Barn

Dag Johan Haugerud's second feature film "Beware of children" or originally "Barn" which means nothing like the English word, but "Children" or "Kids" in English, is a profound movie. The film premiered in competition at the Venice film festival. The film is treating the tragedy as we humas react. We deal with it both depression and humour (!). The film is much funnier than you would expect. We got to laugh about some people's reactions, and are disgusted by other's.

The film starts with it's turning point right away: A 13 year old boy is treated by an ambulance crew in an Oslo suburb school yard fotball field after what seems like a violent episode involving a girl at the same age. She tells she was "just kidding" but admits to hitting her class mate with her rucksack. The boy dies just after reaching hospital, and the school goes into crises mode. What makes it worse is that the scholl's freemale principal actually is having an affair with the boys single father, a right wing politician. The girl's parents are left wings, and the father actually a member of parliament. The film is about what happens, and what is said around the scholl environment and at their homes in the aftermath.

Just like his first feature "I belong" ("Som du ser meg" = "The way you see me") this film is really about human communication. I guess the way we communicate is something which interests director Haugerud quite a lot. and it is really interesting as well, and becomes very clear in his movies. Communication, and here as personal, and not so much through all kinmds of media, which many latter fils have as a theme, is based on so many factors. All humans social communcation is based upon upbringing and environment, and dealing with such a profond tragedy is a difficult matter for all. We was to blame? Was it an accident? Could this have been prevented? Who feels guilt? What was the reason for this? What do you say? What can be said? How de poople react? How can one deal with such a tragedy? How do the people around the main involved react? How can they help? What can't be said? What is said behind their backs? Well, still life has to go on. Even trivial talking about curtains and dinner.

The film two and a half hour long, which is a bit lenghty, but none in the cinema seemed to feel it too long. Me neither. Still I think many will think it's too long. However, it was very different, and quite interesting, though a tiny bit too subtle for to me for giving it a 10/10. Still a film I'd recommend, especially for teachers, but certainly also for people working in environments with a lot of people. Much is actually to learn.

Watched this movie at its premiere at the Venice Film Festival and was blown away about how funny and interesting it was. I thought the topic was so dark that it would be a sad movie, but rather on the contrary it was full of humour. I can not reccomend it enough. The movie is in Norwegian but the Italian translation was perfect. I can not wait to see this movie again! Could not reccommend enough!

Exceptional drama that, without fanfare, won the main Amanda awards in 2019, for best film, direction, screenplay, actor, supporting actor, cinematography, film editing, score and sound. With these credentials (plus the Nordic Film Council award for Best Film of the Year, with the highest cash prize known in all of world cinema), do watch this movie which, unhurriedly and with dramatic solidity, describes the crossing lines of life, alternatives and decision. Released in English-speaking countries as "Beware of Children", do not be fooled: these are not children of the corn, from Brazil, Rosemary's babies, Damiens or any other "alive" infant, but child victims of the world.

With a mobile football gate, in the middle of the playing field of a school in Oslo, which reappears on screen every so often as a leitmotiv, the story of «Children» unfolds for 157 minutes. One morning, during a break between classes, next to this football gate, Lykke, a 13-year-old girl, hits Jamie, a classmate of the same age, with her backpack, knocking him down and causing him to die accidentally. The girl will not get tired of repeating the same version: it was an accident, but nobody believes her. The circumstances are complex: Lykke is the daughter of a Labor Party leader, while Jamie's father is a far-right politician. In addition, the school principal maintains a secret relationship with the "neo-Nazi" politician; and her brother, a teacher, who was in charge of taking care of the children, was not present in the playing field when the events occurred, escorting a young and attractive intern.

Besides Lykke, the politician, the director and her teacher brother, several secondary characters are outlined with few but precise strokes, as an effective example of a contemporary society with great social advances, which debates the prospects of the future, with a central objective: the education of children. Making a film on this subject is not an easy task and making it enjoyable is a more challenging exercise. Director-screenwriter Dag Johan Haugerud deals with the formative ethics of teachers and parents, the debate between "political correctness" and a less rigid education, without neglecting the human side, the conflicts of ideologies and dogmas interfering in the affections and the class rooms, with Lykke always at the center, affected by the evolution of events.

With excellent performances from the entire cast, the two actors that attracted me the most were Ella Overbye as Lykke and Thorbjorn Harr as the right-wing politician. She, on the one hand, plays a lucid, fragile and vulnerable young girl; and while he is effectively terrifying, when the most cruel and authoritarian side of the man wins over the fragility of the hurt father.

In my mind, the film deals with a Norwegian way of handling a difficult situation. Being av Swede, a neighbour of Norway, I think that the film is also relevant for my own country. In our countries, people in problematic situations try to be kind, try not to be too emotional, and try to avoid the crucial question. In the film, one of the teachers was expected to guard at the break at the moment when Lykke killed Jamie. He did not do that. That was, however, not revealed until the end of the film. This remarkable delay was a consequence of the non-confrontational way of communication between the people in the film. Another aspect was the handling of the very causes of events. Obviously, Lykke had hit Jamie in a way that resulted in his death. We do not learn in any detail how this implausible event could happen. The was obviously due to a lack of any serious investigation. That, in turn, was due to regard to Lykke as a person who still was a child. An investigation would not result in any legal action. In the film, many people felt guilt. Due to the lack of clear common understanding of what had happened some people felt guilt unnecessarily. And for those that had actually contributed, the guilt could not be resolved since it was no common understanding of what had happened. So in my understanding, the avoidant way of handing a difficult situation, more people will be left with unresolved guilt.

Warmly recommend this film for everybody who is interested in questions about modern school and children-teachers parents relationships. Politically and socially engaging and perfectly balanced drama