I love this movie so much

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Some of the reviewers on here and I,must have watched different movies.For one thing,there is no character in this movie called Justin.Furthermore,I thought the characters were well developed and the portrayal of the AIDS crisis as it existed in the 1980's was spot on...I,like many other people,sadly,have known several victims of AIDS and have seen many of them die, much too young....The two lead characters,I thought, had a great chemistry together and it was very distressing to watch Jake die and Frank have to go through it with him....Especially touching,for me,was the fact that Frank traveled to Morocco to scatter Jake's ashes,since it was a place Jake always wanted to visit.All in all,I thought this was a great movie and not what I was expecting based on the DVD cover.

The first ten minutes of this film might lead you to believe that it is little more than a campy celebration of homo-eroticism; however, this could not be further from the truth. House of Boys follows the story of Frank, a young man who runs away from home in order to pursue a liberated lifestyle in Amsterdam. After being abandoned by by a friend, Frank wanders into the gay strip club/brothel the House of Boys, where he is offered a job. As Frank gets to know the rest of the performers and their stories, this reviewer finds that the audience will get more than what they bargain for as Frank starts to learn about the World in its troubles.Unlike a number of gay themed films, director Jean-Claude Schlim took great care that his actors performances did not come off as inauthentic or wooden. As the film progresses, the characters introduced continually strike the audience as authentic, likable, and sympathetic. The audience is allotted ample opportunity to become invested in the arcs of several of the key characters and appreciate the growth they reach at the end, with one exception.Especially impressive is Schlim's use of set design to convey the change in tone within the film. Initially, the sets ((particularly the House of boys itself)) are loud , elaborate, and colorful. As the film progresses, however, the audience sees less of this and makes way for more plain, fading surroundings such as the hospital at the end of Act III.One point of criticism is the arc of Emma. The end of her arc, while satisfying, did not have enough set up to provide adequate pay off to the audience. The film would be just as strong without the scene attempting to conclude her arc.Nonetheless, every cast member gives solid performances that provide adequate depth and sympathy for their character. Despite dealing with sexually charged themes, the film is never pornographic and expresses the sexuality of the characters tastefully. In the end, it appears to this reviewer that the frilly titles and campy opening were intentionally misleading. The depth of House of Boys is more than skin deep.

I just watched this mess and barely had the interest to click further, having NEVER heard of it in the 5 years it's been out. It was on my queue so I must have added it at some point but OMG what a piece of crap!The story is well tired and in this instance, would be by the time you were done hearing the plot told as if it were an audio book.I can just read the synopsis presented to Foundations and charities all over Europe for this overly expensive rehash of midnight dancer bollywood field of dreams steven king make-up. "Rehash" does not begin to cover the scope of this slop.

Just saw this today and have mixed feelings about it. On the plus side there were some decent performances from the three male leads Layke, Benn and Steven as well as Eleanor David. But for me there were too many directorial clichés in terms of characterisation script and cinematography: blue skies, white screens, schmaltzy music. I just felt as I often do when watching gay movies that I wish there could be some real originality in a script. Yes all the types depicted here do and did exist amongst gay men and certainly the era was well portrayed: a free for all time when cheap sex was taken for granted without any consequences. But the only time in the movie where I felt really touched by a striking use of sound and image was when we heard Jake's dying death rattle in his breathing counterpointed with scenes of his sleeping friends there for him in the hospital. I do however have to defend the film from some of the charges in other reviews posted here. Porno scenes? Hardly. The film was set in Luxembourg and this was clear; why Amsterdam? because that was where his friends were going. It also was one of the few places at the time where male brothels existed. And it was pretty clear to me why Frank went there: to get away from hostility in college and at home. I also liked the flashbacks which served to explain why a straight boy like Jake would end up working in a place like that getting used in the same way his father abused him, this time though for money. I also thought the graphic effects of the disease and in particular Karposi's sarcoma were rightly quite full on. I doubt if anyone in the cinema where I saw it, at a Gay film festival, hasn't known someone who's suffered from this dreadful disease. The silence through the last section of the film spoke volumes. I found the drag really bad but it was authentic that bad drag often gets applauded so uncritically as in the House of Boys. Nice to see Udo Kier again, a legend from some of the work of the more controversial directors from the German cinema of the 70s..but does Stephen Fry ever turn anything down? I guess he took part as his name may have helped get funding and I guess also that he believes rightly that these films with this message are needed, they are. I just find it's impossible to get away from him in the media. Overall it's worth seeing this film and for me it got better as it went on.