emkarpf I've seen this film at the Lübeck film festival, with English subtitles. I have never seen a film of this director before. I'm saying this because former commentators have talked about language and the director repeating himself - I wouldn't know about that.What I've seen was an interesting love story of adolescents, with all the insecurities and incongruities I remember from my own life at that age. The characters were interesting, their interaction believable. The story was well-constructed - a lot of things you learned in passing during the first half-hour turned out to have some impact later on. It is not easy to knit real life memories so closely together that they will carry over a two hour movie. What really made the movie come to life was the decision to extend shooting over a three-year-period, so the actors would actually get older during the movie. This cannot have been easy, especially as the film is a period piece. But it lends a special credibility to the story which I admire.

Moeborg I couldn't agree more with Jimpansy. Avoid like the plague. Why doesn't Malmroos see a shrink and get on with his life instead of inflicting his banal teenage traumas on the rest of us. The worst thing about having paid money to see this (all other movies were sold out, and the people I were with wanted to see something) is that it will encourage Malmroos in his delusion that anybody cares, and to keep making more movies. (Actually the same movie over and over). I don't normally post comments, but felt that a warning was in order. No matter how much I try, I honestly can't think of anything positive to say about this movie. And I do like slow movies such as"The weeping camel" and human drama like Ken Loach. Malmroos should start doing something of use for the world such as cleaning or looking after old people.

brinckzone If you've seen one Malmros movie, you've seen them all. Maybe. Or maybe not! Many of Malmros' movies takes place in his own life, so does this movie. It is often the same story - the one about being unhappily in love. The Malmros movie 'Kundskabens træ' depicted the children (and has now made cult status), and now with the movie 'Kærestesorger', we see the teenagers. It is quite a work that underlies this movie. It took Malmros three years to make this movie. This is because we, as a viewer, have to get the feeling that the characters undergo a development - and they really do! A lot happens in three years when you are 15 years old.The language can seem a bit strange and you can get the feeling that the actors cannot act. But the movie is supposed to depict the 60's. The language was different then. And actually, the language - and how the actors talk is not far from the language in 'Kundskabens træ'. This means that not only did the actors had to act, but also work a lot on how they talked. The actors are not professionals, but they are really good! The movie can seem boring to some (it goes on for over two hours), but we have to get the feeling that three years have passed, at the end of the movie. It is not supposed to be a funny movie, but the dialogue is sometimes hilarious.If you are curious to see what it was like to be a teenager in the 60's, you should definitely see this movie.

Jimpansy For the last couple of decades Niels Malmros has made various versions of the same story. This is not an exception. It is however way worse than the previous ones.Acting was ridiculously poor. Especially The girl lead was truly awful. Every piece of dialogue seemed staged and theatrical. No lines were that of 15-16-17 year old students, but rather a elderly mans perception of how they are supposed to talk.The movie is boring to the extreme. In order to counteract this - obviously the boredom issue was apparent even to the instructor - unfunny jokes are put into the script every once in a while. These made me cringe.I do however enjoy poor movies, and this one is memorable. Enjoyable to some extent, but not intentionally so.