task. Nikki Barrett, the film's Australian casting director, began by conducting a nation-wide search for Artie, the playful six-year old who has to try to make sense of the sudden departure of his mother from his life even as he watches his father nearly fall to pieces. Barrett looked at over a thousand boys, screen-tested another hundred and finally, short-listed about twenty. Out of that group, Scott Hicks believed that a clear winner emerged: six year-old Sydney native Nicholas McAnulty, who makes his motion picture debut in this movie.

Of the casting of Artie, director Scott Hicks recalled: "When it came to Artie [Nicholas McAnulty], I wanted someone who would be completely believable and the last thing I wanted was a child actor. Nicholas really intrigued me, because he was so forthright for a six-year-old. He had no shyness and no inhibition about him. He was very direct and struck up a conversation with me like any adult might. In his audition, he clearly had the ability to put himself entirely into the moment. The next step was presenting him to Clive for his response because the connection between them was going to be so vital to the success of the film."

Star Clive Owen clicked immediately with newcomer Nicholas McAnulty, something that quickly became obvious to everyone around them. "When you put them together, they became an instant family. They are spookily alike," said producer Greg Brenman. Clive Owen added: "With Nick we all took a gamble on a very unpredictable energy that kind of kept everyone, Scott [Hicks], me, everybody - on their toes. We didn't want to control it too much because that's the energy at the heart of the film."

The filmmakers' instincts proved themselves on the set, as Nicholas McAnulty gave himself over to sheer imagination. "This was an enormous task for a child to fulfill, to take on a leading role opposite an actor of the caliber of Clive Owen, and with a story as emotional as this, and yet Nicholas stood up to that challenge and everyday surprised me with something," noted director Scott Hicks. "I was very keen to have Artie's character, and indeed the whole film, have as much a sense of real life to it as possible, and Nick's ability to imagine himself a part of this world led to some dazzlingly true moments."

The search for Artie's half brother, the teen-aged Harry, who comes from England to live with Joe and Artie quite abruptly, was equally challenging. As a young man torn between his divorced parents and full of roiling emotions and resentments, Harry's arrival becomes a catalyst for his father's quest to reunite his sons, no matter what it takes. "The Harry storyline with Joe is especially interesting because it's about a boy who feels abandoned and a father who ran away, thinking he wasn't needed, and their struggle to heal that wound," commented producer Greg Brenman. "We needed someone who could convey the awkward dynamic of an adolescent with his Dad, yet also the sense of what Harry is searching for."

After a series of auditions in London with Nina Gold casting, director Scott Hicks again happened upon a young man whose presence took him aback. This was George MacKay, who had recently been seen as the youngest Bielski brothers in director Ed Zwick's tale of Jewish rebellion against the Nazis, 'Defiance' (2008), which starred Daniel Craig and Liev Schrieber. "George's reading was so touching and so subtle that it stuck in my mind," Hicks recalled. "I felt that if somebody could, with no appearance of acting, touch me so strongly that he had to be worth exploring."

When director Scott Hicks showed the tape of actor George MacKay's audition to actor Clive Owen, Hicks said: "Clive just flipped out and said, he's fantastic!. And so we were both very excited about the idea of the two of them working together."

Actor George MacKay, who played Harry, was drawn right away to the script, which he said stood out among all the others he had read at the time.

Debut theatrical feature film of actor Nicholas McAnulty who portrayed Artie.

User reviews


  • comment
    • Author: Dammy
    Going in, I had utterly no idea of what to expect from this film. My companion didn't even tell me ~what~ movie we were going to see, much less any clues to what it was about. I don't think I've ever walked into a theater with so little idea of what to expect. All I knew was that Clive Owen had a role; but he plays such diverse roles, that gave me no clues.

    But, I'm sure even those who knew lot more about this movie going in were surprised. The story provides lots of unexpected and unusual moments. I would anticipate the plot would turn one way, and it would find a whole new direction of it's own. It was refreshing to see a movie that didn't try to fit a mold - that has it's own unique view, rather than fitting into a genre.

    The acting was quite amazing; really wonderful believable performances all around. Main characters and minor characters were so believably portrayed that watching the movie occasionally gave me as sense of being the peeping tom.

    So those are truly amazing achievements in a movie, especially these days. And yet...

    "Boys" has aspects of a great movie, but, sadly, it isn't great. The underlying Peter Pan theme was a bit overplayed. It felt as though the director kept whispering in your ear, saying, "Got it? Got it, yet?"

    The storyline held surprises, drama, tension, and some great comic relief... along with more than a few tediously boring scenes that let the audience fall right out of the movie (enough of the raindrops on windows!). It's always a bad sign when I check my watch during a movie, and I checked my watch way too many times in this one.

    So, go see it and expect to see something special in it. The specialness is there, even if the movie sometimes dumps you out of the scene and back into your theater seat.
  • comment
    • Author: Malahelm
    Mention Clive Owen, and chances are you'll think of that suave persona playing no less than roguish characters ranging from secret agents to well, erm, the go-to man if you want things done. Like Jackie Chan in The Spy Next Door, he's about to discover that the biggest challenge of his cinematic career is parenting, and in The Boys Are Back, Owen sheds his larger than life, indestructible spy characters for the role of Dad, and a complicated one too in having to reconnect with two boys from different marriages.

