Varnier’s director exquisitely and succinctly reveals to the viewer the touching world of two teenage boys. Cold and calculating Tom with a sick ego and confidence in the advantages of an aristocratic lifestyle and his peer Charles, correct, sensitive and in love with his beautiful mother.
I have never seen such a lively, truthful, easy play of young actors. An internecine war for the right to be the head of the castle, the exemplary superiority of the upper class over the lower. Bullying, assault, Tom's neglect and Charles's quick-tempered response. In this picture there is a boyish fight, a struggle for power by all means, who is dominant and who is led?
The psychological deep bond between mother and Charles is shown with trepidation and the deprivation of the bizarre and strange Tom is juxtaposed. The obedient son is ready to fulfill any maternal orders, including to forgive all the evils of the spoiled boy, to fulfill the request of Mr. Brio, that is, to go against his heart, because Charles has a dream to see his father again, and not to be involved in the cycle of affairs in the life of his mother. In the address of the poor boy fly hurtful words that his mother is a prostitute and clings to the walking purse, and the biological father died long ago. Who is missing and who is missing?
Upon returning to the castle, the boys signed the pact in blood and promised to keep the oath. Charles pities his mother, compassionates her not sweet share of a single mother and sacrifices himself, which means he admits defeat and goes, in fact, all-in. The highlight of the plot is a theatrical reprise of Tom's not a children's production at all. This is the apogee of adult acting of children. Otherwise, farce. Other epithets do not fit the game; it is not simply frivolous, funny, absurd - it is a farce, clearly and unsophisticated.
Who will gain freedom, and who is doomed to become a prisoner of the castle?
In the end, you will enjoy a hearty victory.
I highly recommend watching this movie. Everything is fine in it: casting, music, light, scenery, camera work, editing. Excellent roles (both children and adults are great). It's not a Susan Hill movie. From there, only the general idea is taken, and the characters and context are completely different. The script and the direction are also beautiful. This is the case where the film did much, so to speak, better than the book and leaves a lot more to think about. The question of the strong and the weak is implicitly raised. What is the power of the individual, is it innate, what place does faith in God occupy in this matter; is this faith false? Why are most strong people often bad people and can they change? .
“I Was the Master of the Castle” is a film by the famous French director Régis Varnier, based on the book by Susan Hill “I am the King in the Castle”, which tells about the complexities of teenage relationships.
Far from the noise of cities and civilization, an aging Mr. Brio lives in an ancient castle with his young son Tom. Recently, their home was visited by death, taking Mr. Brio's wife and Tom's mother. Considering that the boy needs female care and companionship, Brio hires a governess, who also single-handedly raises his son Charles, the same age as Tom. Mr. Brio sincerely hopes that their children will become friends, and his son will no longer feel unhappy and lonely. But it's different. Selfish Tom considers the appearance of Charles an attempt on his personal territory, an attempt on his father’s love for him, and takes measures. Between the boys flares up irreconcilable enmity, sometimes leading to the most unpredictable consequences. Meanwhile, between Mr. Briaud and Madame Vernier there is a mutual attraction, which eventually develops into love. And this fact only deepens the mutual dislike of the boys.
"You're poor." You must obey me. These words are repeated more than once, making it clear to the viewer that even in the twentieth century the problem of “rich-poor” has not lost its relevance, although it was slightly shabby by the winds of revolutions. Here social inequality is one of the methods of humiliating and insulting the enemy, who, however, resists and begins to resist.
"Your mother is a prostitute." In this film, children’s perception of the world is combined with sophisticated cruelty, and jealousy and unwillingness to share “their” parent are one of the main motives for continuing the struggle. Each of the parents, in turn, becomes involved in the war between Tom and Charles, making the relationship of adults complicated and dramatized.
Another reason for the struggle between boys is the need to dominate. The natural desire for a teenager to assert himself in this tape becomes for the heroes almost a vital necessity. Smooth, with a twisted imagination, the domestic tyrant Tom and simple, but strong in body and spirit Charles - which of them will be stronger, which of them is the "master of the castle"?
Watching the drama unfold on the screen, the viewer does not just follow the sudden twists of the plot, no, he is forced to wonder: where did 12-year-old Tom get such ideas and such desires? What shaped Tom's perverse thinking - parenting, environment, or is he from birth a descendant of an ancient aristocratic family? . .
The minimalist design of the picture - muted watercolors and the absence of unnecessary sound effects - does not distract from what is happening, concentrating on a decent acting. Casting is really very good: young actors coped with their complex images impeccably. They made them believe in the experiences of their heroes and their soul throwing, not inferior to their adult colleagues in the person of Jean Rochefort and Dominique Blanc, who here managed to stay in the background.
The obvious drawback of the picture is not too high a degree of tension. Too calm pace of the narrative and too standard for such a promising story camera work leave the viewer outside the story itself, and the expected heat of emotions does not happen.
