simhou-1 I was not usually a fan of movies from the past....but this one truly took my breath away~ Especially the two Kids. They are truly something special....and to be recorded down in history with such an incredible film is just remarkable! They gave me chills from beginning to end, kept me captivated right from the start....and thrilled me to the very last second~ This, in my opinion, is how you truly make a Spine-Chilling Thriller! >_< If you are a fan of the classic Hitchcock Movies like Psycho, then this one is definitely your cup of tea.... There are quite a few similarities in the way they're both shot, but what makes this film stand out above the rest was those amazingly Talented Child Actors!!!Régis Arpin's (Thomas) death Glares gave me Shivers down my Spine....his face truly Epitomises the Core of this film!!! He has taken the term "Psycho" to a Complete Other Level - Re-Defining our Perceptions of Insanity~ However, the true Heart and Soul of this film has to be the Sensationally Stunning breakthrough performance of David Behar (Charles). In my eyes, he was the true Breakout Star of the film....every second he was on-screen, Demanded Our Attention - you can't help but be Mesmerised and Captivated by his performance!! Together the two actors have truly made history and created a bond of Epic Proportions....as I'm sure this will only be the beginning of a whole new perspective to the ways in which we'll be watching movies in the future.....All I have left to say is - Enjoy the Ride!!! Let this film take you to places you've never been before and let it Open your Mind, Eyes and Heart to something Majestic, Awe-Inspiring and Unforgettable.

R. Ignacio Litardo You still think childhood is naive and that only as adults we can become ... less good? Go watch this film now :)! Jean Rochefort, usually a likable chap, sort of like a French Sean Connery, in here plays against character, a rich lonely guy who isn't of course as mischievous as his son, but is no angel either.Films usually center or focus on one character, and this is Thomas Bréaud's movie! His cold stare and regular features are awesome. I'm surprised according to IMDb at least, he hasn't turned out any more films. Strange.Charles Vernet on the contrary, and probably predictably, is a good boy, a normal chap in unusual, I'd venture say, not a very healthy environment.I wasn't very convinced by her mum, played by Dominique Blanc with conviction but... there was something that didn't made me "see her" in the role, from the start. But that's probably me, for she's turned out more than 60 films, many well known. She is nice enough, dignified but also with obvious longings for earthly pleasures.My "favourite" scene is when Thomas, right after being saved by Charles, comes home and whispers to poor Charles: "Your mother is a prostitute". And then at night actually shows her son how her bed is empty, and offers to look at her father's bedroom. Let alone the play... Thomas is a born perverse, with an angel's face, which makes him even more "lethal".Visually arresting, like the scenes of the horses when the boys escape the castle, or Charles' ball bouncing off the ceiling of a cathedral, a helpless white soul in a solid grey world. OK, it sounds corny, and the film isn't, but it's what came to my mind at least :).Music is 90% classical, all by the same composer: Prokofief! You'll hear the "Romeo and Juliet" ballet excerpt more than once, put to perfect use (it's chilling!) and other famous and not so pieces. With the delightful châteaux and superb car (any IMDb user can help me out and tell me which is the brand and model?).Maybe Pedro Aguiar's insightful review here on IMDb of course is right, and only children's minds can grasp the "meaning" of a film such as this. I found it implausible on many accounts, to start with. And then, for some reason the film didn't resound to me as a humane story, but as a cold device made to shock, manufactured to startle and deceive. Like a mechanic cuckoo clock, if you get my analogy.I didn't like this movie in the sense it's not pleasant to watch, at all, but life isn't composed only of roses, beautiful things, and good people, so if you're prepared for an emotional ride, a movie that won't let you rest for a moment, like a thriller but with psychological action (thus more effective, by far) do watch this movie.Just don't tell me I didn't warn you :).

sosssod I believe this film is giving a lesson to all the Hollywood productions, and I'm glad to see that the Cinema isn't entirely dead. For his second film, after "La femme de ma vie", Régis Wargnier draws a parallel between the cruel games of childhood and the perversity of the adult world. The child actors are acting brilliantly through a disturbing film.VIVE LE CINEMA !

Pedro Aguiar I saw this movie 11 years ago, when I was almost the age of the protagonists, and it looked so real and intense to me that even for long later I still was impressed and didn't want to see it again. If you watch it, you'll probably understand why.Thomas (Régis Arpin) is the 12-year-old son of a millionaire who lives in a big mansion surrounded by woods in France. When his mother dies, his father hires a widow maid to take care of all while he is away. The woman brings her only son, Charles, to live with them and, hopefully, make company to lonesome Thomas. The rich boy and the poor one become enemies from the very first encounter. Moved essentially by jealousy and fear, Thomas decides to turn Charles' life into hell, especially after their parents eventually fall in love. As the title suggests, he wants to make clear to the 'invader' who is the lord of the castle.American audiences will compare it to "The Good Son", but Macaulay Culkin is a hundred feet below what Régis Arpin does in this movie. Childish cruelty here is not a psycho obsession, but rather a mean of defense which is later surpassed.Yet, it's the best French film I ever watched, even though I was that young boy the first time. By then, the end of the film seemed quite enigmatic to me. Years later, I thought I had found the clue and I had a certainty about it. By seeing it again, I believe it was really intended to be enigmatic, and there are no certainties to have: only a child's eyes are able to perceive.