    Based on the memoirs by Simon Carr, Owen stars as Joe Warr, a British sports news reporter now living in Southern Australia with his wife Katy (Laura Fraser) and son Artie (Nicholas McAnulty). But an unforeseen tragedy forces him to rethink his priorities in life, and figure out just how to cope with bringing up a kid, having no experience when he abandoned his ex-wife and his son Harry (George MacKay) from a previous marriage. So he hatches what he thought was a brilliant plan, and that's to bring Harry to Australia, and together, as a trio, would seek out new adventures in their parent-child relationship, imposing no rules other than to listen to him when commanded should the boys get out of hand.

    The opening sequence would give rise to a certain expectation of how this film would play out, and little would you guess just what the beach going public was cursing at Joe for. It's this no holds barred growing up adventure that elevates this beyond just another movie with mourning and longing, where the protagonists realize that their unorthodox ways of bonding together, forging strong family ties, is just as easy and fragile as it is to be torn down.

    Scott Hicks doesn't sugar coat the film with saccharine sweet moments, but instead offers some real pragmatism in what one would expect in a household lacking a woman's touch. And as a male I too abhor household chores unless it's absolutely necessary, so watching how the art direction of the Warr household just brought out that smirk that the filthy pig sty, erm, isn't far off from personal experience.

    But it's not always just about the boys, as the narrative did offer a sneak peek into another what if moment, where budding romance with Laura (Emma Booth) was suggested at, though smartly worked on in not allowing it to overshadow the examination of the main relationships in the film about a father's attempt to connect with his sons, and them with each other. You'd wish for more given Booth's fine performance as the divorcée giving out all the right signals, only being frustrated that they're not acted upon with some degree of sincerity, with that unfair feeling of always being used.

    For those familiar with what Clive Owen does best in his cinematic, larger than life personae portrayed on film, this role of Joe Warr would lead you to believe the the actor certainly has dramatic chops for more serious, father roles even. With excellent tracks by Sigur Ros, The Boys Are Back is one film that manages to get under your skin and make you feel very much for the dysfunctional family trying to find its rudder in the confused world they live in.
  • comment
    • Author: Xar
    There is much to admire in this film.

    The acting is superb. In fact it is Oscar worthy, whether from Clive Owen or either of the young actors playing his sons. (I fear the 6 year old will get all the praise, but the 14 year old's performance was simply brilliant and more difficult.)

    The story is honest, fresh, and touching. This isn't a, "What happens if..." movie. This is not just a true life story, it is a true to life story. You can see that Scott Hicks had one goal, honesty. He succeeds at every level and this is perhaps the most honest film you will ever see.

    So why did I debate giving this film a 6 or 7 and not an 8 or 9 or 10? Because in this quest for truthfulness, it often fails to satisfy. It is, in many ways, a movie that only asks questions and provides no answers. They did their best to reach inside this story and create a beginning, middle, and end, but the truth is that at the end you are left without any of your needs met. I absolutely did not want Hollywood elements tossed in, but the story is simply incomplete. It is real. And real stories are incomplete. I suppose I want to praise this movie for being brave enough to not satisfy while warning friends, "Look, this is a very good film, but it's focus is honesty even if that means ignoring your needs as an audience."

    Perhaps over time I will come to see this as brilliant. The characters are often not getting their needs met, and neither does the audience. But how do you recommend someone pay $10 to not have their emotional needs met? At the screening I attended, there was a Q&A with Scott Hicks and Clive Owen. Many people joked about a sequel with their questions, because clearly there could never be a sequel. Even Clive joked about sequel titles. You know what? I believe all the sarcasm about a potential sequel came from the truth that this story is unfinished.

    So...

    If you feel like seeing honesty and emotional truth, if you want a break from Hollywood BS, if you want to see a slice of real life without any pretense or falsehood, rush to this movie. And I do hope you enjoy it more than I did because of these warnings.
  • comment
    • Author: Chuynopana
    I had relatively high hopes for this, a Scott Hicks and with Clive Owen in the lead. And set in South Australia where I live..........but I was ultimately disappointed. Clive Owen seemed to merely get by in the lead role, rarely displaying any complexity of emotion, and on occasion (perhaps the fault of the script? ) displaying none at all , for instance in response to such a fraught question as the older son asking him " but why did you leave ME?" Or when the same son cries in frustration and anger. It's not as if he is convincingly showing a man who is bad a displaying emotion either , it's more like he couldn't be bothered. There is a similar non-response when later the boy tells him that his mother , Owen's ex-wife , hates him ( the son)

    The young actors were very good indeed, acted Owen off the stage I thought, in the depth they brought to their characters.

    I do wish, for once , that a movie about a spouse dying could be made featuring an ordinary ,flawed couple, not always these golden blessed types who gaze adoringly at each other and stand silhouetted against perfects sunsets in each others arms.

