I typically do not like the "traditional" gay cliché genre where all relationships have to end in tragedy. But I COULD have made an exception here had the writer/filmmaker decided to go in the direction of a ghost story...which was alluded to about mid-way. Meaning, there were many elements of horror/psychological thriller, beginning with the character of Nathan's family life. Then, we see the tension between Nathan and one of Roy's "alpha male" friends, foreshadowing some negative story line. But all in all, this is just too linear and has a very "made for TV" feel (the sound-track gets very annoying). And the ending seems to make this just too "cutesy" and negates the entire horror/ghost story direction (it's almost as if the writer got stuck and didn't know where to go and wanted to end on some "feel good" note...just lazy). Also, there were several instances where either the writer or the director didn't seem to understand the setting they were portraying (Baptists in the South would NEVER have a crucifix on the wall...let alone in a church...that's Catholicism). In other words, a) do your research b) pick your "mood" and where you want to go and c) be consistent. The acting was in fact superb and I think the best thing about this...so I wish all involved an excellent career.

I have to tell ya, this movie might be romantic as you say but really it lacked a lot of stuff that I don't understand!The boy Nathan was abused by his father then was raped by his lovers friend? It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. The father in the beginning seemed like an ordinary bloke and only became evil when Nathan didn't go to church. I read on the plot that he was evil. It seemed to me he was bipolar then an abusive dad. I honestly didn't see any beating or hitting in this movie. Like what are they talking about?With the friend, he seemed to me that he was extremely jealous of Nathan getting a bj from Roy. Like where did he come out of? It seemed too fast for me to look at a better reason why he came out of nowhere?! Seriously it was such a filthy scene. I think there shouldve been lines involved in this movie, this is the worst movie I've ever seen and which it gave me a headache!

I liked this movie. It wasn't exactly a masterpiece, having some issues, but it's unexpectedly warm and tender moments,the acting (especially Max Roeg) and the soundtrack (why so many people find it annoying is beyond me..) made it worth watching. I think it's major issue was the ending and most of the movies second part. I read the novel (I loved it and it's definitely better than the movie), so I tend to compare the movie to it. The novel's ending was more ambiguous, interpretable, bittersweet, very moody indeed, while in the movie's case it was way too abrupt, not exactly faithful to the book (while the rest of the movie was, mostly)and rather undecided. First, we are given the fact that Nathan is dead, and the next moment we see him walking up to Roy and then sitting on the bus, the way he used to..It's not that I didn't get it-it was an attempt to recreate the novel's ambivalent final, but it just didn't work. While in the book, there was a subtle mix between reality and dream, the movie failed at this point, giving us just something confusing instead of something dreamlike. The horror tale part didn't fit in the movie either- Jim Grimsley managed to masterfully create a truly eerie and terrifying atmosphere in the second part of the novel, but in the movie version, the part about the haunted house looked like it was taken from an average teen movie. The rest of the the movie was very well crafted, managing to depict the fragile love of the two boys, that seems almost unreal. I loved the fact that teenage love was depicted (both in the novel and the movie) exactly the way it is: clumsy, awkward but of incredible depth and intensity. The love scenes are reserved, but they were one of the most romantic ones I have seen so far. Although there are some (love) scenes in the novel which weren't included in the movie (and they would have added so much to it!)they were able to portray the aching tenderness and profound love that the boys developed for each other. It was heartwarming to see that love scenes can be made without graphic nudity, picturing just two lovers cuddling and caressing each other. The only objection I have regarding the love scenes is that maybe Nathan's character could have been a bit less shy-there were moments when it looked like Nathan was rather obeying the infatuated Roy and not reciprocating his feelings.Both actors did a good job, although it was Max Roeg that I liked the most. He really shined in his role, and even without much dialog he managed to portray his character's confusion and sentimental turmoil marvelously. He made the character look very real, a handsome and popular farm boy leading a normal life,whose world is suddenly turned upside down by the feelings he has for his shy schoolmate,feelings he cannot identify at first.All in all, it's a movie that worth a watch,not as good as the book though. It's complex and subtle, but lacks the eeriness and dreamlike atmosphere of the novel, the mix between a touching love story and a Gothic horror tale. I definitely recommend both the movie and Jim Grimsley's novel - it's a haunting story of first love, that will definitely haunt you for a while.

I read the book, and felt it was slow and boring except for certain parts. So when I heard that there was a movie, I was happy. As I was watching the movie I was getting a better feeling than reading the book, I feel there should have been more on the interactions with the father, and the music was kind of annoying, But as a whole it was turning out to be a decent film...Until the "director" tried to be all artsy and suspenseful and ruined the climax ending. The kid was getting rapped, and you have this yuppie music come on like it was just another scene. There's a conversation before or after the attack but of course the horrible "director" though it would be a good idea to turn the music on to were you can only understand mumbles. The acting was OK. The only person that really looked out of place was the kid playing Roy. That's only because he was shorter than the other cast of boys. I think Randy Wayne (who plays Burke in the movie) would have been a better choice for the character Roy. This movie would have been so much better had the "director" focused more on the darker side of things, and knew just a little about using music in scenes.