Usually, when I'm overwhelmed by a film, I'll give it 10; when I'm offended, I'll give it 1. As for this one, I was neither, so I rather gave it a mediocre mark.While the users with excellent comments are overwhelmed by the tight plot, beautiful cinematography and incredible acting, others are offended by its cruel and controversial scenes. I'm sure both side are understood here. I did appreciate all the efforts from filmmakers and actors, but I had to say I didn't receive much from this film.I don't think those two kids are feral at all. At least, behind every negative things they did, there are reasons we are capable of making out. I mean...yes, these two kids lived in the dark side of the society since their births, and it's the world who's responsible for all their abnormality and destructive behaviours, and then what? In the film, some others tried to retrieve this situation, but the two kids just didn't buy it and even went further under the pressure, which was understandable. And when I expected the real changes, the film cut out. **(mild spoiler)In the end, the society failed to accept them back while the two kids went on living in their own world. Now that's what disappointed and upset me. And I don't think the adult couple willingly accepted Chloe's hug was strong enough to put an end to the society's effort and also to this film.** In that case, the film's effort on me went halfway...Also, in my opinion any art work should be careful of handling controversial issues. They have to be worthy in a film to achieve the effects, otherwise it could be offending. "Hard Candy" seems to me the best negative example. Fortunately, this one was just OK for me. After all, they were kids. Though doubting the realistic possibility of their extreme behaviours, I can always understand them.However, I believe the filmmakers agree with me on that understanding is not enough for those kids living on the edge of society. We don't want them to end up lost causes.Then there should have been more to this film.

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!

Chanced across this movie on the ever-reliable SBS television network tonight, and got hooked very quickly.After the "prison break-out" scenes at two-thirds of the way through I honestly thought that this movie should end. In fact I started to get annoyed with it at that point, but the relationship between the two leads was in fact extended in a completely different direction and the conclusion - that you only "have to sit down and push with your own two feet" - was well worth what seemed like a lengthy epilogue.In fact for me it was really the performances of the two leads that made this movie special. It's great to see such convincing performances from such young actors. It's certainly no Rain Man - thankfully. Joseph is particularly powerful as the Tom Cruise equivalent in the lengths that he goes to defend his "sister" - to the point of losing his own sanity. It's also no Shine - Chloe's almost wordless performance is really quite convincing without any of the effort that Geoffrey Rush had to make. I just hope she doesn't get type-cast.For the record, I don't think it's ever made clear that there is any direct family relationship between them, and in fact Chloe continues to seek her true "home" with Joseph's assistance - while he rejects his own.And ultimately it thereby becomes a story about family. Joseph rejects his true "family" when it is found, perhaps because he isn't satisfied that Chloe has found hers. When she wanders into her final ideal home and and hugs her final ideal parents (who Joseph holds at knife-point) it really gets rammed home that the only family they've ever had is each other.Sniff.Of course if you don't understand French and have to read the subtitles it's probably only a 7.5. And then I could spin a few more paragraphs about the story this tells about how we treat our children. But I won't.And having said ALL of that I do have some issues with some of the nudity in this movie. Having grown up in France I understand that it's "purely artistic" but I'm not sure that those standards apply in other countries.

Sometimes I wonder where people come up with these superlatives; every movie is the worst or the best, etc. And often one person like Karl, is saying this is the WORST, while someone else is trying to say this is the BEST, about the very same movie. Its a silly kid's game like who's the prettiest???Okay, I'm not going to say this is the best, =) but;It is a very interesting movie, it communicates some very complex ideas and does it in a way that is aesthetically well done. Karl says the movie has an overload of clichés, and lists murder, arson and incest.First of all, murder and arson do actually occur on a fairly regular schedule on this planet, these acts themselves are something of a cliché, but;This movie outlines an intense angst in the hearts and minds of these two kids, and the arson is actually a fairly mild reaction to that frustration. I really argue intensely with Karl's assertion that these themes are portrayed in a manner that is a cliché. I think the incidents are quite surprising in their context in the film, and therefore, not possibly clichés.Secondly, there is no incest,,, one central point of the film is that Joseph believes Chloe to be his sister, but even though he is told otherwise, still wrestles with his intense feelings for her. The love for her that he has developed, thinking of her as a sister, can't be erased by learning the fact that she is not.I agree with Karl that the acting of the boy playing Joseph is remarkably perfect, but the Adele Haenel's performance is even more astounding to me. Her character is spell binding. All in all, I have watched this movie at least 50 times, (I work in a situation where I repeatedly have the opportunity to get caught up in it) and every time I've seen it, I find something new from it. When I was in film criticism classes, I was taught that the basic purpose of a film is to communicate ideas, and do so in a way that is unusual enough to interest and entertain the viewer. This film does that well, so I rated it at an 8. Its not the best, but it's light years away from being the worst. Films aren't a contest Karl, the good ones are works of art to be appreciated by someone who takes the time to do so.