    And anyone who has been close to someone dying of cancer will find the diagnosis of advanced virulent cancer with NO symptoms other than a dramatic collapse and , eventually a Camille-like elegant fading away in his arms, ludicrous.

    Smaller things that annoyed me were how did the kids at the beach party know where to go to gate-crash ? Maybe I missed something.

    Planes to the UK seem to be easy to hop on to as well, no booking or waiting about ..and as for the older boy's mother taking him to Heathrow airport to fly to Australia when she had had no communication at all from Owen in response to her telling him that the boy was actually coming , yeah, that's likely

    Lovely scenery, good young actors, but that's about it for me.
  • comment
    • Author: Malien
    This movie was disappointing. All of the emotions and values seemed rather predictable. The situations the people got into were not realistic. For example the mother in law refused to look after the children when the main character (Owen) had a business trip to make. Just wouldn't happen the way it was portrayed. A bunch of teenagers arrived for a party and wrecked the house, but although there was a teenage son, he was of a different age group than these people who came from nowhere. This was fabricated to create a situation of tension while the main character (Owen) was away on his business trip. Totally unbelievable. The girlfriend refused him when he asked her to look after the kids for a few days. Wouldn't happen. The son couldn't look after his younger brother yet could get himself from Australia to England alone.

    This was an attempt to make a weepie with a very unbelievable story. Acting was good, story and script not so.
  • comment
    • Author: Thozius
    Going by a superficial examination of director Scott Hicks' latest human drama, The Boys are Back, it might prove incredibly difficult to envision how the story, detailing the death of a spouse, healing through father/son bonding and the struggle to balance personal and selfless agendas in life, could avoid caving to contrived Hollywood sentiment and easy storytelling cliché. However, bearing this concern in mind, Hicks' film can be seen as affirmation to the fact that real stories of loss and emotional rebirth can be told without simply succumbing to excessive saccharine convention while retaining their authenticity, as The Boys are Back fuses humour, heartbreak, power and poignancy with the greatest of ease and with a complete lack of pretension, feeling impressively real and all the more resonant because of it.

    While the film could be described as a challenging watch due to its upsetting subject matter, more challenging (in an entirely positive sense) is Hicks' refusal to provide the viewer with 'easy answers' or superficial narrative or emotional closure. Rather than providing a streamlined narrative filled with requisite Hollywood exposition and filler scenes, the film appears to simply jump from scene to scene, providing a clear sense of an overarching narrative, but with more of a clunky, episodic flow, devoting nearly as much emphasis to seemingly banal scenes as Owen's character struggling to do the laundry or leisurely sequences of the boys playing (framed by the sumptuous scenery of Southern Australia)as more pivotal plot points. However, such a narrative style amplifies the sense of realism of the story, as if Hicks' cameras simply happened across the events unfolding rather than them being carefully predetermined for maximum emotional effect, as one might see in a more carefully tailored Hollywood film. Similarly, despite the superficially fragmented sense of narrative, through representing seemingly inconsequential moments interspersed with the major emotional scenes, Hicks' story paradoxically feels all the more flushed out, hinting at a much grander story looming beyond its collection of trace moments, and feeling all the more realistic and impactful because of it.

    However, Hicks' film truly excels at providing moments of raw, often tear-jerking emotion, without them ever seeming forced or false. The subtlety and abruptness of Owen's wife falling ill is all the more devastating through its lack of overt begging for sentiment, and many of the scenes of Owen attempting to cheer up his sons are likely to leave few dry eyes in the house through their overwhelming charm and the sheer naturalistic joy they evoke. As such, while the film is not without its occasional faults (rocky patches of dialogue crop up throughout and the story begins to drag as it approaches the end), its sheer power, emotional poignancy and Hicks' refusal to beat the audience over the head continually instils the film with life and immediacy, making it a perpetually interesting watch.

    However, as with many such intimate human dramas, it is the strength of the central performers which really drives the film home. Clive Owen is simply flooring as the struggling sports writer attempting to find equilibrium between his own concerns and grief and taking care of his two sons after the unexpected death of his wife. Giving a performance brimming with pathos but also necessary charm, Owen easily delivers his best work to date: a magnificent, unshowy and achingly true portrait of a man in crisis which proves utterly unshakable after the film is done. However, as capable as Owen is, the performances by Nicholas McAnulty and George MacKay as his two sons (younger and older respectively), who prove just as proficient at delivering staggeringly honest, powerful, charming and heartbreaking performances of two boys caught between acting their ages and dealing with emotional trauma potentially beyond their capacities. Laura Fraser is also a heartbreaking and memorable presence as Owen's tragically deceased wife, seen largely in imagined conversations with him throughout the narrative.

    Whether extracting tears of heartbreak or cheers of joy from the audience, Hicks' The Boys are Back proves a remarkably effective yet impressively low key drama filled with enough scrappy humour to provide much needed balance. With astonishing performances sure to attract awards attention, the film will hopefully begin to garner more widespread recognition and attention, which it unquestionably merits and deserves.

