I Declare War (I) (2012) User Reviews

War ... It's child's play

[Coventry · 7/10 · 8 April 2013]

Like many fellow viewers at the Brussels International Festival of Fantastic Films that afternoon, I didn't have any clear idea on what to expect of "I Declare War". It plays at this prominent and reputedly brilliant genre festival, so it must contain some sort of significant cult value, that's for sure. But what exactly to prepare for, I didn't know… Drama and valuable coming of age life lessons like in "Stand By Me"? Adventure and thrills like in "Lord of the Flies"? Or maybe something entirely unique and innovative like "War of the Buttons", or something extreme and shocking like "Battle Royale"? It became somewhat of a mixture of everything, in fact, and yet at the same time something totally new and original. Although I certainly can't state that "I Declare War" is one of the greatest and most eye-opening films ever made, I'm nevertheless very glad that I watched it and wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to a wide variety of film fanatics. It's an atmospheric and occasionally very suspenseful motion picture with sublime performances from the youthful ensemble cast (not a single adult in the film) and a well-scripted scenario that thankfully doesn't get overly moralizing or metaphoric near the finale. It's summer vacation and the neighborhood boys gather every afternoon in the woods to play war. The rules are quite simple: two camps and two generals instructing their teams to capture the opponent's flag through smart tactics and ingenious war strategies. The soldiers use wooden sticks and water balloons, but through their vivid and wildly imaginative eyes we see rifles, machine guns, bazookas and grenades. Today also promises to become a special day for the troops, as there will be mutiny within the platoons, female soldiers joining for the very first time and ordeals that will genuinely put the soldiers' friendships to the test. "I Declare War" is reasonably fast-paced and benefices from terrific filming locations as well as from steady direction and – as mentioned already – stellar performances. The sound, visual and make-up effects definitely aren't childish, but neither are they provocative or graphic. In other words, this isn't just intended for physically grown-up people, but also for emotionally mature audiences … largely accomplished by kids! What I appreciated most of all was that, at all times, the children remain in fact children. Their reasoning, motivations and interactions are exactly like any child of whatever origin or culture would react. That sounds logic, but it really isn't as the movie will make clear, and that's why it's such an impressive and highly recommended effort.

Stand by me no south park yeah maybe.

[ericnottelling · 5/10 · 27 July 2013]

If anyone compares this to stand by me I'd really like to know what they see as the comparison other than it has kids and one of them wears a red shirt that looks like the kid from stand by me shirt. The kids remind me more of south park characters with their style of foul mouth and mean demeanor. Yes there was swearing in stand by me, but it had actual context of bonding and horsing around. You had a sense the kids liked each other. This movie not so much. It's more of a south park effect. It lacks real character connection and any sort of philosophical point. In some sense I think they may have been better off running with more imagination of the war thing, almost like a pans labyrinth, than what they did. The characters were very cliché and over the top. I don't blame the actors for it, I think the kids did a great job, more the script they were handed. It makes the movie hard to watch at points, because the script writing just doesn't hold much reality to how kids really act, which I think was a real strength in stand by me. I wouldn't watch this with smaller kids. But if you are bored and got nothing else to do it's OK.

Surprising, Unexpected Warfare

[in1984 · 7/10 · 31 July 2013]

7.1 of 10. Far more entertaining than the average war film, and far more insightful. It's tempting, and would be too easy, to compare it to Lord of the Flies given the ages fo the combatants. It is a more realistic and more likely version of Lord of the Flies, something that could easily happen in bigger town or distant suburb, maybe South Park in the 6th or 7th grade or Kids (1995) 3 years earlier and a 100 miles north of New York City. Part of the enjoyment is that it does set itself apart from most of the common teen/child story lines.

Outside of some annoyances involving actions and characters that seem to be stretching reality or purely for sex appeal to naive tweens (the power bra wearing 13ish girl), it immerses and continues to keep you guessing as to the outcome. It's not a film to watch for the action of war as much as the mystery and intrigue, as if a spy game more than a war game.

a disturbing but original parable - Platoon meets Lord Of The Flies

[gregking4 · 7/10 · 27 August 2013]

