Les diables

Joseph(Vincent Rottiers) is constantly running away from one children's home to the next with his non verbal, autistic sister, Chloe(Adele Haenel) who cannot stand to be touched by anyone. Only her brother is able to reach her, and she follows him as would a trained dog. With every escape the pair search for their childhood house, with false memories of a normal home life. They were actually abandoned by their mother at an early age.

The two are caught once again and Chloe begins to improve with the help of a caring worker at the facility they are living at. Joseph resents the fact that his sister no longer needs him and becomes a thief and hooks up with Karim, another troubled boy.

The three children make another getaway and find a house Chloe believes is their childhood residence. They rob the place and Joey burns it down, leading to more problems with the law, which are dealt with in an interesting manner. Les Diables is depressing but very realistic, and the two leads are extremely talented. They alone, are worth the price of admission.

I had a strange impression leaving the theater after "Les diables". I needed some hours to get back to reality. In some movies, you really have to convince yourself that the actors are really comedians, because they play in an amazing way.

This movie tell us about a little 12 years old boy, Joseph, who's trying to reach his parents' house with his autist sister, Chloe. Both are orpheans and Joseph is the only one who's able to manage his sister. They don't know where the house exactly is, but Chloe often makes a glass-mosaic representing the building. They will follow their path, purchased by cops and educating staff of different institutions.

I have to say that the rythme of the movie, the quality of the screenplay and, of course, the interpretation are all great, and left me the impression that, sometime, beauty is much more simple as what we believe.

A great and sober love movie, hope everybody will have the opportunity to see it.

To Karl, who practically took a swing at the director of this fabulous film, honestly you have no idea.

Please do tell me why this film was so bad? I found it inspiring and uplifting in a sense. I myself have an autistic brother and your dreadful use of the word "feral" was quite offensive.

To say it was one of the worst films you have ever seen is a complete utter joke. The director and actors have put countless hours into this film and the intriguing storyline was moving. Many movies out there either have no storyline or lack of effort in not only the directing of the film but the lack of professionalism on the actors behalf.

Again, I think you need to look at this film from a different angle as it seems you have only looked at it from a selfish point of view.

For the record, I thought it was an astounding film, absolutely magnificent performances by Vincent and Adele. Top work!

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.

Credit where it's due: filmmaker Christoph Ruggia and cowriter Olivier Lorelle penned an astonishingly fierce screenplay. Where it occasionally diverts even slightly from its core strength one can readily discern it's troubled by comparison; as a prime example, consider the major moment and curious plot point coming shortly after the one-hour mark. However, in its heavy focus on Joseph, Chloé, and the relationship between them, the writing is sharp and exquisite, often altogether downright brutal, and absolutely spellbinding. Chloé, autistic and all but entirely nonverbal, struggles to interact and grapple with the world, and be understood, in those ways she knows how. Joseph is as angry as the sun is hot, not to mention emotionally disturbed, and he readily lashes out at a moment's notice, while also being immensely protective of Chloé. Put the two of them together and the question quickly becomes who needs who more, and who truly understands who better. These dynamics resonate so deeply that they organically foster significant, heavy emotions regardless of what's happening in a specific scene - but to that point, the scene writing is so strong as Joseph and Chloé stumble about, with increasingly desperate situations in which for that ferocious push and pull to make waves, that the narrative which manifests is inescapably absorbing as the children move forward to an unknown, uncertain future.

That's one thing 'Les diables' unquestionably has going for it. Another is the cast. Everyone on hand gives tight, striking performances, and where usually I'd criticize acting that's as brusque and forceful as it is here - definitely echoing the tenor of Ruggia's direction - in this case I think that aggressive drift is very appropriate for this tale, and these characters. My commendations to all, though by all means Vincent Rottiers is rather captivating all by himself as anguished Joseph. He embodies the furious, bitter agitation of the boy all too well, to the point that it's somewhat difficult to separate part from player, but also illustrates gratifying nuance and range in betraying the underlying hurt and vulnerability. Personally, I'm surprised Rottiers wasn't more celebrated for his portrayal, because I think he's terrific. In fairness, in subsequent years he was quickly outshone by costar Adèle Haenel, who at this point needs no introduction. Even in only her debut role, thirteen years old at the time this was released, Haenel demonstrates a wholehearted commitment in her performance, and an unwavering passion and vitality as an actor, that exemplifies why she would go on to earn such stellar acclaim. If anything I think she's limited here by the nature of how Chloé is written, and perhaps in turn by Ruggia's direction, yet for the fact that even here she impresses so greatly is a fabulous testament to her skills.

We have to talk about the elephant in the room, though, and to do so, it's worth drawing comparisons to another French filmmaker. Louis Malle was a man who quite courted controversy in his career, for he had no qualms about broaching taboo topics - and he committed fully to realizing those topics on film, whatever that meant. Malle was never less than totally sincere, however, so while matters like underage nudity or incest can and should make us flinch in real life, his pictures come across as meaningful storytelling and exploration of these topics instead of the tawdry, dubious exploitation it could so easily be. As 'Les diables' delves into similar murky territory I believe in all earnestness that by and large the inclusions here, uncomfortable at best and almost entirely unwatchable at worst, do come from a place of simply relating a story, ugly though it might get, and not ducking away from the most unseemly aspects of it. On the other hand, the way the camera lingers on Haenel during her nude scenes, and the length and number of them, is distinctly disconcerting. To whatever extent the feature is only being true to the saga on hand, I don't think there's much arguing that it does also cross a line to be more than a little unscrupulous and indiscrete. Unfortunately, that foul notion is bolstered by the revelations in recent years about Ruggia's appalling behavior toward Haenel throughout the production. There's no excuse for what multiple people have accordingly corroborated, and that paints in a new, seedier light the degree to which Ruggia, as director, chose to showcase a thirteen-year old child as he did.

Though it's off-putting at first I do overall admire the direction here from a fundamental standpoint of orchestrating shots and scenes, and guiding the cast. And in all other ways this is splendidly well done, including those stunts and effects that are employed, production design, cinematography, editing, and so on. It bears repeating, too, that Rottiers' debut as Joseph, and Haenel's as Chloé, are outstanding, matching the stark, powerful writing note for note. In every way that counts, this movie is superb - I dare say, even better than I had hoped - a fine credit to (most) all involved, and easily deserving of a solid, high recommendation. This makes it all the more regrettable that Ruggia's poor behavior, and his dubious decisions regarding a select few shots and scenes, append a sketchy, wary asterisk to the title, and very much dampen the enthusiasm of any recommendation. For all the hard work and intelligence that went into 'Les diables,' and those ways in which it succeeds so roundly, it is well worth seeking out whether one is an especial fan of Rottiers, Haenel, or anyone else who participated. For those ways in which Ruggia's stamp was indelibly placed upon the production as a person and as a director, any discussion one would have of this gets a lot more complicated. Watch, if you have the chance, but watch with keen awareness.