    -8/10
  • comment
    • Author: Pringles
    At its core The Boys are Back is nothing new; tales of heartache and sorrow, and the plethora of emotions experienced after a loved one passes away, are a staple of the drama genre. It's thanks to novelist Simon Carr and screenwriter Allan Cubitt that Boys manages to feel fresh - albeit with slightly annoying characters, more on that soon – their book and adaptation, respectively, is in the higher echelon of 'mourning' dramas. The two plots – firstly Joe's new found responsibility to Artie then to his other son Harry, both under different circumstances – mould together seamlessly and never does it appear like they went for too much. Even the small subplots, which can so often be unnecessary, are natural and help boost the already exceptional story.

    There is an issue though: the major players can be aggravating on occasion. Joe, a supposedly intelligent person, makes some parental decisions which – grieving a lost one or not – come off as just plain stupid and dangerous; mother-in-law Barbara needlessly spits out some manipulative dialogue; young Artie, possibly due to no fault of his own, at times behaves like a spoilt brat; and every now and then Harry is too whiny, even for a teenager. But hey, don't all family members have their faults? Unfortunately some of these are heightened after a life-changing event.

    Greig Fraser's astounding cinematography must be given a mention. The rural South Australian setting is nothing short of breathtaking as Fraser's light green and orange palette gives the location warmth and calmness. The SA government would be well served using some of Boys material, the festival state's tourism would skyrocket. Complimenting the visuals is Hal Lindes terrific acoustic score, his music captures the mood perfectly for the opposing upbeat and pensive moments.

    Overall director Scott Hicks has delivered a worthy picture about mourning, adapting and moving on. Would have been excellent if it weren't for the characters intermittently grating on your nerves.

    3.5 out of 5 (1 - Rubbish, 2 - Ordinary, 3 - Good, 4 - Excellent, 5 - Classic)
  • comment
    • Author: Hellstaff
    I guess anyone can try to get their life story out there nowadays, no matter how boring. The only reason I sat through this dull film was to see if something, anything, would happen before it ended. That something happened in the first 5 minutes: Clive Owen's wife of 6 years dies - suddenly, I might add - of cancer. He is left a sullen shell of a man, unable to keep his house clean and look after his young son. True stories usually have something inspirational or redemptive about them. At least they should or it is not a story worth telling. No such luck here. He tries to reconcile with the older son from a first marriage, who lives with his ex-wife half a world away. I could go and tell you how he ambles through each day, but it would be just as boring as it sounds. This film really had nothing to say, and it is easily the worst movie I have seen in years.

    I don't have a grudge against this type of movie. I actually am a sucker for a weepie done right. The best examples would be MEN DON'T LEAVE (with Jessica Lange) and of course TERMS OF ENDEARMENT. I am among the few people who have actually seen MEN DON'T LEAVE, and it is a masterpiece. A terrific example of tempering your weepie with humor and interesting characters. I'd sit through it a dozen times.
  • comment
    • Author: Akinonris
    A brilliant movie with emotions perfectly emoted by characters very well etched by the writers. That's what I would like to say about this movie in one word. The director has blended all the factors into one...be it the shots, the music, the characters, the story...all into one. And he has done it in a brilliant way that I felt that I was with those characters living with them. Clive Owen, Laura Fraser, Nicholas McAnulty, George Mackay all did a wonderful job. I did not have any expectation while going into the cinemas to watch this...and when I got out i was feeling very refreshed... A good movie...I recommend it to all.
  • comment
    • Author: Ballazan
    Finally saw this film from beginning to conclusion. Had caught bits and pieces (on Showtime) and it made no sense. Now I can reflect…with some competence.

    The screenplay begs for "competence." The nagging, continuing "ghost-wife" is a cliché. The lost, near-forgotten teen son from the first marriage played evenly by young George MacKay has but one or two scenes of any value to the overall script. This character is written as an uptight, boarding-school, Brit teen seeking acceptance from his father. I get that. But, considering the numerous wasted scenes as the second wife drifts into death is long and boring.

    With that said; the film offers some promise. The younger son is wonderfully, cheerfully portrayed by Nicholas McNulty. The director had to have rewritten parts of the script to infuse the energy of this little boy-actor making the film a bit more realistic.

    Clive Owen, a very good actor, does his best to muddle through the disjointed script. However, his character is far from believable. An award-winning sportsman in his youth, he is now an aging, sudden single-father, sportswriter in Australia. (Of course, the film was produced by their government.) When he leaves the boys alone to attend a major tennis match some seven hours drive away – well, you might already guess what happens. The huge glitch in the script is that he could've taken the boys with him. They might have ended up locked in a hotel room for a day or two; but, that in itself would have given the screenplay/story some extra leg room for character development.

    When he goes to England to retrieve his run-away teen ranks as the highlight of the film. The interactions between father and long-lost son are realistic. They are not heartwarming. No swell of the angelic chorus. The very last scene when young MacKay looks at his father is the only heartwarming moment. It lasts for about 3 seconds, but only makes sense if you can sit through the entire movie.
  • comment
    • Author: Leyl
    Do not look for comforting resolutions and feather-smoothing platitudes or resolutions in "The Boys are Back."