The Dirty Dozen and Platoon meets Lord Of The Flies? In a forest, a group of 12-year old boys play a game of Capture The Flag. The rules of this war game are fairly simple - the general gets to pick his own team; the base cannot be moved; when you are shot you must wait a certain period of time before rejoining; if killed by a grenade you go home; and whoever captures the enemy's flag wins the game. PK (Gage Munroe, from TV series Justin Time, etc) is a skilled tactician with knowledge of military strategies and he has never lost a war game. But this time there is another dynamic at play as simmering animosities, deep seeded resentments, jealousies and petty rivalry surface and ensure that the war game turns nasty. The fine line between imagination and fantasy and bloody reality become blurred. And the introduction of a girl into one of the teams this time brings in an air of sexual tension and jealousy. I Declare War is a disturbing but original parable that shows what happens to children's games when the rules break down and there is an absence of parental supervision. Writer/director Jason Lapeyre and co-director Robert Wilson explore many of the usual tropes of the adolescent coming of age drama, and mix them with the masculine themes and violence of a war movie. Although the boys are playing with sticks and balloons, the film makers occasionally show them with real weapons. There is a dark, vicious undercurrent of humour running through the material. The performances of the young cast are impressive, with Monroe a standout as the driven PK. Michael Friend is wonderful as the psychotic and sadistic Skinner, who has taken command of the rival army and is determined to win at all costs. This is a thought provoking film that deserves a broad release.

Great Acting But a Really Confusing Premise

[benghill · 6/10 · 7 May 2018]

I thought the acting in this movie was really good. I loved all the children. But what is this movie about?

Is this movie just about a game or what an actual war would look like if it was fought by children? Are we supposed to take everything that happened literally or is it all a metaphor? If the first is true, this movie is very messed up and should come with a warning before people watch it.

In the opening scene, Kenney throws a paint balloon at the fat kid, killing him in the game. He then asks who else is still alive on his team and attempts to beat him up for not telling him. He is then stopped by his team captain PK. At this point I thought Kenney was just a big bully and that the movie would pick up soon. It turns out he is one of the most sane characters. He is later abused even worse by the other team and PK is reluctant to do anything about it. We are supposed to believe that this is the good team and PK is a kind and honorable soldier who follows the rules, is kind to his teammates, and will do anything to protect his friend. (He is only 12)

Early on in the movie Skinner declares tyranny over the former team captain simply because Skinner is a psychopath, yet no one seems to object. Skinner then kidnaps Paul, PK's best friend. He then tortures him and I'm pretty sure he tries to murder him. (This is just a game right?) Skinner blames Paul for all the bad things that have happened to him. Paul has no idea what happened and for some reason Skinner won't tell him. Paul escapes and goes back to his team. PK tells him to go back to his prison, which Paul does for the team, but mostly out of loyalty to PK. Paul returns to prison and Skinner tortures him some more. There a bunch of other subplots, but none of them are that interesting. In the last 10 minutes of the movie PK shows up. Skinner reveals that he and PK were best friends before Paul moved to town.

Why does he wait till now to tell Paul? What does he hope to get out of torturing Paul for something he didn't know he did? It is also unclear how long Paul has been in town and why this has never come up before. Skinner offers to be friends with both PK and Paul, which Paul does not seem to object to. What was the point of kidnapping and torturing Paul if Skinner was willing to be friends with both of them? It seems Paul had nothing to do with ending their friendship. PK stopped being friends with Skinner because he's a psychopath, and who could blame him? Sadly, PK shows to not be much better.

Though PK has technically already won the war, Skinner declares himself the winner. He agrees to give up his claim if PK cuts Paul with a knife. PK has two choices: Keep his honor, accept Skinner's pointless self-declared victory, prove to be a great best friend, prove to be a great leader, and stand up to a psychotic bully. His other choice is to betray and physically harm his best friend, show his weakness in leadership, achieve the victory he already had, and show that he will give in to Skinner's bullying. PK ignores the obvious right choice and attempts to cut Paul. While watching this I was sure this was all a trick. He was going to beat Skinner the right way and show his loyalty to his friend. I was wrong. PK claims it was an accident, but we all saw him hold the knife to Paul's neck and attempt to cut him. PK cares more about victory than his best friend. They stop being friends. Paul, the only nice and rational kid in this movie, fights in a war he doesn't understand for the sake of his best friend and then has his neck cut by that friend.

The central conflict of this movie was interesting and I wish it could have been revealed more than 10 minutes before the end. I wish they could have given us some resolutions?

I know this movie is about 12 year olds, but 5 year olds should have a better sense of logic. I'd expect children who play in the woods with dangerous weapons and have no adult supervision to be more mature than 5 year olds. As far as we know, there is no prize for winning other than satisfaction. Apparently that's worth losing all your friends, physically harming and possibly killing other children, and putting your own life in danger; even if the victory is not legitimate. Even by 12-year-old logic, how can you blackmail someone into being your friend. If you have any idea of what friends are, you know that this defeats the entire purpose of having them.

