Liam Cullen This is a film which forces you to think differently. Boy A completely shifts its focus from the typical media perspective and instead chooses to concentrate on the one(s) being vilified.Before watching Boy A, I reminded myself about the facts of the James Bulger case. It's painfully clear that this film was intended to force viewers to have a new perspective on the case and its perpetrators: Venables and Thompson. In both the film and the case, there are: two schoolboys skipping class and getting up to no good, an unspeakable act of sheer horror, and prosecution by both the judiciary and mainstream media. The most heartbreaking allusion that the film makes to the case, though, is in its use of the train tracks. The train tracks are where James Bulger, at only two years old, was sickeningly abused and ultimately killed by the two boys, depicted by the media at the time as Child A and Child B.Both Eric and Philip have very troubled backgrounds and as a result their morals and values have been entirely skewed. Eric, at least, seemed to lose his sense of knowing right from wrong the longer he was around Philip and subject to his brash, violent nature; the more exposed he was to Philip, the more detached he became from humanity.Was Eric a bad person? From everything we've seen, no: it seems as though an abusive father, a detached mother, an unsupportive and inadequate school system, and bullying all had a detrimental impact on the growth and development of this young boy. Eric did kill (or at least take part in the killing of) a schoolgirl, and took part in some other very violent acts too; however, this only occurred after he had been exposed to and influenced by Philip for some time. Jack, on the other hand, is one of the most friendly, caring, and vulnerable individuals you'll ever see on-screen - he is totally at odds with Eric. This juxtaposition is excellently handled by the director through the use of flashback to simultaneously introduce us to both Eric and Jack whilst distinguishing the two.Additionally, it must be noted that the schoolgirl whom Eric and Philip kill is not revealed to be entirely innocent, kind, or vulnerable. Instead, she's portrayed as an arrogant, rude, distasteful little girl. Her attire and well-spoken nature lead the audience to believe she's from a wealthy background, whereas Eric and Philip are the complete opposite. This makes it even more difficult to watch as we know that the schoolgirl is the victim, but ultimately so are Eric and Philip.A scene which I found especially perplexing was the one in which the pair of them catch a fish and Philip then proceeds to beat the fish within an inch of its life, only to toss it back into the water. He admits that he knows the fish won't survive, yet he's still chosen to release it back into the water rather than show it mercy. This speaks volumes for the way in which young offenders are handled in the justice system. Is rehabilitation truly effective? Can it have a beneficial impact on the offenders? Or by the time they're finally released back into society has the damage already been done too significant?The drawing we see at the end of the film by the little girl indicates that she sees Jack as a hero. This further reinforces the idea that it's all a matter of perspective. In a past life, Eric used his knife to kill a schoolgirl; but to this little girl, Jack is a hero who used his knife to save her. This stark contrast goes to show how much an individual can change, as Jack's mentor, Terry, identifies when he reflects on how far Jack has come since he met him all those years ago. This notion, then, seems to answer the questions raised earlier in the film as to whether or not rehabilitation is actually effective: we can see from Jack's behaviour and his progress that rehabilitation can and does work. Unfortunately, though, once someone has been broken into so many pieces and they've been put back together, it only takes the most gentle upset for it all to come crashing down again.In the end, we're led to believe that he jumped. Jack admits that, as Terry often told him, Eric is dead - in his past. But now that his past has been brought up again, it has consequently resulted in the destruction of Jack: his new identity. This leads him to a sense of hopelessness as he realises he's trapped between two worlds and they're collapsing against one another, pinning him in between until he shatters. This leaves us with a bleak message: we, the public, have ultimately caused Jack to take his own life. What makes this far more serious is that public intervention actually has resulted in the deaths of innocent people, such as Scott Bradley, who was wrongly identified as being Venables. As a result of his misidentification, he was harassed, vilified, and took his own life; an innocent man died at the hands of the public's persecution.If you enjoyed Boy A and the way it encouraged you to see from a different perspective, then I urge you to watch "The Dirties", which deals with bullying in schools and the consequences which can arise from neglecting to address it.All in all, Boy A is a highly thought-provoking and devastating film, which ask us to pause and reflect on our treatment of young offenders and consider that there may - and indeed likely is - more going on than that which is portrayed by the media. Only once we take a step back and contemplate our crucification of these children can we effectively pinpoint what causes such tragedies to occur and prevent them from happening ever again. RIP Jamie Bulger.

waxyjo I'm not entirely sure why some have said this film has stayed with them in a depressing way. Perhaps it is easier for some to have cut and dried, black and white views about certain things. Life of course never fits into those type of parameters; which have been paved by a non-thinking 'justice' system and continued by a pack mentality.This film challenges generalisations; keeps you on the edge of your seat with no clue of what will unfold next. It stays away from clichés and works only on allowing us into the depths of this main character's psyche. It is a rare treat to watch a film which neither lies to us, nor makes judgments. We simply see a snapshot of a young man's life, interlaced with his history. There are plenty of disturbing scenes and I did cry a lot watching this film. Mostly the bits which show such severe neglect of the young boys. Unfortunately this kind of neglect IS a reality in our society and that's one of the reasons this film is important. There are very very few human beings who randomly decide to be violent (psychopaths - humans who are unable to experience empathy, being probably the only example of such). Almost ALL violent behaviour stems from abuse and is a learned/copied response.The only antidote is love. I have seen a webpost which may or may not be accurate but it states that there is a tribe in Africa who respond to negative behaviour with love only. This is the only response which could work. Forgiveness IS the only way and I feel this film really conveys that message. It leads us to have compassion for a man who was severely abused as a child and who may or may not have contributed to the murder of another child. We're never actually told if he did hurt the girl but the point isn't whether or not he did the point is that we can see that he never would NOW, that it's not in his nature to inflict pain. Like his social worker says; this young man deserves happiness and anybody watching the film will be compelled to agree.There is no shame in feeling love for a vulnerable, abused human being. We should never be concerned to feel compassion or care for another. An abused dog which bites will be forgiven by most and a human should be given the same chance. A wonderful film. Oh and exemplary acting throughout from all. I particularly loved the social worker and his story also. He was a beautiful, rich character. Bravo to the film makers for championing the underdog and taking on such a sensitive and controversial subject. {from a thinker who loathes the media for the needless negativity it propagates}

Bene Cumb I have always preferred British films to U.S. ones as they are more often honest and realistic. Lives of ordinary people are generally not full of becoming heroes or obtaining sophisticated skills, dramatics is spread in minor events as well. I can understand that horrible deeds should never be forgotten, but a witch hunt by media is not justified as well - especially if a person has changed for the better as Andrew Garfield's character has repeatedly demonstrated. Moreover, cornered people, who have nothing to lose, may act totally strikingly.Boy A is a gloomy film, full of stress and misapprehension, but very realistic and with excellent acting (esp. Mullan and Garfield). I could have expected a different, more clear ending, but it is probably my fault :) Not recommended to those accustomed to bright and trouble-free life.

Armand bitter, cruel, delicate, profound. a movie like gray water of a river. with an impressive Andrew Garfield in his best role. with wonderful images. with an extraordinary story. and full of subtle nuances of redemption, new life, ambiguous feelings, faith, love, trust, relationship and world as enigma. a film out of words, definitions or verdict. a film as a travel to dark territories in light of sweet innocence. victims as parts of victim existence. the stain, hate, need of sense and fragile protector. a picture in newspaper. and the circle of hope, values, wright things is broken. tale of somebody in clothes of everybody secret. because the picture of new Jake is not an accident. not slice of pessimism. it is one of world rules. basic rule. in a society for who forgiveness is just metaphor.