    The strength of this film is the confusion and adjustments of life necessitated by the accidents and the neglections of life. This was thoroughly captured by Allan Cubitt in his narrative adaptation of the episodic novel.

    Scott Hicks has managed to reproduce these faults/strengths on film with a sure and loving eye. His work with script, camera and actors reminds me in many ways of the love songs that John Schlesinger sang to those he nurtured onto celluloid.

    Clive Owen portrays his universal love and need through the chauvinist characteristics of his daddy hood. A solid harmonic melody consisting of grace notes.

    George MacKay's artistic accomplishment as a teenager should not be over-shadowed by the younger actor. Those concerned about the emotional hurts of the "forgotten" child, will find the case for all forgotten children is made and reinforced by Master MacKay.

    Then to that younger actor. Nicholas McAnulty as the youngest Warr, is the first "child actor" that has managed to go beyond "Yeah, nice work." for me. I can see, as Mr. Owen has said in an interview, why an actor of Owen's stature and ability adjusted to this boy's genius.

    The entire cast, Ms Fraser, Ms Booth, the others cast by Nikki Barrett and Nina Gold, were exemplified by Alexandra Schepisi's mother-in-law. This oft-called "thankless role," sang with her humanism and fiber, especially in her scenes of conflict with Mr. Owen.

    I hold this film, this director, this star, these co-stars/supporting actors as both precious additions to my memory bank and a water mark for what I consider art in the world of film.

    Thank you, Arlen Dean Snyder
  • comment
    • Author: Cerekelv
    Clive Owen, I find, utterly boring. His voice, his eyes, his mannerisms--boring. This storyline was plain DRIVEL for me. I am probably the only one who feels this way about Clive, but I just don't get him--ever. And especially in this pathetic presentation. It played like a 1960s 'made of TV' or 'Lifetime Movie'. I don't need 10 lines to re-express, but for whatever reason, IMDb has this '10 line' minimum requirement. Sorry, I even took the time, but I wasted my time by watching this thing, and felt I deserved to voice my opinion. I suppose 'boring' was not exactly correct. Perhaps ANNOYING would be a better choice.
  • comment
    • Author: Jeronashe
    This is one of the poorest movies I've seen - I'd no idea what it was about, but generally liked Clive Owen, so thought I'd rent it. It's the only film I can remember in which I actually yelled two or three times at the TV screen "End. END!" Owen plays the most Uriah Heepish parent I've ever seen. Extraordinarily passive - yet deceitful in many ways (Not least, as a top newspaper's sports editor who lies to all at work, and to the nation about covering the biggest international sporting event held in Australia each year - one can only hope he was fired, though there's an odd failure to mention the consequence).

    I've never seen a parent apologize each time his child deserves punishment. Child throwing things? Apologize. Child hits him repeatedly in the head? Apologize. Child refuses to get in the car to go somewhere? Apologize. Child won't get up from having a tantrum on the floor in public? Apologize. Child wants to throw things in the house? Apologize. Child cries because he wants to swim instead of be in school? Apologize.

    Say that you're deeply deeply sorry for every breath you take, every move you make - you get the idea.

    This is a creepy movie - the parent abandoned his vows to God, his son and his spouse to be true until death - and is somehow not made to feel the terrible consequences of his abject despicable treatment of his spouse. Why did he leave her? "I got (this sexy babe) pregnant".

    I constantly wished the worst for the protagonist - which I don't think the film intends.

