Jackson Booth-Millard I found out about this French film because I remember seeing the title in the numerous editions of the book 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die, it was almost a contender in the Oscars category for Best Foreign Language Film, but it was nominated, I was looking forward to trying it. Basically set in southwest France in 1962, shy young man François Forestier (Gaël Morel) from the lower middle class is working towards his high school diploma. He spends most of time talking about movies and literature with his best friend Maïté Alvarez (Élodie Bouchez), whose mother Madame Alvarez (Michèle Moretti) is François's French teacher, she and her son are communists. At the boarding school, François becomes acquainted with immigrant farmers' son Serge Bartolo (Stéphane Rideau), they join in the dormitory at night for a chat and are drawn into an erotic relationship. François discovers his homosexuality and develops a deep attraction for Serge, who had only acted out of curiosity. Maïté is disappointed when he confides in her about his feelings, she encourages him to come out of the closet, Serge becomes increasingly interested in her, but Maïté is not interested in anybody. Serge's brother Pierre (Eric Kreikenmayer) dies while serving in the army in Algeria, and Maïté's mother suffers a nervous breakdown, then Algerian-born French exile Henri Mariani (Frédéric Gorny) aggravates boarding school and political conflicts. Henri is obsessed with events in Algeria and supports the OAS (Organisation armée secrete, meaning Secret Army Organisation), which opposes Algerian independence and defends the rights of French settlers there. Henri treats François with no sympathy and tells him bluntly to confess to his homosexuality, his political stance provokes Serge's hatred, Henri finally engages Maïté as they give in to their mutual attraction. Each character develops through the course of the film, repeatedly shifting from stubborn positions to more flexible appreciations of their circumstances. Also starring Jacques Nolot as Monsieur Morelli, Nathalie Vignes as Irène, Michel Ruhl as Monsieur Cassagne and Fatia Maite as Aicha Morelli. This is a complex story about war, class, sexuality and responsibility, I did find it hard to keep up with everything going on, but it was great to watch for the beautiful French countryside and other shimmering images, a worthwhile drama. Good!

ANightToRemember I've been a bit confused as to some other reviews I've seen on this site. Most call the film "beautiful" and a great realistic love story. In some cases they seem to right, but in other cases they aren't. Let's start with the plot: It's 1960's France, and we've got three guys at a boarding school. François (our main character), Serge (our main character's love interest/lust), and Henri (some kid with a radio). François is in some kind of borderline relationship with his best friend, Maïté. They're at a wedding of the older brother of Serge, even though we aren't totally sure who knows who and how they were invited there. I'll just assume that Maïté's mother, Madame Alvarez, somehow knows Serge's brother. Anyways they go through a horribly shot wedding (more on that later), then go. We get some dialog in which François claims Serge is "weird". Serge's older brother says something about being attracted to Madam Alvarez, and that she can help him get out of going to the war in Algeria. Oh, and he attempts to almost rape her, but don't worry: it's never brought up again.Anyways, Sergi seduces François one night, and it all goes from there. That kid with the radio is involved too, don't worry. Henri is apparently a Fascist from Algeria (strange, considering he's about as North African as a taco) who is always eager for news from there. It all goes from there, I don't want to give away too much.Okay, now let's start with my first problem: the cinematography. Some call it "beautiful" and it looks like "summer" and so "pure" all the time. Okay, no. It just sucks in this movie. NOTHING is unique about it. I could pick up a camera and make a movie in the same place with the same outdoor light, and it'd look so "artsy" to some. It is just... nothing. Nothing looks pretty, nothing looks unique. It's just average.And don't get me started on my main problem: the editing. The GODFORSAKEN EDITING. It's just awful. There are no transitions, at some points it seems to cut in mid-conversation. Let's use an example. At the beginning, there's a scene with Madam Alvarez is dancing with Serge's brother at his wedding. First of all, they are dancing incredibly quickly for a waltz, and they spin and spin and spin. We're with one camera angle (never cuts to another), so it's almost like both are trying to talk, but the other person continues to block them with their head. The scene ends with the two talking, only it's his shoulder covering half her face and his, well shoulder. It just looks terrible, almost unprofessional.A lot of elements seem tacked on. There's a whole sub plot with Madam Alvarez as well, with her going crazy over something (I'll leave it to you to see). Only there isn't a reason for it. At all. There isn't any resolution to her problem, no relation to our main characters, it's like they just wanted to add more drama, but it seems like two movies that were accidentally edited together when they should have been separate. The acting is quite good, though. They all seem to know their characters and do perfectly fine with what they have. I wouldn't mind seeing most of them in other films.But the direction that everyone calls "fantastic" isn't really that. Half the time the characters do things for no particular reason, leaving you wondering their motivations for half the things they do. While it isn't a bad movie, it isn't good. It's entertaining, but just an average piece of film. Nothing special. Go ahead and see it if you want to. By seeing it, you won't gain anything. By skipping it you won't miss anything.6/10

limau Well, actually, I exaggerate, it isn't really too bad, but I just feel obliged to balance off the hyperventilating praises that this film got from so many reviewers.This is a just so-so film that tells the lives and sexual awakenings of four teenagers in a school. The story itself is good, plainly told, and parts of it are well-done, and evocative of the feel at a particular time in history as well as of the confusion that teenagers can feel grappling with their sexuality and love lives.However, there are a number of problems. The acting of the main characters is really rather wooden (although the girl who played Maïté is an exception) - whether they are telling going through a personal crisis or telling an affecting story, there is little change in their expressions. The dialogue is sometimes verging on the silly - do young French people really constantly go round declaiming their thoughts and views in the way they do in this film? If you put some of the dialogue in the mouths of American teenagers and you will see how stupid and pretentious they are, but many reviewers seem to think that since it is French, it must be deep and profound rather than ridiculous.It is a shame that so many lose they critical faculty when judging non-American films. One reviewer claimed that it put 99% of American films to shame, when really, if truth must be told, the vast majority of foreign films are really quite poor, and this one is not an exceptional one. Some, perhaps the great majority, of the astonishing good and imaginative films in recent times comes out of America, while those from elsewhere often get stuck in retreading old stuff and mire in mediocrity. The awarding of the Palme D'Or this year to Ken Loach's utterly second-rate The Wind That Shakes the Barley is perhaps the ultimate example of this kind of blindness.

David On all fronts WILD REEDS is a top-notch drama - offering a look into the lives of 4 teenagers at a boarding school in rural France in the early 60s, this film is complex and immaculately well-made. Unusual in films depicting adolescence, WILD REEDS is complex and sophisticated, respectful of its' characters' varying sexualities (and their struggles to accept same), while also offering other glimpses of their intelligence and growing independence: views on the Algerian war, which was then raging, and on communism (with one character defined as communist, and another as an ardent anti-communist). The lush cinematography is summery and beautiful throughout, and the cast (most whom have gone on to other notable films) is great throughout.Techine's direction gives the many strands of this story a great, personal feel - the shoe store scene stands out as an honest depiction of an individual recognizing and trying to accept his sexuality, and attempting to identify other gay people, as a way of lessening isolation, and in an attempt at spontaneously finding some sort of role model. Very thoughtful and very well-made.