I'd like to hear what other people think. Feel free to agree or disagree with my comments.

interesting idea

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 26 December 2022]

It's summer time. Neighborhood kids play war in the woods. The guns look real and they seem to fire real bullets in what looks like real warfare. It's imaginary and it's a game. The rivalry heats up and the game turns into something more dangerous.

This is a Canadian indie. It's not really a kids' movie. It's closer to Lord of the Flies with one big difference. The premise of the movie is showing realistic gun fights with their imaginary game. It's an interesting idea, but it does need some work. The movie needs to show the difference between imaginary and reality. There are rules to this game. It needs to explain them. With more clarity, the story behind the concept could be smoothed out.

Original concept but boring.

[peterp-450-298716 · 2/10 · 6 February 2014]

I really wonder where the comedy part actually was in this movie, as stated in the genre section by IMDb. I rather felt sorry for some of the leading playing figures. I think that P.K. and Skinner would be very interesting study objects for aspiring child psychologists, and eventually could use some proper psychological assistance.

On second thought I ended up watching 90 minutes at a cinematic display of a game played in the woods like scouts members still play. But in this case performed by a group of youngsters with a lot of dangerous imagination. It reminded me sometimes of "The Goonies", but without the pirate ship and without Chunk.

At times the acting was very annoying and amateurish. All the characteristics of a low budget film were there : the same location all the time, endlessly running back and forth in some local woods, no expensive action scenes or props. Personally, I thought P.K. wasn't exactly a textbook example of a leader. He'dd rather gather in the group of most bullied boys at school.

The concept is original. It shows how children experience the adult traits like hatred, jealousy, love, loyalty and friendship. In reality this could also lead to similar incidents, unfortunately. Only the effect is weak and makes this film a slow, boring and totally not emotionally touching film.

More reviews at http://opinion-as-a-moviefreak.blogspot.be/

War as the true test of friendship

[RichardvonLust · 8/10 · 28 July 2013]

This film is surprisingly good. Very low budget with few sets or special effects and literally no adult actors, I Declare War nonetheless scores extremely high on the thought provoking barometer. It forces us to examine the real nature of friendship and perhaps to realize that true friendship is sadly extremely rare.

A group of about a dozen boys play out a war game in the local woods. There are strict rules of engagement and death is established through a direct hit with small balloon filled with red dye. No one is meant to get hurt but, as with all wars, rules are broken and the passion of the moment has its own momentum.

But this is not just a plot about the corrupting effects of aggression and power over victims. A whole series of relationships exist amongst these boys. The leader of one side has a 'best friend' whom he protects above the safety of others whilst the opposing commander, a dreamy eyed beautiful youth, is befriended by a besotted girl who will stop at nothing to impress him. There are ex-friends who have become enemies, jilted friends who wish to regain their standing and just normal mates who hang out with each other under the guise of friendship.

Each of these relationships is put to the real test and each is exposed for what it really is. In the end there is only one true friendship amongst them all and the stark reality of our own lives is chillingly revealed. This is not a film about war but actually about love. It is well worth seeing for all age groups.

I may have missed the entire point of this

[johnnyinmtl · 3/10 · 28 July 2013]

I'll have to admit that going into this film my first thought was that maybe while playing an innocent game real weapons were found and it turned deadly. (In hindsight, too bad this wasn't the fact).

I really don't have too much to say about this at all. The children, I guess, did as well as they could and maybe even two or three of them will make a career out of acting. Only the future will tell. I do not remember any outstanding scenes at all.

I think though that I can honestly say that the two lead characters in this most definitely had some kind of psychological problems. It does become apparent in at least one of them and with the other one, as an armchair psychiatrist, I would find some kind of therapy for him. If this was real life, these two boys would definitely need professional help.

I just don't have any idea of what to take away from this story. I give it a 3 only because it really didn't insult my intelligence and the kids I think did their best with what they had.

What happens when innocent fun gives way to danger? Classic theme well-executed.

[larry-411 · 9/10 · 9 October 2012]

In the tradition of "Stand by Me" and "Lord of the Flies" comes a poignant dark comedy that puts a timely spotlight on the games kids play and the consequences of seemingly innocent actions when fun gives way to danger.