    I loathe this movie.
  • comment
    • Author: Damdyagab
    Nice film that unfortunately didn't get the chance to perform well at the box office because of an incredible lack of marketing. The film has three connected storyline.You have Joe Warr (Clive Owen) a father who his coping with adjusting his carefree lifestyle for the need of his sons after loosing his wife from Cancer,you then have his son Artie Warr (Nicholas McAnulty) a little boy who don't know how to handle the loss of his mother. Then,you have the 14 year old son,Harry Warr (George MacKay) from a previous marriage who always felt left out by his father and never built up the courage to tell him and the fact that his mother is now pregnant with a new child from another man increase the boy's feeling of being on his own.The father and his two sons learn from each other throughout the film and the father start to built a relationship with his children but the film is not Soppy or cheesy,somehow it find a way to tell this sort of story without going over the top,to make it short this is not a lifetime movie of the week , it's a strong drama with subtle,quiet but very thoughtful performance. Clive Owen gives one of his best performance as a father who doesn't quite know how to handle his newly found responsibility,he gives a very strong yet vulnerable performance. Nicholas McAnulty,the youngest of the cast gives a great performance for such a young actor,he plays a boy who is overwhelmed from keeping his grief locked inside with incredible maturity. But in my opinion the most interesting storyline came from Joe's estranged British son,Harry, played by the very talented George MacKay.The relationship between Harry and his father was very interesting because they truly felt like a father and son who knew nothing about each other and some of the most intense scene came from the two trying to get a feel for each other.One scene that stick in my mind was when a frustrated Joe asked Harry to take the garbage out and after Harry insist that he will do it but later , Joe get angry with Harry who immediately realize that he had upset his father.It's an awkward moment between a father and a son who were never long enough with each other to have that sort of fight before and it ends up with Harry crying and his father running away from having to deal with his oldest son's problem , knowing quite well that the problem was in fact himself.It's theses bravely performed moment that makes this film a pleasure to watch. The only minor problems I have with the film is that some elements that are introduced are not used to the best of their capacity.The relationship between Joe and his Mother in Law is interesting but underused and you feel that much more could have been done with it,the same goes for the relationship between Joe and the mother of one of his youngest son's friend (Emma Booth). Overall this film had a very good Cast and interesting characters and as a Drama it's superior to a lot of films that comes out at the moment. Very recommended. 7.5 out of 10.
  • comment
    • Author: Prorahun
    this was a very interesting film to watch but by no means gripping. Certainly a lighter role for clive Owen after Duplicity and The International and he is of course faultless in his execution of the role as journalist Joe Carr showing great vulnerability in his relationship with women in general, notably his two wives and then his two sons Arty and Harry who live apart. There are a lot of sensitive moments and much is overplayed, though personally the death of his wife I think is not played enough and the grief of the family seems somewhat hollow to me. Laurel seemed too available and not involved enough in the story and can someone explain what the party was all bout at the house when Joe Carr was away. Who were the uninvited guests and how did they get into the house? Didn't get that at all, not at all! Another film which promises a lot but delivers little, touching on serious family issues but not really addressing them.
  • comment
    • Author: lucky kitten
    It's just so uninteresting. While watching the movie, all I could think of was "Poor Clive Owen. Stuck in this awful mess." He was supposed to be this tyrant of a father, yet I never saw any proof of this. The only way you would know he was mean was because other character kept telling him so. I felt like the scenes where he was so mean and nasty were left on the cutting room floor, and we were left with a sanitized version. I felt like I had seen this movie on Lifetime or Hallmark Hall of Fame. Or perhaps they blended the two together and came up with this. Commercials would have made a huge improvement.

    It was choppy and uneven in most places, and yet, occasionally there would be a wonderful scene that was stuck in now and then. The movie did have some beautiful scenery and cinematography of Australia.
  • comment
    • Author: Iphonedivorced
    This film is about a husband who grieves the sudden death of his wife, the way he copes and the unexpected complications that follows his decisions.

    "The Boys Are Back" is a touching drama that slowly unfolds but constantly captivates the viewer. It is a sad tale to be felt and pondered on. It is not easy to cope with the sudden loss of a loved one, even more so when compounded with job pressure and coping with family duties. What strikes me the most is the incongruence between Harry's behaviour and feeling throughout the feeling. He wants his father and yet he keeps pushing him away. Fortunately, the ending is satisfying and has adequate closure of issues. I enjoyed watching "The Boys Are Back".
  • comment
    • Author: Modar
    In The Boys Are Back, a film based on the memoir by Simon Carr of the British newspaper the Independent, is about a character named Joe, a sportswriter who has a five year old boy living with his mother in southern Australia. Joe is away from home often and mostly sees the boy, Artie (Nicholas McAnulty) on holidays or the few times he can get away. He loves his wife (Laura Fraser) and kid a great deal, and his life, as they say in the movies, is turned upside down by his wife's passing from cancer. Suddenly he finds himself with Artie 24/7, a boy who doesn't grasp what has happened fully with his mother's death (Artie, rambunctious but not annoying, asks Joe at one point if he can die so he can be with his mother again). On top of this for Joe is his teenaged son Harry, (MacKay) from a previous marriage, who comes to visit and adds another to his juggling of being a single-father-widower and top sports writer.

    There's other things that sort of 'happen' to Joe as well in the film, such as a friendship (but not quite romance, thank goodness for us hoping for a lack of contrivance) with a single mom (Emma Booth). And it happen in a fairly realistic context of sudden grief that Joe has while taking care of his small boy, which he's never had to really take charge of before (we get the sense he left most of the child rearing with both of his sons to their respective mothers), and as a easy-going but firm parent has a philosophy of "just say yes", meaning anything goes, except when he says so.

    His source material is a memoir by Simon Carr, which was more just a collection of musings and thoughts and little anecdotes as a single father as opposed to a coherent narrative. But what unfolds is just simply this story, more of a character study, about parenthood and the nature of a father-son bond that mostly the director Scott Hicks takes without too much sentimentality. He and his screenwriter accomplish at best something we don't see too often in movies: a sympathetic man, a father in a tough situation, and a little boy who seems simple enough but has his own complexities and nuances (McAnulty is great at getting the exuberance and frustration of a six year old, particularly one without a mother, and is never less than genuine). And then when Harry is thrown into the mix then the complex relationship builds as it becomes a father-son-brother story, with scenes that reveal how little of a bond there really is between Joe and Harry, and how they both know it needs to change now or never.

