The Childhood of a Leader

2016 "Witness the birth of a terrifying ego."
The Childhood of a Leader
6.2| 1h56m| NR| en| More Info
Released: 22 July 2016 Released
Producted By: Hepp Film
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

The chilling story of a young American boy living in France in 1918 whose father is working for the US government on the creation of the Treaty of Versailles. What he witnesses helps to mold his beliefs – and we witness the birth of a terrifying ego.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Hepp Film

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Michael Ledo PLOT SPOILER REVIEW...if I understand it.The story is about a precocious, insolent, young American boy Prescott (Tom Sweet), growing up in France as his dad (Liam Cunningham) negotiates the Treaty of Versailles, which many say lead to the second World War. H.L. Mencken claimed the Second World War was fought because we backed the wrong side in the first war.The film is organized as a musical opera, implying there is a conductor over us and history is set whether it is Hitler or Prescott, the wheels are in motion. The dialogue about history "It happened before" shows that things go in cycles and nothing really can stop it.The picture is nearly half in French. It is slow and boring, even the groping parts. The parents gave Prescott far too much freedom, although that is certainly not the case of evil dictators making me question what was the whole point? And the gap between the childhood and the last 8-10 minutes of the film, I would consider more important than Prescott dressing up as a girl, groping his teacher and screaming he doesn't believe in prayer. Yawn.The film has won numerous awards and is critically acclaimed. I think everyone is out of step, but Johnny.Guide: No swearing, sex, or nudity.
Turfseer Those indie filmmakers contemplating a directorial debut should beware of a dreaded contagion which I have dubbed "The Citizen Kane syndrome." You don't exactly have to be a boy wonder such as Orson Welles to churn out a well-received debut feature—all you have to do is be a technical virtuoso with a brilliant set design, highly original cinematography and an experimental, gripping score that diverts your audiences' attention from a screenplay that is so generic that virtually all psychological complexity is lost. Of course Welles managed to avoid all that until he substituted the stock melodramatic figure of his protagonist Charles Foster Kane for the real-life William Randolph Hearst, in the second half of what has come to be regarded as the most technically innovative film of the 20th century.Debut Director Brad Corbett also seems to have fallen victim to the "syndrome" in his rather specious take on the childhood of a wholly generic "Fascist leader." But before we examine the generic quality of his narrative, Corbett's talents still must be acknowledged. He has put together a story involving a period in history that is rarely covered these days—a behind-the-scenes look at the Versailles Treaty negotiations from the Allied point of view; what's more he's impressively employed Kane-like cinematography and music, creating a Gothic noir palette reminiscent of the German Expressionists.That being said, Corbett's story that seeks to explore the roots of fascism, manages to hold few surprises. His anti-hero (played by the young Tom Sweet) is named Prescott (aka "The boy")--he's the son of a married couple, a German woman and a US diplomat, who has arrived in France as part of the team to negotiate the terms of the Versailles Treaty with Germany, along with the other defeated countries in World War I.Corbett's narrative chronicles a series of tantrums the boy throws beginning with some rocks he hurls at parishioners leaving a church. The head priest tries to reason with the boy but his anti-social behavior continues. The mother's main crime, according to the film's scenarists, is that she overly-feminizes her son by failing to cut his hair short; at a certain point, the father's fellow diplomat mistakes the boy for a girl. On another occasion, the boy gropes the breasts of his French teacher--which I suppose is intended to suggest that he's acting out his Oedipal attachment on a more attractive substitute.Eventually the boy parades naked in front of the father's assembled associates and then locks himself in his room and won't come out, despite entreaties from his mother and a sympathetic maid who is eventually fired by the mother for encouraging him in his rebellious proclivities.Corbett takes a stab at blaming an authoritarian patriarchal culture for the boy's eventual descent into what appears more like Stalinism than Fascism at film's end—it's the boy's father who gives him a nice little whipping after refusing to comply with his demands to come out of his room. Thus, the boy's childhood traumas at the hands of his parents, serve mainly as the director's explanation for his embrace of evil as an adult.At the denouement, Corbett only offers a glimpse of his authoritarian martinet. And as argued before, it's a wholly generic portrait since we learn nothing about the future monster to be except that he's propped up by an adoring crowd of sycophants.Corbett also indulges in generalizing about the average man's apathy in the face of evil. Echoing Satayana's famous quote ("Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"), he has one of his characters, Charles, a widowed British diplomat, quote the Sartre- influenced novelist John Fowles: "That is the tragedy: Not that one man has the courage to be evil, but that so many have not the courage to be good."Corbett's greatest failure here is to develop some of the ideas from his source material—a short story by Sartre (from which he takes the title of this film)—in it, Sartre follows his protagonist who has a one-time affair with a pederast poet and then joins a group of youths, who assassinate a Jewish man on the street. This idea is also found in Rossellini's film—Germany Year Zero—where a prepubescent boy murders his father after coming under the influence of a Nazi-sympathizer, a pederast, in post-war Berlin.Encounters that prepubescent boys and young teenagers had with pederasts and certain kinds of homosexuals (not of the liberal persuasion)--as chronicled in such books as "The Hidden Hitler" and "The Pink Swastika"—suggest that there may be more of a direct connection to adults joining fascist movements later on than what Corbett lets on here. Again, his rather tame speculation finds its roots in his simplistic, generic understanding of "evil"—not based on true, real-life experience. Still, Corbett is not without talent on a technical level—a script with more psychological depth the next time around should afford him an opportunity to join the ranks of talented directors churning out compelling art-house offerings.
zacknabo Brady Corbet has assimilated many wonderful visual styles which he has picked up over the past several years working with master directors such as Von Trier and Haneke, but this is all Corbet has accomplished. Reappropriating stunning visual film language does not a good director make, because used haphazardly the images lose their ominous, dark tone and are instead replaced with empty somewhat pretentious images that have nothing story or acting wise holding it up. So all we are left is a misfire. While Corbet is similar to another young director, Xavier Dolan, in that they are trapped exercising their personal influences, Dolan has more innate talent. I would say that Corbet's command of the camera at times is promising. The sad part is he has a great skeleton but no meat and few functioning organs. The performances are a bit flat, though they are only working with what they are giving. Bejo is tiresome and Pattinson is...Pattinson. The best scene is in the beginning where the young boy gets in trouble with snowballs, a possible reference to Abel Gance's Napoleon. Corbet like Napoleon is undone by his ambition. But I do wish more directors were this ambitious in their debuts. If nothing else Corbet swung for the fences...and he should know better: nobody does Haneke better than Haneke.
Rodney Larios This movie might have been decent if I was able to actually decipher some of the dialogue. The French was not subtitled and it was spoken through at least half the movie. The English was whispered behind music that was entirely too loud. But what bothered me most is there was not enough "story". Why did he have mental health issues? His mother seemed to love him, he was cared for by people close to him. He was not poor or abused, give me something! There is not even enough for me to provide a decent speculation. I think it could have been so much better, as much as I wanted to like it, I did not. The music tried to make it more suspend up than it actually was. The people that say this was "art" are just lame and use that as an excuse to give it better reviews. This movie had no substance and no matter how you try and describe it, the fact of the matter is that it doesn't!