Les Enfants terribles

There's a lot to like in this: the good music, the nice cinematography, the solid acting and the story's creepy surreal nature. As good as the elements are, though, they just didn't create an appealing film. I never cared for the main characters and I couldn't find anything meaningful to get me involved. It was interesting, but left me feeling unfulfilled.

This is a different style for Melville, for sure. I couldn't help but feel a distinct disconnect with the whole cast throughout the movie. It felt lifeless and the chemistry between all of them was virtually nonexistant. The story and writing was fine enough, but the real star of the movie was clearly Melville's direction and the music choice to really hammer away at the audience. It may not be great as many of Melville's movies are, but it's surely decent and an interesting watch.

a brother and sister yell at each other a lot. the love quadrangle is pretty interesting for a while, and there is a good dose of surrealism, but in the end it's just silly, and even with melville directing, i blame jean cocteau entirely. his curly script goes everywhere but somewhere, and the set design, which seems to have garnered praise, is more stuffy than elegant. one commenter said this is about siblings wanting to fuck each other; i'd suggest there are speedier ways to attain that goal.

Cocteau's stamp seems more prevalent than Melville's, resulting in a melodrama less methodical and more literary. That's okay, though. These characters are brutal. It's a ruthless battle of wills, and I just lapped it up. There are also interesting undercurrents of taboo eroticism, including hints of incest and homosexuality.

Directed by Melville, but it's got Cocteau's stamp all over it. His voice is unmistakable... both his literary voice (he wrote the novel) and his actual voice (he performs the narration). It even looks like a Cocteau film. I'm rather indifferent to Cocteau (I'm not even sure if I like La Belle et la Bete that much anymore) so I didn't get much out of it. I can't point to any particular flaws, but I didn't connect with it on any level. All I can say is: eh, it was okay.

A uneasy collaboration between director Jean-Pierre Melville and writer of the story Jean Cocteau. Such a deep portrayal of psychopathic and manipulative siblings. Not denying that it's a high-quality movie and that it very unique in its story, but it's also hard to embrace because of the characters being so unlikable. This is the sort of relationship one can write a thousand different analyticals about, for it makes a lot of impressions, most in directions my mind don't wanna go.

More of a Cocteau than a Melville film. The Cocteau script really nails the unique sibling dynamic where to everyone else, it looks like you're spewing vile hatred at each other but you're really both in on the joke. Difficult to get very invested in the proceedings beyond that though.

O segundo longa de Melville estreava há 70 anos na França. Fiquei sem reação ao terminar de vê-lo porque sinceramente não sabia se tinha gostado ou não dele, pois me parece tão peculiar dentro da carreira do Melville e tem escrito Cocteau por todo ele, que meio me senti ludibriada. Em todo caso é um excelente filme que vai ao extremo para mostrar poeticamente a toxidade das pessoas. DVDRip no MakingOff.

Rarely goes beyond a mere illustration of Cocteau's wonderful novel. Enjoyable but unremarkable.

73.500

The movie version of Cocteau attempt to become Genet. It is even worse than the book.

74.750

Powerful. Flawed, maybe, ...but very powerful.

Very nice looking movie about bugshit-crazy incestuous desire. Both the the brother and sister and the idiot friends who indulge them are completely unrelated to anything remotely human. As a response to other comments here, there are not undercurrents of incest; THEY ARE THEY WHOLE POINT OF THE STORY. It is a story of a brother and sister who want to fuck one another.

#894

A bit too French, when you get right down to it. The characters are insufferable and the screenplay feels clumsy, but the cinematography is attractive, and some shots are just pure visual poetry. Not one of Melville's best, but further establishes Melville as a solid stylist.

Visually arresting and surprisingly fast-paced, this film develops a brother-sister relationship that is endlessly complex. I just couldn't get over how annoying and generally uninteresting Nicole Stéphane and Edouard Dermithe were as the two leads. (In other news, the Philip Glass opera based on this is FANTASTIC)

I haven't liked what I've seen of Cocteau so far, but I loved his writing in this and Melville handled it well.

833

Discreet, intense, fascinating....

Energetic, curious, neurotic and feverish (there are moments here clearly resembling a dream/nightmare). It reminded me somehow of Greenaway in its somewhat stilted lyricism and formal bravura - although this is far more "throbbing" than what I've seen by him (and maybe I'm just crazy comparing the two). Fascinating if not completely arresting.

786

I guess I expected the style here to be more like typical Melville. It's still absolutely out of this world stylish, but wasn't what I expected. Unfortunately, other than the style there's not a lot here. Very dramatic story, but the actors weren't getting me to buy it.

It's a very interesting movie, at the least; very memorable sets, a nice musical score, an intriguing story, twisted relationships, and so on. The acting is a bit melodramatic and leaves something to be desired, but the movie is very much a stylistic triumph. I'm not sure how compelling it is as a whole, but I very much enjoyed it. It's a well-made movie in all regards and it's very unique. The more surreal, dreamlike sequences were fantastic; a lack of narration would've enhanced this.

I liked the set design.

# 888