    Another thing one must commend upon is Clive Owen, who is perhaps the paramount reason to see the film. It's a minor revelation after years of awesome action films (Shoot em Up) and thrillers (Duplicity) to see the guy get so much in touch with a torn and frayed character like Joe. For one thing, we see him cry, but its only in two crucial scenes, one of them while on a telephone with Harry as he greatly holds back tears when asked if anything is wrong, then later on in the other scene having his sob in the middle of a grassy field. It sounds like a character that could lead to some cliché- a tough no-nonsense sometimes-drinker sportswriter who has to put up with two kids- but Owen makes Joe fascinating to watch at every turn. Especially since, frankly, it's also equally impossible along with the crying to picture Owen acting so well off of McAnulty, who has had relatively little experience. Watching the two of them together go back and forth, and then later on as well with Owen and MacKay, is the heart of the picture.

    The film is crafted with a lack of cynicism, with an eye for the way family works in times of trouble, and as well for luscious vistas from down under in Hicks' own home areas of south Australia. But there are a few things that keep The Boys Are Back from being a must see. There is a guitar score by Hal Lindes that pops up with an irritating precision, much akin to something like Brokeback Mountain, where we're made to suddenly feel something be it in a montage or a simple cut-away, and it becomes old-hat pretty quickly as the only significant orchestration. Also, a plot device that should work more but doesn't: Joe's wife appears several times in the film as a sort of ghost or just presence of comfort to give some advice or listen to Joe's own fears, and its just hokey, especially when we're told that it's not only Joe but his mother-in-law seeing her daughter, and at the end giving Joe a piece of encouragement regarding a convertible that had me roll my eyes. It's a shame, since everything else around those flaws make up some of the finest non-sentimental familial-drama scenes I've seen this year. 7.5/10
  • comment
    • Author: Stan
    This movie had its moments, but overall I didn't care for it. I love Clive Owen and sympathized with his character up to a point, but I found his dying wife too perfect and quite unlikeable, especially after their back story was revealed. His character seems stunned and disbelieving that he could be suffering such misfortune, never mind that he caused so much misfortune to those from his past. He had every excuse for himself and his actions but his older son had his number (his younger son was just annoying.) I did like that he was finally called to account for some of his crappier decisions, and that he was able to make at least some amends.
  • comment
    • Author: Ferne
    If Clive Owens accepted the role of Joe Warr (based on the autobiography of Simon Carr) as an attempt to break away from his type casting as a blood and thunder action hero, he at least proved that he is able to step beyond his usual screen presence. Though the story of a happily married sports writer to a beautiful young second wife Katy (Laura Fraser), enjoying their one child Artie (Nicholas McAnulty), who abruptly becomes a single parent when Katy dies from metastatic carcinoma, placing him in the uncomfortable position of becoming a single parent, is not unique among the tearful novels that have also made their way to the screen, this film survives on the quality of the cast. Not only does Joe have to overcome the treacherous terrain of tending to housekeeping along with the tenuous gap that occurs when a parent dies and the remaining parent must tend to the grief of the remaining child, but he also must cope with the young Harry (George McKay), his son by his first marriage in England (his second family is in Australia) who feels deserted and asks to come to live with Joe and his half brother Artie. The film lingers over the madness of a household of males, tinkers with tricky problems with inlaws and his exwife, but in the end the message is that with 'growth' on the parts of each of the three males in the tale, happiness is possible.

    The film's intent is admirable and the cast of characters selected to portray these people - Owens shows real potential as a serious dramatic actor, George McKay is particularly excellent as the elder son - is very well selected. The film is long, and could be easily edited without altering the impact of the story. Director Scott Hicks allows the film to become predictable and overly saccharine: less could definitely have been more. But it is a good evening's entertainment. And Clive Owens CAN do Hallmark-type films for TV!

    Grady Harp
  • comment
    • Author: Kajikus
    Joe Warr (Clive Owen) is a sportswriter who suffers his wife's death. All of a sudden, he's left with two boys to raise. Instead of dealing with his grief and anger, he takes off with the boys on a reckless trip with the philosophy of "just say yes".

