ChikPapa Very disappointed :(

GetPapa Far from Perfect, Far from Terrible

SeeQuant Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

GusF Based on a novel by the late Robert Cormier, the film paints a fairly dark picture of humanity in general and emphasises the dangers of mob rule through the vehicle of a chocolate sale in a Catholic High School of all things. A pessimistic tone pervades the film and, in the end, no one really wins. Good doesn't triumph over evil. While I haven't read the original novel from 1974, I certainly want to. Apparently, the original ending is even more pessimistic. The star of the film is, technically, Ilan Mitchell-Smith - best known as Wyatt in "Weird Science" a.k.a. the one who wasn't Anthony Michael Hall - as Jerry Renault. I say "technically" because while the thrust of the story pivots around Jerry, other characters have considerably more screen time, particularly in the first half an hour of the movie. To be perfectly honest, Mitchell-Smith isn't a great actor but he's certainly adequate. It's also supported by a great secondary cast including John Glover, Wallace Langham, Adam Baldwin and Doug Hutchinson (who was apparently 27 at the time in spite of the fact that he was playing an 18-year-old boy). Glover and Langham, probably best known for their roles in "Smallville" and "CSI" respectively, deserve particular praise.I've been wanting to see this film for over two years and it was well worth the wait. One of the most powerful films that I've seen in a long time which raises some thought provoking issues. It cost $500,000 but made only about $300,000 at the box office. It's so little known that I don't think that it's even earned cult status! I imagine that its lack of success was based on its somewhat silly sounding title, frankly. However, it's far darker and much more interesting than the title would suggest. The cheesy soundtrack aside, I heartily recommend this film.

preppy-3 This is a textbook example of how NOT to adapt a book to the screen.Teenager Jerry Renault in high school is having a terrible life. His mother just died, he has no connection with his father and has next to no friends. Then he has a run in with a secret group in the school called the Vigils. They tell him to do something and he refuses. Then his life becomes a nightmare...At least that's how the book went. The book is harrowing. Strong, powerful and very bleak and desolate and Jerry is put through utter hell and is almost killed in the end in a truly horrifying sequence. A faithful adaptation of the novel was not going to happen--it was considered too extreme and doubtless it would get an X rating (for the violence). So...why bother with a movie version? Well...they did. The story was toned down and changed a LOT and VERY badly cast (especially the part of Janza). It was also shot with a wobbly camera which made me sea sick and (for some reason) Jerry has acne and nobody else does (?????) And, worst of all, they totally changed the ending which completely destroyed the point of the book! The ending is just hopeless--I'd love to know what they thought of when they dreamed it up.The book is powerful, grim stuff and NOT for kids. It's not easy to read--it's very disturbing--but it has a point. This movie just tones down everything, casts it badly and destroys the book. This seems to have disappeared completely--that's a good thing. Don't bother. I give it a 1.

foOki Just a quick note on the much debated ending. ----------------------------------------------------Jerry won adulation from his superficial peers who didn't have the courage to stand up against their oppressors, and instead simply followed whoever seemed to be `on top'. A rather shallow victory if one at all, as succeeding in a circus-like fight against just one minion of the `Vigils' could hardly have been Jerry's desired ending. After all that, Archie was simply replaced by his apprentice.Cormiers ending was a far longer one and obviously darker. However this ending is still satisfying as the same underlying story remains, Jerry stood up for what he believed but in the end he was still a pawn.

Aussiesmurf An extremely low budget adaptation of Robert Cormier's coming-of-age novel hits most of the marks with accuracy. For the uninitiated, the plot concerns Jerry Renault, a freshman at a religious private school. He is drifting in an emotional vacuum since the death of his mother particularly due to the resulting emotional gulf between he and his father.At Jerry's school a secret society known as The Vigils plan various pranks and psychological games, known as assignments and given to various nervous freshmen such as Jerry. When a school chocolate sale becomes the focus of the Vigils and the staff, Jerry takes a seemingly futile stand against conformity that sets off many ramifications...The main things to praise about the adaptation are the acting by the various (mostly quite young) participants, and the tight script, which maintains a remarkable fidelity to the structure of Cormier's novel.MAJOR SPOILER!!!There has been much controversy concerning the ending to the movie, which is of the surface quite different from the novel. It is true that in the novel the villians go 'unpunished', while that is not the case in the movie. However, I would argue that the fate of Jerry, the protagonist is roughly the same. The point being that even if Jerry 'wins' the climactic fight, he has still really lost, because he has doomed himself by being a participant in a contest not of his making.Worth a look, but if you're studying the book at school, you'll need to read it as well.