Jason Lapeyre and Robert Wilson co-directed from a Lapeyre script. Wilson is an accomplished producer -- this is his second feature directorial effort (he serves as a producer on this as well). This is Lapeyre's followup to his first narrative feature "Cold Blooded." The movie had debuted as a work-in-progress print at ActionFest in North Carolina in April, where it took home the jury prizes for Best Film and Best Screenplay. It went on to a triumphant premiere at last month's Toronto International Film Festival. It took top honors here in Texas, winning the Fantastic Fest Audience Award.

The premise of "I Declare War" is deceptively simple -- a group of kids gets together on a regular basis to play war games in the woods, challenging each other in mock battle with harmless paintballs and tree branch bazookas. We used to play cowboys and Indians with water guns and toy pistols. Some of us graduated to Civil War reenactments. We turned out okay. So when these youngsters choose to head out into the forest and get a good physical workout trying to steal the opponents' flag from their home base, while most of their peers are engrossed in role-playing games on their computers, this looks like a marvelously healthy alternative.

But boys will be boys, as they say (okay, there is one girl), and the situation inevitably turns sour. Rivalries turn real as jealousy, love, and loss come to the fore, and some players take the game one menacing step further. The timely topic of bullying suddenly rears its ugly head as we see its root causes on display before having the chance to look away. As in 2004's "Mean Creek," one of my all-time favorite indies, innocent joy turns to potential tragedy as the line between fantasy and reality blurs both on screen, for the viewer, as well as in the minds of the youngsters.

What the kids begin to see in their minds -- a stick of wood is suddenly a rifle, a paintball is a real grenade -- is reflected in the film itself. This is just one of the many masterful strokes that sets "I Declare War" apart from its brethren and makes it such a powerful cinematic experience in its contribution to a rich cinematic tradition, the classic morality play writ large when the protagonists are vulnerable adolescents.

This character-driven study on the limits to which a man/boy can be pushed rests on the abilities of this age-consistent ensemble cast to make these characters believable. Without that the narrative would fall apart like an army facing mutiny. Standouts include Gage Munroe as PK and Michael Friend as Skinner. Both turn in frighteningly genuine performances that may draw a tear or two. All team members are on somewhat equal footing in significant roles with few in background support. Kudos must go out to Siam Yu, Aidan Gouveia, Mackenzie Munro, Alex Cardillo, Dyson Fyke, Spencer Howes, Andy Reid, Kolton Stewart, Richard Nguyen, Eric Hanson, and Alex Wall. Another bold choice -- there are no adults in this tightly-focused production.

The movie's authenticity also stems from its unscripted feel, as the youngsters were encouraged to insert dialogue using their own teenage vernacular and improvise where it was agreed the young actors would best know how to behave in a certain situation. The language is raw, to be sure, not unlike my 2012 SXSW Film Festival favorite "Funeral Kings," with F-bombs galore and enough obscenities to make their parents blush. But it always effectively serves the plot and is never gratuitous or overtly offensive.

Production values are well above the typical indie or foreign film. The entire picture was shot in one exterior location, a seemingly simple task made much more difficult by the limited hours allowed for underage actors and inability to avoid shadows no matter how well lit. Still, it always appears to be magic hour with the kids awash with the stunning beauty of nature, bathed in sunlight, their angelic innocence filling the screen.

Composers Eric Cadesky and Nick Dyer have crafted an intricate score that's surprisingly heavy, serving as a perfect dramatic counterpoint to the child's play in the great outdoors. The action dictates the viewer's emotions, not the clichéd tugging of heartstrings with violins and cellos, and that's as it should be.

The camera-work is virtually all Steadicam, affording cinematographer Ray Dumas the ability to maintain fluid motion throughout, despite the natural obstacles inherent in shooting on a forest floor. The combatants often move with the frame and not through it, as though we were running right alongside them. These tracking shots bring the viewer right into the action, allowing us to feel as if we're part of the game. But we're playing both sides -- but they don't know that -- and that's part of the fun of I Declare War. Spies abound, and you're one.

"I Declare War" also works because we've all been there, more or less -- every audience member will see a bit of their golden youth in one or more of these kids, for better or worse. If painful it can be cathartic. If pleasant it's sweetly evocative of a time past to which many wish we could return.