    This is a hard film to watch mainly because Joe is unable or unwilling to deal with his wife's death. The sons don't improve the situation. The younger son is too bratty, and the older son is too pathetically weak. It is truly frustrating to watch this dysfunctional family. It does improve as they conflict with each other, and they start dealing with their issues. But unless you like emotional punishment, this film isn't for you.
  • comment
    • Author: Nten
    If you have read any of my other reviews you will know I like movies about families adjusting to problems, and this one was no exception. The film stars Clive Owen, mainly an action star previously, in a domestic role based on a memoir by Simon Carr, and directed by Scott Hicks, probably best known for "Shine". As others have noted, the story concerns a soon to be widower having to deal with being a father to his 6 year old son, played brilliantly by Nicholas McAnulty, and further into the film, his early teen son from a previous marriage who comes to stay with him in Australia from England. He is played by George Mackay, who outshines everyone including Clive Owen, who received Oscar buzz for his performance. The situations are not that unusual, nor are the happenings. What makes the film more than standard fare are the excellent performances and the literate script and fine direction. I found the first 30 minutes rather sad and depressing, and even a bit slow, but from the time the older son enters, the movie takes off, and by the end I felt I was watching a great film. Some of the reviewers complained that it wasn't believable, but it is based on true events from a memoir. Others may have been expecting more "action", and dislike movies about relatively ordinary people facing the ordinary problems that so many of us may encounter, with no easy solutions. Had the movie been a little tighter in its editing, particularly in the early scenes, I would have given it a 10, but it is definitely a must-see if you, like me, find the majority of Hollywood mass entertainment movies a waste of time, and prefer heartfelt honest reality, rather than a lot of violence, raunchiness, and profanity.
  • comment
    • Author: Sinredeemer
    This was an excellent movie, from the story to the acting, to even the camera work. It was a very touching piece. Mainly it was about how different people deal with the loss of a family member. And this didn't mean the death of one for all the characters. Clive Owen gave a brilliant performance as (Joe Warr)a grieving and now single father or a precocious little boy. He did drink heavily at first, but once he realized he had to deal with being a father he decided to become more mature. You couldn't ask for more from the six-year-old Nicholas McAnulty that played Artie. He was funny and cute and ill-tempered in just the right ways. He was the embodiment of how children do not know how to deal with the death of someone close. As for his older son from his first marriage. His name was Harry, he was played masterfully by George MacKay. This character was supposed to be moody and burned by his father's leaving him with his mother, who was now moved on with her life and had very little room for Harry in it. This is why he was so angry with his father. George portrayed all of this emotion quite brilliantly. He was the right person for this role. And has a promising future as an actor. He was angry and teen-age "I'm mad at my father" moody, and mature, and pleasant to his half brother... all in just the right ways. The only thing I hold against this movie, is that Joe was seemingly interested in another woman and it was never pursued. Although it would have been hard on Artie if his dad had moved on that quickly.

    For performances and for the movie overall I give it a 9.5/10.
  • comment
    • Author: Haal
    OK, yes, I admit it and anyone who knows me can guess that what first attracted me to this movie was........ Clive Owen. However, I was impressed to see that this was a serious film and actually sounded very good. Clive Owen departs from more banal roles in recent thrillers such as The International or Duplicity to play a grieving widow and father of two. His intensity and naturalness are earning him lots of praise and talk of a first Oscar nomination.

    Owen's character loses his wife to cancer very early on in the film and is faced with the task of raising their particularly rambunctious child on his own. To add to this, another son from his previous marriage comes from the UK to Australia to live with him and the boy.

    Clive inhabits his role with ease, playing an understanding and tolerant father who lets his boys engage in unconventional activities (presumably to make up for their lack of a mother) who can also become suddenly impatient and irritable under stress, taking some questionable decisions.

    There are lots of sympathetic father/son scenes as well as endearing moments between the two half brothers. However it pains me to say that the movie failed to truly grip me or Fabio and merely coasts along, like a beautiful Australian landscape. An enjoyable film- touching but not moving, nice but not memorable.

    My rating: 7/10 Fabio: 6/10 Total: 13/20 For more movie reviews visit and become a follower at: http://paulinasmovies.blogspot.com
  • comment
    • Author: Olwado
    This movie was a surprise to me (in a good way) as I'd never heard of it before and only bothered with it because I saw Clive Owen's name attached. Now though I can't understand how it's gone under the wire and remained so underrated. The performances are just fantastic, particularly from the boy playing Owens youngest son Artie (Nicholas McAnulty). He is amazing, acting like a real kid not a Hollywood version, complete with temper tantrums and utter brattiness that all parents will appreciate yet his grief is at times also absolutely heartbreaking.

    Filmed in South Australia (and England) the scenery is beautiful and only adds to this honest and well portrayed story of a father trying to cope and carry on following the death of his wife, while raising his two sons in a nonconformist way. This really is a story of fathers and sons as all the women here have lesser roles. Despite the heavy content this still manages to have a few lighter comedic moments. Just a great heartfelt movie. 05.13
  • Cast overview, first billed only:
    Clive Owen Clive Owen - Joe Warr
    Emma Booth Emma Booth - Laura
    Laura Fraser Laura Fraser - Katy
    George MacKay George MacKay - Harry
    Nicholas McAnulty Nicholas McAnulty - Artie
    Julia Blake Julia Blake - Barbara
    Chris Haywood Chris Haywood - Tom
    Erik Thomson Erik Thomson - Digby
    Natasha Little Natasha Little - Flick
    Lewis Fitz-Gerald Lewis Fitz-Gerald - Tim Walker
    Nakia Pires Nakia Pires - Lucy
    Emma Lung Emma Lung - Mia
    Steven Robertson Steven Robertson - School Housemaster
    Georgina Naidu Georgina Naidu - Paula
    Daniel Carter Daniel Carter - Digby & Paula's Child
    All rights reserved © 2017-2024 hd.thomson-multimedia.com