txmoviegoer I am actually IN this movie (I was an extra in the racing scenes - that's me in a tan dress with a parasol, listening to the band play, and again up on a lock gate, watching the racers - and my father and brother were extras in it too, my dad played a nineteenth-century bookie!), so I would really like to be able to give it an excellent review. I have to be honest, though - the script is pretty bad, Nicolas Cage had very little to work with here, Christopher Plummer is wasted, and even the racing scenes are cut badly so they're not very exciting. It was much more fun to film than it is to watch - I'd say only seek out this one if you're a big Nicolas Cage fan and are intent on seeing every film in which he's acted.

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.

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.

lib-4 Nick Cage was only 22 when he made this period piece. Chariots of Fire (1981) must have been in the back of his mind. Ned Hanlon was not a big enough name to interest the viewer, and he was a naive young man. But it was a nice, but not remarkable movie. He did build his pecs up for this-- he always gets into his character.