I declare this movie sucks

[kvalentine926-189-516307 · 1/10 · 8 July 2013]

I do not know what movie the other reviewers were watching because "I declare war" was 90 minutes that I wasted watching this crap. The kids repeatedly mouthing innate conversations while on the hunt for the enemy camp that no real kids would actually be saying. A so called wannabe military strategist General PK replying "no" when a kid asked if Napoleon ever lose a war, I guess the movie writer never heard about Waterloo.The only part of the movie that I found even remotely amusing was when the kid returned to the enemy camp where he had been tortured and overacted his death scene after being shot by the enemy camp kids.I believe this would have made a decent 30 minute episode of the new twilight zone. Anyone who thinks this movie belonged in the top ten movies of 2012 probably also thinks Spring Breakers should get a Best Movie Oscar nomination.

The Little Rascals in combat

[actionfilm-2 · 3/10 · 24 January 2014]

Plot of the film is kids play war, tantrums are thrown, somebody gets hurt. Though certainly watchable, this film leans towards mild exploitation rather than any serious social commentary or observation on childhood and adolescence, so if looking for something heavy like "Ratcatcher" or "Lord of the Flies" you'll need to look elsewhere. That's not to say the filmmakers intent was to produce any type of exploitation, I really don't know, perhaps they intended to produce some type of profound allegorical tale, one to cause serious contemplation. If so, judging by many of the reviews here they achieved that goal, so hats off. Myself, I did no serious anything after watching the film, but here are a few observations. When characters are kids, no one expects them to perform with sharp logic or reasoning, so many of the lapses in such can be explained there, but it's still distracting. Several things are amusing, though not sure if intended to be. The character of field commander Quinn is described by his opponent PK as a brilliant nemesis and tactician. If leadership quality includes crying and running home when one of your own grunts pelts you with a tomato, then Quinn is a regular Patton. PK appoints the role of chaplain to one of his less aggressive soldiers, a boy who attends church on a regular basis, and as is customary in film today, his faith is mocked throughout. Another of PK's soldiers is quite inquisitive, contemplative, aggressive even, yet he goes into battle forgetting his only weapon. Fighter, intellectual, or idiot, you decide. As I said worth a watch, though you might want to lower your expectations if you've read the many glowing reviews here.

Stand By Me for a new generation

[craig-shurn · 9/10 · 10 January 2013]

This is a difficult one. Great movie with great performances by the kids. But a tough one as the kids are playing with guns. Not real guns, they use sticks for that and use rocks as hand grenades, but through their eyes they are real. I hope that the recent violence and gun shootings don't put anyone off going to see this. It doesn't glorify violence in any way, in fact it gives an anti-violent stance. It reminded me of this generations Stand By Me meets Lord of the Flies meets War Games meets Son of Rambow. I really hope that it finds an audience. It deserves to. It made Ain't It Cool News' Top 10 list of 2012. It'll take some creative marketing to get people to watch it but in 10 years time we'll look back at it they way we look at Stand By Me now.

Movie that could have been OK, but sucks

[realvedmak · 1/10 · 10 November 2013]

Story this was based on was probably really good.

Unfortunately, this movie is so badly executed it will be quickly forgotten.

Kid actors did their job perfectly. I question casting choices simply because P.K does not look like kid that would have been a leader, but that type of kid that gets picked last. Girl should have been dressed more intelligently, rather than like a poor peasant girl with no taste in clothing.

Where this movie really starts to suck is unclear division of reality and fantasy. Adding sounds of gunfire, explosions, making kids look like they just crawled through pigsty, these were not good choices. This movie apparently happens one nice afternoon. Unless they are supposed to be living in ghetto and be dirty 24/7, there is no way normal kids would get this dirty that quickly.

Some parts were written like kids are 6, some like they are 20. Not having read the original story, I have to guess that these were changes made by somebody at some point, and that somebody is pretty clueless about child psychology.

Its movie that is about halfway there, and if I believed in 1 to 10 system I would probably give it around 4, but since I only believe in 1 or a 10, this movie got all I could give it, a 1. You will lose out on nothing by choosing not to see it.

