The Devils (2002)

Just perfect...

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

Usually, when I'm overwhelmed by a film, I'll give it 10; when I'm offended, I'll give it 1. As for this one, I was neither, so I rather gave it a mediocre mark.While the users with excellent comments are overwhelmed by the tight plot, beautiful cinematography and incredible acting, others are offended by its cruel and controversial scenes. I'm sure both side are understood here. I did appreciate all the efforts from filmmakers and actors, but I had to say I didn't receive much from this film.I don't think those two kids are feral at all. At least, behind every negative things they did, there are reasons we are capable of making out. I mean...yes, these two kids lived in the dark side of the society since their births, and it's the world who's responsible for all their abnormality and destructive behaviours, and then what? In the film, some others tried to retrieve this situation, but the two kids just didn't buy it and even went further under the pressure, which was understandable. And when I expected the real changes, the film cut out. **(mild spoiler)In the end, the society failed to accept them back while the two kids went on living in their own world. Now that's what disappointed and upset me. And I don't think the adult couple willingly accepted Chloe's hug was strong enough to put an end to the society's effort and also to this film.** In that case, the film's effort on me went halfway...Also, in my opinion any art work should be careful of handling controversial issues. They have to be worthy in a film to achieve the effects, otherwise it could be offending. "Hard Candy" seems to me the best negative example. Fortunately, this one was just OK for me. After all, they were kids. Though doubting the realistic possibility of their extreme behaviours, I can always understand them.However, I believe the filmmakers agree with me on that understanding is not enough for those kids living on the edge of society. We don't want them to end up lost causes.Then there should have been more to this film.

Les diables is a powerful, delightful, poignant and terribly sad film. Hard to endure in many of its crucial moments. Definitely not a popcorn movie. This is a film with a lot of work in the script and a lot of masterful work in many other aspects.The acting is not only superb... it's mesmerising. I think about myself directing these two young actors into such a complicated argument and it sort of makes me shiver.This film seems to explode in your mind. The story is so engaging and powerful, you'll have the same experience many of us already have: it's very difficult to put it away for a long time.Cinematography is on par and above of the best french contemporary cinematographers. Lighting, locations, wardrobe and the whole aesthetic experience is so subtle that it goes under the skin unnoticed, but with a clear and powerful purpose. The dynamics are all well thought and paced to fit the crudeness of the story.But, above all, the acting reflects the most difficult human experiences in a world where all the characters have is each other. It's a fearful drive in the territory of love: its beauty, its bitterness, its bright and dark sides. All in all, a film about love where the most unexpected things will happen.

Wow, where did these actors come from? Throughout the film, I was in turmoil who was the better actor, Adele Haenel or Vincent Rottiers. She did an outstanding job in an almost non-speaking role and he was very morose, gloomy and violent as well. I do believe that to get children (although they're almost teens) to act this way is very hard. And to accomplish it in two actors, is very admirable. Ruggia did an excellent job, maybe the casting alone was 90 percent of that.Without spoilering anything, I would like to comment that the let's say, 'least boring scenes' between Haenel and Rottiers, to use a heavy understatement, have not been shot in a mainstream film, since Maladolescenza (1977) ( http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0076749/ ). I suppose Ruggia didn't care about American distribution, and rightly so. Take into account that Maladolescenza was shot in a very different era, where a lot more was possible, a much more permissive epoque when not EVERY bit of skin was declared porn as it is now, we have to salute Ruggia even more, and Haenel and Rottiers as well. Although ... I don't know what the reason is that Haenel has not made a film since Les Diables, and Rottiers has. If it is because of those 'least boring scenes', then that surely would be a pity, because then we would have lost a potentially great actress.

Sometimes I wonder where people come up with these superlatives; every movie is the worst or the best, etc. And often one person like Karl, is saying this is the WORST, while someone else is trying to say this is the BEST, about the very same movie. Its a silly kid's game like who's the prettiest???Okay, I'm not going to say this is the best, =) but;It is a very interesting movie, it communicates some very complex ideas and does it in a way that is aesthetically well done. Karl says the movie has an overload of clichés, and lists murder, arson and incest.First of all, murder and arson do actually occur on a fairly regular schedule on this planet, these acts themselves are something of a cliché, but;This movie outlines an intense angst in the hearts and minds of these two kids, and the arson is actually a fairly mild reaction to that frustration. I really argue intensely with Karl's assertion that these themes are portrayed in a manner that is a cliché. I think the incidents are quite surprising in their context in the film, and therefore, not possibly clichés.Secondly, there is no incest,,, one central point of the film is that Joseph believes Chloe to be his sister, but even though he is told otherwise, still wrestles with his intense feelings for her. The love for her that he has developed, thinking of her as a sister, can't be erased by learning the fact that she is not.I agree with Karl that the acting of the boy playing Joseph is remarkably perfect, but the Adele Haenel's performance is even more astounding to me. Her character is spell binding. All in all, I have watched this movie at least 50 times, (I work in a situation where I repeatedly have the opportunity to get caught up in it) and every time I've seen it, I find something new from it. When I was in film criticism classes, I was taught that the basic purpose of a film is to communicate ideas, and do so in a way that is unusual enough to interest and entertain the viewer. This film does that well, so I rated it at an 8. Its not the best, but it's light years away from being the worst. Films aren't a contest Karl, the good ones are works of art to be appreciated by someone who takes the time to do so.