Limerculer
A waste of 90 minutes of my life
Glucedee
It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.
StyleSk8r
At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.
Billy Ollie
Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable
merklekranz
Nicholas Cage plays Canadian rowing champion, Ned Hanlan, from his humble beginnings rowing illegal liquor across the border, to his championship race in England. The problem is, you've seen it all before. Pick any boxing, baseball, or football film, and you will be on very familiar ground with "The Boy in Blue". In addition, Cage's romance of Cynthia Dale comes across as really sappy and uninteresting. The movie plays like a series of Victorian postcards. Even usually reliable villain, Christopher Plummer, is no more ruthless than a puppy dog. This movie is way too predictable, toothless, and sugar coated, and does not live up to expectations. - MERK
stealthjunk
Warning - Spoilers The Boy in Blue is a representation of the life of Ned Hanlen - a rowing champion during the late 19th century. Learning his craft as a whiskey runner Ned moves into the world of high stakes rowing (popular during the era) and through love and emotional growth becomes a champion.While well done for a period piece the life of Ned Hanlen, as told in The Boy in Blue, does not represent a story compelling enough to carry an entire movie. Interesting in it's technical details (I've done a small amount of rowing and thought the sport was well captured) the amount of drama in Mr. Hanlen's life just does not rise to the level needed to make the movie consistently interesting.David Naughton plays the sleazy manager/promoter (with the requisite Heart of Gold); Christopher Plummer plays the sleazy backer/gambler (no Heart of Gold) and Cynthia Dale plays the love interest. While mildly interesting the attempts at sabotage, thuggery and skulduggery just don't add up to a "movies worth" of a story.
rainbow4142000
We saw it for the first time on AMC, which is FINALLY starting to show some different movies........it presents a sport that I believe most Americans are unfamiliar with.......Personal comment: I don't believe that people should stoop to cheat in ANY SPORT or to sabotage anther's chances of winning. FAIR IS FAIR! This movie came out a few years later than CHARIOTS of FIRE, and one cant help but feel the same emotions of being in a race whether on land or the water. Good sportsmanship should always be at the top of ones personal goals........and really enjoying competition. Ah, Nicolas did well in keeping in shape to do this movie!!!! AND the musical score is great too!!!.S.T. rainbowsmileyfish says hello :-)<>{
preppy-3
I saw this in a theatre out of pure curiosity back in 1986. The ads gave no indication what this was about--it just showed Nicolas Cage with his shirt off showing his VERY nice chest. It was a dull true story of Ned Hanlan who was a world class sculler--or something like that. It takes place in the 19th century (the ads didn't mention that either) and I usually hate period pieces--that didn't help me like the movie more. The only good thing about this was Cage--he WAS good and his body looked fantastic. But, unless you're interested in sculling, you'll probably be bored silly.There was one unintentionally hilarious scene in which Cage tries to rip open a woman's shirt--and it wouldn't rip! He fumbles with it before he finally gets it off. The audience I saw it with was laughing hysterically.
