I watched Boy Wonder knowing absolutely nothing about the movie other than the brief description Netflix provides. The first half of the film is fairly slow and gives little indication of what the story is about. All we know is Sean is a nerdy outcast, saw his mother killed when he was a boy, and trains in a boxing gym.
It's not until 45 minutes into the movie before we're given a clue Sean's worldview might not reflect reality. (The scene on the sidewalk where the mother is scolding her child is shown twice; first as Sean's interpretation and then as what really happened.) But if Sean is seeing a skewed reality, how much of the first 45 minutes can we believe? Viewers aren't given any clues to the answer.
The key to movies with a good twist is to set up the story in a way that leads viewers to believe they understand the worldview presented in the film, then reveal information that invalidates that worldview but allows the entire film to be interpreted through a different worldview. (i.e. Mulholland Drive, Primer, etc.) While I admit the ending surprised me, Boy Wonder didn't present a cohesive enough story early on in the movie for me to establish an original worldview. Furthermore, after the reveal at the end of the movie many of the character's actions still don't make sense.
Why is Sean seeking out these criminals? He tried to avoid the fight with the dealer and the shooting appeared accidental. If he didn't want to fight, why did he go there in the first place? For the second fight, he purposely lured the pimp out of the house and immediately got the upper hand, but fought purely defensively until the pimp told Sean he was going to beat the girl. His indecisiveness makes it hard for viewers to understand why he is doing these things.
The crux of the movie rests on the question of whether or not Sean's father paid Larry Childs to kill his mother. Viewers don't really know if he did or didn't--neither explanation holds up very well in light of all the other actions taken in the movie.
Sean believes his father did, based on what he heard outside the car that night. ("Time's up Rock.") Deducing a contract killing from that statement is a stretch. If Sean's father wanted to call it off (as he appeared to want to do in that scene) there's no reason Larry wouldn't agree and just keep the money. A more plausible explanation is Sean's father was late on a debt of some sort.
At the very end of the movie Larry Childs tells Sean his father was not part of the killing. If that's true then Sean made a mistake killing his father. However, detective Ames helps him cover it up by throwing the gun in the river. Why would she do that? We're not given any insight into her motivation.
In the end many of the character's actions seem random rather than based on whatever principles they value most, and that makes it hard to understand or empathize with them.
It's not until 45 minutes into the movie before we're given a clue Sean's worldview might not reflect reality. (The scene on the sidewalk where the mother is scolding her child is shown twice; first as Sean's interpretation and then as what really happened.) But if Sean is seeing a skewed reality, how much of the first 45 minutes can we believe? Viewers aren't given any clues to the answer.
The key to movies with a good twist is to set up the story in a way that leads viewers to believe they understand the worldview presented in the film, then reveal information that invalidates that worldview but allows the entire film to be interpreted through a different worldview. (i.e. Mulholland Drive, Primer, etc.) While I admit the ending surprised me, Boy Wonder didn't present a cohesive enough story early on in the movie for me to establish an original worldview. Furthermore, after the reveal at the end of the movie many of the character's actions still don't make sense.
Why is Sean seeking out these criminals? He tried to avoid the fight with the dealer and the shooting appeared accidental. If he didn't want to fight, why did he go there in the first place? For the second fight, he purposely lured the pimp out of the house and immediately got the upper hand, but fought purely defensively until the pimp told Sean he was going to beat the girl. His indecisiveness makes it hard for viewers to understand why he is doing these things.
The crux of the movie rests on the question of whether or not Sean's father paid Larry Childs to kill his mother. Viewers don't really know if he did or didn't--neither explanation holds up very well in light of all the other actions taken in the movie.
Sean believes his father did, based on what he heard outside the car that night. ("Time's up Rock.") Deducing a contract killing from that statement is a stretch. If Sean's father wanted to call it off (as he appeared to want to do in that scene) there's no reason Larry wouldn't agree and just keep the money. A more plausible explanation is Sean's father was late on a debt of some sort.
At the very end of the movie Larry Childs tells Sean his father was not part of the killing. If that's true then Sean made a mistake killing his father. However, detective Ames helps him cover it up by throwing the gun in the river. Why would she do that? We're not given any insight into her motivation.
In the end many of the character's actions seem random rather than based on whatever principles they value most, and that makes it hard to understand or empathize with them.