Awesome Movie

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

This film presents a microcosm of a society governed by a strong patriarchy. Ostensibly it's a haven for those who have suffered at the hands of the wider world but, as the movie slowly reveals, the line between the safety of a haven and the exclusion of fascism is hard to draw.The most common complaint against this film appears to be that it is 'ambiguous'. However, in my opinion, the film is not ambiguous at all, rather it is 'ambivalent', which may have confused some. The film swings between dichotomies - love and aggression, truth and lies, freedom and control etc. Beautifully summed up by a shot in which Gregory carries in one hand bandages and in the other scissors, perhaps also emblematic of the Eagle in the US federal seal (olive branch in one claw, arrows in the other, literally meaning peace and war). In my view this film presents us with a social philosophy, one which examines how the sins of our past are passed down onto the children of our future. Even with the best intentions the patriarchal harem that 'Gregory' has created, with its goal of protection, relies on his ability to be totally benign which, owing to the vicissitudes of human nature, is impossible. Thus the ideal of fascism becomes a facade behind which repression and hypocrisy reside. The micro-society depicted is a partisan one. However, the true follower of its values himself becomes a partisan and ironically is therefore in transgression of his autocratic ruler.There are rich visual metaphors throughout which support a fully animated subtext. All elements of this film are superb, including the acting and the directors gradual unravelling of the pervasive ambivalence in relationships is masterful. The message here can be translated both socially and personally and because of that, like many great films before it, it has a multiform impact and can be watched in many ways. It's not quite genius, but it is extremely good.Personal, relevant and very well made.

I'm a fan of the actor Vincent Cassel so that was enough to get me to go see the movie. He plays a cult-like leader of a small hidden society made up of woman and children in a dystopian future, when his warp Mister Rodgers charms is not working on one of the boys it threatens to untangle what he created. Past this, I could not tell you what the movie was about. Though they gave some clues of what cause whatever apocalypse they were living in, most of what's going on is left to the imagination.So the movie relies on the abilities of Cassel and his interaction with his strange tribe of children. It was noteworthy to see the emotional conflict bouncing back and forth with Cassel to the rest of the cast. Especially, the lead boy who basically is realizing that the life these people are leading is wrong and not for him, and it's setting him aside from his mother. It can be very distracting from the fact that the movie has a plot I don't fully understand. But I did like it.

A sequestered commune is the setting for Ariel Kleiman's disturbing story about 11-year-old Alexander (Jeremy Chabriel), whose father, Gregori (Vincent Cassell) teaches him a life to be divorced from mainstream life, except when Alexander efficiently murders for money. The joy of the communers juxtaposed with their terrible assignments points up the film's allegorical comment on the danger of isolationism.The film points out the ironic Christ-like parallel as Gregori carries wood across his shoulders to begin building a home for his children and harem. The contrast between his love for his life and the horrid tasks for the children is obvious and a telling comment on the dangers of messianic obsession.A couple of the young boys, including Alexander, rebel against Alexander's tyranny and become objects of deep concern for Gregori. Even an unauthorized candy bar could be trouble. Mostly, though, it's the natural contrariness of youths, exacerbated by the limiting confines of a closed community, that leads Alexander to begin straying.While Kleiman leaves out the spiritual development of the commune, especially with so many women complying, and definitely leaves the audience hanging at the end, the film is successful showing a productive closed society, a Utopia if you will, the downside appearing as a dark stain not easily expunged.

In yet another high quality Australian movie, Vincent Cassell is Gregori, a man who is sheltering people in his compound from a bleak outside world. This isn't really a thriller, it is more of a drama/coming-of-age story as there is not a lot of action, rather the atmosphere is thick, and an overall feeling of dread looms over the entire film. While I feel a bit divided about the film, there is no denying that it is technically sound, with the locations, camera-work and soundtrack all of extremely high quality. Whether you will like this or not will boil down to whether you like this fresh approach to making a film, as it does come close to being too ambiguous for its own good. Personally I liked it, as it is unlike most movies, though it does smell ever so slightly of lazy writing. But the world within the film is so intriguing that it works, as long as the viewer is willing to participate in the experience. I cannot shake the feeling that this is a brilliant concept that is not fully explored, but the film's universe is unforgettable; both the desolate outside world and within the compound, where Gregori's word is law and children are encouraged to be creative, whether it includes face-painting or karaoke. Oh, and Gregori also trains the children to become assassins. The movie begins with Gregori at a hospital, talking to a troubled mother who is nursing her newborn child. Next we suddenly find ourselves in the safety of his compound eleven years later, where we see mothers and their children happy and in safety. They seem to obey Gregori's word because of this. When young Alexander, who I assume was this baby at the beginning, starts to feel differently about what he is doing, what he has been trained to do, I really started wondering how it was going to end, as the relationship that forms between the two characters is much like that of a father and son. Rather than exploring the amazing looking outside world that has been created, the film focuses more on how this world has affected Gregori, Alexander and the rest of the compounds' residents. Most of the film's run-time is spent inside this compound, which at first confused me, as the barren world that is created outside the compound's walls is extremely striking. I wondered why this world wasn't explored further. A world in which Gregori has not only built a compound where his word rules, but also a world where he sends child assassins out to do his dirty work. However, I believe this was the intention, as the focus is on the daily lives of the people inside these walls, and on the way Gregori seems to be a husband to so many woman while also being a father figure to so many children. These children love living in the compound so much that they cannot see the violence that resides in Gregori's heart. He is a flawed and complex man, whose personality is a direct result of the desolate outside world. Or, one could ask, is this only the way he perceives it? Both Gregori and Alexander make for interesting character studies. Alex's journey is a coming-of-age tale of sorts, but one very different to movies normally associated with that tag. He is the only one within the compound who begins to question Gregori and his methods as he matures before our eyes, becoming disobedient and asking questions. The obedience to Gregori by the rest of the residents though is one of many elements in this film that isn't quite explained. It however provides more food for thought. Was Gregori delusional? Did he truly believe he was helping these mothers and newborn babies? Overall, the best way to describe this movie would be an ambiguous character study as well as a coming of age story. Ultimately, the sparse details given is for each viewer to interpret. Ambiguity reigns supreme here as gaps are not filled, events are often not explained. This approach is taken perhaps a little too far, but regardless, the film is gripping and full of emotional depth. Gregori is one of the better characters I've seen in a film for a while, as is Alexander. They both have complex character arcs, as does their father-son type relationship. This is certainly not a Friday night beer film as its ambiguous nature is sure to raise many intriguing questions for the viewer to chew on. Do I think it was lazily written? Yes, to a small extent. The dialogue could have been better and there could have been more action, but ultimately I feel the filmmakers wanted viewers to think, to ponder, to contemplate on what they have just seen. In this regard it succeeds, but with a little more energy in the dialogue and with more meat on the bones of the story, this really could have been quite something. Vincent Cassell also is not at his best, he looks the part but is not as engaging as his character suggests. This could be due to the fact that he stepped in for Oscar Isaac, who pulled out just before shooting. In saying all this though, the entire movie looks and sounds incredible – meaning this is yet another young Aussie director who I shall be keeping my eyes on.