The true story of gay lovers, Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold Jr. who kidnapped and murdered a child in the early 1920s for kicks. The plot covers the months before the crime, the ...
See full summary »
Three intercut stories about outsiders, sex and violence. In "Hero," Richie, at age 7, kills his father and flies away. After the event, a documentary in cheesy lurid colors asks what ... See full summary »
Fifteen-year-old Beni falls in love with Fögi, a singer in a Rock band. As Fögi seduces him, Beni is willing to follow him where ever he takes him. But Fögi is a drug addict and pulls Beni ... See full summary »
Urs Peter Halter
The true story of gay lovers, Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold Jr. who kidnapped and murdered a child in the early 1920s for kicks. The plot covers the months before the crime, the investigation, trial and final fate of the two men. Written by
Col Needham <firstname.lastname@example.org>
The barber shaving Craig Chester in one scene is played by Jim Crawford, who did hair and makeup for the film. He is also the prison barber shaving the boys' heads later in the film. See more »
The two lead characters use a telephone with Touch Tone dialing-systems and other modern devices (TV remote controls, ballpoint pens, etc), even though the film is set in the early 1920's. The placement of such anachronistic objects was deliberate on the part of the filmmakers. See more »
I had heard that this film was stylish and intriguing, but I just found it annoying. It's been a while since I've seen it (and hopefully I won't find out all my memories are wrong and I'm unjustly condemning this movie), but my memory is that the filmmakers tried to portray Leopold and Loeb as victimized by an anti-gay society, and that this somehow caused their horrible crime. I totally disagree with this point of view, and think it's unfair both to homosexuals and to Bobby Franks, the real victim of the story. I can't imagine why anyone would want to claim those two as martyrs. I also thought L&L were portrayed as a bit more sophisticated than they actually were--after all, they were teenagers who lived at home. The film places them in a kind of fantasy world that seems like it should be scored by Morrissey.
I just read an interview with one of the filmmakers that implied the film's anachronisms, such as the push-button phones that characters used, were meant "to add Brechtian distance". They certainly do that, but I happened to find it highly irksome.
Apparently a number of people found this movie interesting, but I would have preferred a less "stylish" and more realistic examination of the part homosexuality may have played in the Leopold & Loeb case.
17 of 37 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?