Great film about childhood and friendship

[micha-hilliard · 9/10 · 8 April 2013]

Caught a screening of "I Declare War" at CIFF. What a tremendous film! It really captured what it felt like to have a best friend during childhood (the sense of loyalty and exclusiveness). Those were the most intense relationships of my life, especially when they came to an end. I thought the casting was just right and the performances outstanding (some of the best child acting I've seen, the characters of PK and Skinner were particularly memorable). "I Declare War" also struck a great balance between lighthearted and more serious content. I was glad to see that the narrative did not descend into savagery (in the manner of "Lord of the Flies"). The humor added much. I absolutely loved the imaginary dialogue scenes between Jess and Quinn. All in all, the script was very tight and well thought out. Keep a look out for its theatrical release!

hyper active screeching

[kingcasey_iii · 1/10 · 4 December 2018]

This movie is basically hyper active kids screeching REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEhyper active screeching

If the acting was better this could have been something

[Seth_Rogue_One · 4/10 · 31 May 2016]

First off, I'm not the one who usually goes 'I can't stand child actors' like many others, there have been many cases in which using child actors for a serious movie have worked very well.

'Stand By Me', 'Mean Creek' or 'King Jack' to name a few all had excellent acting in them by leads consisting mostly of kids.

But the acting here (for the more-part of the cast) really is sub-par, even for child actors. And it doesn't help that the dialogue often gets truly cringe-worthy: "even retards are more popular than me!" cries the stereotypical bully in one scene for example.

The actual plot though overall is pretty decent and with a better cast and director it could have been fairly decent.

It's listed as a comedy here but there is very little fun in this movie as it portrays children playing war in a very serious fashion, perhaps to draw some similarities with real war, but I didn't think it really worked.

If you want a movie with kids playing war in the woods then go see 'Son of Rambow' instead, that's more on the comedic tip but at least it entertains without getting cringe-worthy.

Playing war

[kosmasp · 8/10 · 1 May 2014]

Doing a movie with kids is pretty difficult. Only thing that is supposed to be as difficult is handling pets/animals. But this really holds the premise and the promise it is giving the viewer. The actors are young, but they are all really good. Thankfully the script is helping a lot, by not pulling punches and having those kids do things that you wouldn't expect (or maybe you would).

One of the twists is the "fantasy" bit, that you will grow accustomed to pretty quickly. It helps elevate the movie to another level too. Are kids different and what makes them act that way? Thankfully the movie is not blaming something in particular. If your fantasy and your character trades allow it, you will go a certain direction. Really nice movie with a very good story

Awkward

[Leofwine_draca · 3/10 · 12 March 2022]

Essentially LORD OF THE FLIES for a modern viewership. I found it quite awkward and unconvincing, although the young cast members certainly do their best with the material. I didn't like the fantasy aspects giving their mock battles more power and impact than they really had, that felt false and showy-offy to me. Some of the bullying scenes are mildly uncomfortable but this kind of plot has been done much better elsewhere - try MEAN CREEK for example.

Great movie. Great cast.

[mcdonaldm73 · 10/10 · 18 February 2015]

I went into this with low expectations. I am glad I watched this. It was a great movie with an excellent cast. The special effects were good without being over the top. Just enough to add to the movie and not take anything away from it. This movie reminds me of many days spent in the woods with nothing much more than our imaginations and either toy guns, or sticks used for guns/rifles. Pine cones for grenades. You had to be hit with it for it to be considered a kill. We also never were quite as violent as the kids in this film. Although our language was probably just as bad if not worse. I don't think this movie compares to any others. It, to me, stands on it's on. Again, a very good movie. That is worth watching.

The acting is so horrible

[realityinmind · 1/10 · 28 September 2022]

It is probably the unfortunate requirement of an all child cast. Not one single child knows how to act. Its really bad. The kids are directed to be overly dramatic with the storyline, and the director is trying to make the movie epic. But it just falls apart. The dialog is poorly written, the setting becomes too monotonous. And the story becomes convoluted as time progresses... almost as if its being written on the fly. A lot of pointless banter between people. And when all of your actors are horrible actors, you shouldn't make your movie 90% conversation. There is too little actual war in this movie, and too much bad acting. Did I mention bad acting?

An eloquent anti-gun culture essay

[[e-mail] · 10/10 · 31 October 2015]

This refreshing Canadian film, which is reminiscent of Christophe Barratier's La Nouvelle Guerre Des Boutons, is an eloquent and impassioned treatise on the need for gun control. These boys and girls are very serious about their war games. So serious that they start to believe the wars are real, important. So important, in fact, that they begin to think that their friends' lives are expendable in pursuit of vanquishing their enemies. It is quite clearly saying 'This is what happens when people who have no need to carry guns do so'. Only a couple of the kids don't lose sight of the fact that its supposed to be a game; they are the ones who stand back from the crowd and see the bigger picture. The acting is first rate, and the effect created by using kids playing capture the flag to represent the men and women of America's ammosexual culture is compelling.