Critics’ reviews

Boys Don't Cry (1999)

9 reviews from 9 publications. Critics’ score 76: 7 positive, 0 mixed, 1 negative.

Back to our review of Boys Don't Cry

76
Positive
7
Mixed
0
Negative
1

Most critics find Boys Don’t Cry a gripping, harrowing love story, with praise concentrated on the performances and Peirce’s handling of difficult material. Hilary Swank receives broad approval for her portrayal of Brandon, while several reviews give particular weight to Sevigny’s subtle performance as Lana. The central relationship supplies much of the emotional force. Critics also value the film’s lyrical style and its attention to people rather than sociological explanation.

The spread is wide, though the dissent is isolated rather than evidence of an evenly divided consensus. Empire admires the acting and taut direction but finds the characters’ backgrounds too sparsely drawn. The Evening Standard challenges the prevailing view more fundamentally: it considers Swank miscast and argues that the film romanticises the relationship without adequately examining its deceptions. Where most critics see persuasive performances and delicacy, this dissent finds an unconvincing treatment of the story.

RogerEbert.com
22 October 1999 · ★★★★/4 · Roger Ebert
100

The film is a romantic tragedy about a free spirit navigating gender and love in rural Nebraska, avoiding sociological pitfalls to focus on character and illusion in romance.

Read the full review →
Sight and Sound
· Xan Brooks
85*

Peirce's film is a crime story, queer Western and boy-meets-girl romance marked by lyrical ambiguity and haunting emotional resonance. The standout is Sevigny's subtle, unreadable performance as Lana, which anchors the central relationship.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
11 October 1999 · David Denby
85*

A terrific, fearless movie that embraces lyrical realism in telling the story of Brandon Teena's adventures and relationships; it succeeds through delicate conception despite the odds.

Read the full review →
Time Out
7 January 2015 · TCh
80*

The grimly compelling true story focuses squarely on the actors and delivers through Hilary Swank's brave, enthralling and Oscar-winning performance. Director Peirce keeps a lid on artier tendencies amid the sexual transgression and retribution.

Read the full review →
Variety
2 September 1999 · Emanuel Levy
80*

A bold, uncompromising and stunningly accomplished debut that mixes fiction and nonfiction elements astutely, anchored by outstanding performances from the leads.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · Mark Dinning
75*

The film is a bleak and uncompromising true story that becomes harrowing through strong performances, especially Swank's barnstormer turn, and taut direction including the brutal rape scene. It is a worthy attempt that is fascinating and darkly disturbing, though not quite as accomplished as it could have been due to sparse character backgrounds.

Read the full review →
Evening Standard
10 April 2012
30*

The story is made more suggestive than convincing by the director's inexperience and especially the miscasting of Swank, who cannot credibly pass as the kind of boy who fits in with the macho rednecks. The movie leaves an uneasy feeling as it tries to both agonise over the tragedy and romanticise the lesbian relationship without fully confronting the deceptions involved.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
7 April 2000 · Peter Bradshaw

The critic praises Peirce's debut as a gripping, affecting love story with transgression and transcendence, highlighting Swank's courageous performance as Brandon and especially Sevigny's standout turn as Lana.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
19 January 2001 · Angus Wolfe Murray
75*

The critic praises director Kimberly Peirce for taking a real newspaper story and giving it distinctive style while maintaining sympathy for the central character. Hilary Swank and Chloe Sevigny deliver standout performances that capture the emotional core of the story.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate