At once odd, uncomfortable, and compelling, BOARDING SCHOOL covers a gamut of dysfunction and does so with genuine panache. The whole production is downright weird in the very best possible way, and its 105-minute running time passes in a flash.
An ensemble of young actors portraying outcasts and misfits is the focus of this very good production. Each shows promise and brings something noteworthy to the film; however, one actor rises far above the others.
BOARDING SCHOOL is anchored by a courageous performance from young actor Luke Prael that commands the audience's attention from the jump and never loosens its grip.
Prael, approximately 14 years old at the time of principal photography, acts rings around older, more experienced cast members. He expertly presents a character that's complex and (in many ways and on many levels) ambiguous. On appearance alone, he could carry Wednesday Addams or Damien Thorn with equal effect, and his confident gender bending and perverse mystique are simultaneously magnetic and disquieting. Do we like him, fear him, empathize with him, or all of the above? People can decide for themselves, but one thing is clear: He's the best thing about a movie with a lot going for it.
That includes the script. The screenplay is well written, well plotted, original, and offers a comic sensibility that's as dark as they come. It also offers an offbeat subplot tied to the Holocaust that fits fairly well within the main story arc. Thankfully, writer/director Boaz Yakin exercises restraint in ensuring the subplot remains both relevant and present while not getting in the way of the main story. Simply put, it's an enhancement that, while perhaps not essential, is certainly interesting to have.
My only criticism of BOARDING SCHOOL is that it's sometimes somewhat uneven in tone. Elements of horror, comedy, drama, and mystery all are present and compete in a way that ocasionally rankles, but not to the detriment of the overall experience.
The big critics aren't fans of BOARDING SCHOOL, maybe because they seem to insist on classifying it strictly as a horror movie. It doesn't fit neatly into that box. They also misread queer subtext as explicit sexuality. It's not, and it makes one wonder if that's -- whether they know it or not -- their chief complaint.
I'm not sure what the critics wanted to see in this movie that isn't there, but this time what I don't see is their point of view.
