Liebe mich, wenn du dich traust

Two children start an odd game of outdoing each other with limitless dares and stunts, but as they grow into adulthood their stunts become more dangerous and life threatening. Soon enough they realize that their continuation of the game had been a desperate attempt to hide the fact that they were meant for each other. Right away this film starts off in a dream like state, giving us the sense that we're really watching a school play put on by 4th graders. The mood is very light and playful and goes along with the child like innocence of Julien and Sophie. As the two characters mature so does the directing (for lack of a better phrasing). No longer do we feel like we are in the dream of a 10 year old. Reality settles in and eventually the mood in the film becomes very dark and almost depressing. I loved everything about this movie: the plot, the actors (and the chemistry between them) but most of all the directing. I liked the way Yann changed the mood in the film to match that of the character's ages. 9/10

I love this film. It's light, dreamy, and colorful. The movie does not ask you to take it seriously, but simply to watch as Julien and Sophie play with the elements of conventional life. I'm reminded of a character from Milan Kundera's Immortality, who played with the world in the same fervor and commitment.

We see Julien and Sophie's games becoming more and more elaborate as they grow up, affecting other lives even. And when they do, you understand at most levels that they do not mean to hurt other people. They just play as the game is supposed to be played.

It is fantasy in that it lets you suspend realism for a moment, and dwell on the things we take for granted many times- laughter, romance, and childlike innocence. This movie made me smile, and I have no need to question motivations etc. It would be absurd to questions things that are meant to be left alone in their wonder.

Yann Samuel and Antoine Roch the DOP have tried very hard to mimic Jeunet's 80s 90s style (green photography, digitally enhanced ultra-swift camera tracking etc...) which all came from the French TV advertising trendy aesthetics of the 80s. And achieved nothing but an irritating flick. Jeux d'Enfants contains nothing you have not seen before. You wish filmmakers had turned the page... No. The whole "stylish" shooting is so much in your face that it prevents you from following the ultra slim story line. The actors are good (Canet and Cotillard have proved elsewhere that they can act) so what's so wrong and phony about Jeux d'Enfants? You have to look towards the director, who must value photography and camera moves more than actor's direction. What about the script? As often these days, the concept is the whole thing (Open Water, Phone Booth etc...): short and easy to market. What about the spectator who's paid his ticket? Is there anything left for him? Like life, emotions, tears, joy, fear, laughter? Nope. He's been conned. The dialogs are not funny. They're actually incredibly sloppy and vulgar (an 8 year old girl saying "blow job" to her teacher is tasteless and not funny, if not completely unrealistic). The story is unbelievable, and the characters are heartless. No emotions, no depth, no fun. Sheer vulgarity. With color grading gone bad. A talentless caricature of wannabe trendy French cinema. Thank God there are films about youth like Billy Elliot who talk to one's heart, eyes, brains and soul...

The first feature from French director Yann Samuell is an "expressionistic" allegory about love, disguised as a romantic fantasy. It is about how in our relationships we never outgrow childhood games or fully recover from the insecurities caused by deep childhood wounds. It is about how people in love constantly test each other. Each dare is a renewed demand for the other person to prove their love, no matter what the sacrifice.

"Love Me If You Dare" is a gimmick translation of "Jeux d'enfants", a better translation would be "Games of Children". But given the general confusion about this film by English speaking viewers and critics the inaccurate title is probably appropriate. Film Theory 101 would include a discussion of the two basic film extremes, realism and expressionism. Generally the closer a film comes to reproducing reality, the less room there is for the filmmaker to express his artistry. Which is not to say that realism is necessarily less manipulative than expressionism, both aim to effect their viewing audience, expressionism is just less constrained.

When you are used to a steady diet of Hollywood realism, it is difficult to switch gears and watch a film like "Jeux d'enfants" without attempting to force it into the realism mold. The temptation is to gloss over the surreal elements and to take everything you see literally. But Samuell has a background as an illustrator and designer. Note the inventive visuals that employ a multitude of cardboard cutouts and idyllic fantasy settings. This is expressionism. Note the accelerated action segments and strange transitions. This is expressionism. Note the interesting time passage montages and flashbacks.

While you sometimes see similar stuff incorporated into a realistic film, it is explained away as a dream, hallucination, or memory. Here it is a tip-off that this is a surreal allegory like Bunuel's "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie". If you avoid taking "Jeux d'enfants" too literally, stop being judgmental about the actions and motivations of its characters, and focus instead on picking up its allegorical elements you will probably understand it better and enjoy it more.

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.

It's funny how when it comes to french movies, french people are just so harsh (i'm refering to previous comments about this movie and others)!

This one starts really (i mean really) good and, it's true, goes through worse scenes ... but the end ... well I loved it! It sure can be accused to mimic american movies (just listen to the music and the "passing-above" camera moves) but shortly after it really turns ... well ... "french". But it's not a bad thing in my opinion. Talking about the characters, You just can't help thinking "what's with them ?", why are they acting like they do ? I like to think it's because of a tradition in french cinema. Characters have to be twisted and torn apart because of their deep feelings.

In the sequence of events, it can be perceived as seemingly weird ... and I have no answer to that ... Yet I appreciated it quite much and I'm looking forward to watching the next Samuell's piece. I rated it 9 out of 10. And i can only tell: watch it!