"Dance of the Knights" Prokofieva is symbolic at the beginning and end of the film. The war between Tom and Charles also bears the features of a knightly duel, albeit with sneaky techniques like throwing sand in the eye. But this story, which takes place against the backdrop of the walls of a Gothic castle and age-old trees, symbolizing the isolation of space and hopelessness, not only shows the viewer the drama of relationships, but also raises always topical social and philosophical questions, which the viewer will have to answer independently.
It would seem who would better understand and support the boy who lost one of his parents as not his peer, who experienced the same grief. No way! The two of them, as soon as they see each other, begin to feud.
Tom and Charles. These cute kids are each individual. Thomas is a little prince on his planet. From the first minute you expect something unusual, some original judgments, unpredictable jerks. Well, a boy with such an appearance can not be ordinary: play locks and admire stories about gnomes and cheburashkas. And he does not disappoint: childish cruelty is bizarrely intertwined in him with curiosity, a desire for play, and even with religiosity.
Charles is the most ordinary boy, who is full in every courtyard. He loves his friends and is hostile to his enemies. But he doesn't choose them, they choose him. He is guided, despite his strength and courage. Charles is like that stupid dog chasing a car. Catch up, what's next? Even having won, tied and defeated Tom, he remains indecisive. Almost all of his decisive actions are just a defensive reaction to an external stimulus. But it was a pleasant surprise.
I do not think that Tom, with all his extraordinaryness, would be able to sacrifice anything for the sake of a loved one.
No matter how tense the plot twists, somehow one does not believe in the seriousness of their enmity. They are like two mischievous kittens – they seem to fight at full strength, but do not cause serious injuries to each other. Their peculiar concept of honor does not allow any of them to cross the line on the edge of which they always slide.
7 out of 10
What's this movie about? Hard to say... To put it in one sentence, it’s a story of hate and love. As you know, the distance is only one step.
The aging wealthy Mr. Breo, having lost his wife, is left alone in his luxurious mansion with his young son Tom, whom he loves very much, but whose upbringing he clearly cannot afford. After the death of his mother, the boy, deprived of communication with his peers, becomes even deeper into his inner experiences and dreams, and it becomes increasingly difficult for his father to maintain contact with him. To somehow overcome the ever-increasing alienation of his son, Breo hires him a governess - a young, pretty widow of Madame Vernet, whose son, Charles, is the same age as Tom. Breo's calculation is clear and simple: communicating with Charles, Tom will be able to gradually forget the bitterness of the loss and return his father to his favor. Breau's hopes are strengthened when he first sees Madame Vernet and her son at the railway station, falls in love with her at first sight.
But it's not that simple. Tom meets the new inhabitants of the mansion in bayonets, and from the first minute declares them a ruthless war. After a couple of tricks, Charles responds in kind. Meanwhile, Mr. Breau and Madame Vernet gradually develop a mutual feeling. Against this background, they are eager to show their care and love to both boys. But between children begins a tough struggle for leadership and for the attention of parents, as they do not want to give up “their” parents in the “other” hands. They use all means at their disposal, from mutual threats and insults to attempts to physically eliminate an opponent. Mutual hostility leads the heroes to very dramatic consequences. Only a miracle and Tom's prayers save them from a tragic denouement, when Charles, running away from home, tries to kill an annoying rival who is following him. In these “children’s wars” with non-childish passions, parents are also involved, who are passionately carried away by each other, then cool down, seeing the terrible consequences of child enmity.
The most remarkable thing is that in the process of mutual fierce confrontation, both parents and children gradually realize that without these thrills, their future life is no longer possible. Trying to eliminate rivals from their lives, they become more attached to them. Hatred and dislike of each other bizarrely transformed into sympathy and love. The courtship of Mr. Breau is emphatically rude and harsh and sometimes meet no less fierce resistance from Madame Vernet, and Tom, brotherly kissing Charles, whispers in his ear: "Your mother is a prostitute!" Tom is very close to his father and categorically tells Charles that "father is better than mother." But at the same time macabre from the touches of Madame Vernet, that is, she misses the mother's caress and, in general, if it were not for Charles, probably would have resigned himself to this choice of his father. Charles, in turn, is madly in love with his mother, but believes Tom's opinion about her (which is why he agrees to play the role of a prostitute mother in an impromptu play arranged by Tom) and now and then tries to run away from home in the hope of finding his father, who disappeared somewhere in Indochina. The logical result of these sensual dissonances is the final scene on the seashore, when Tom in despair begs to return disappearing in the waves of Charles, to whom he promised only a few minutes ago a difficult life in the walls of an elite school, where they would now have to study together. This is hate and love.
Filmed qualitatively, without noticeable pauses and plot slowdowns. Actors, including young ones, play at a high level. In general, the film makes a good impression and causes strong emotions. It's worth seeing.