BroadcastChic Excellent, a Must See

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Janis One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

gavin6942 The leisurely paced tale explores the relationship between 14 year-old Bo and Kim, 11, the younger son of the stern boarding school headmaster. Mounting school tensions over the expulsion of a troubled student threaten to sabotage the tranquility of the school.The film stills holds up in 2017 as being somewhat controversial, particularly in the United States, not only for its subject matter of an adolescent same-sex romance, but also for its scene that shows both young lead actors; Agensø (age 15 at the time) and Bjerg (who was 12) in full frontal nudity, taking a shower together.Indeed, there are probably two things people will take away from this: one, the child nudity which strikes me as shocking that it passes the censors when it could be seen as pornography. And two, just how very "1970s" the film is with the hair and styles. I do not know much about Denmark, but it does not seem all that different from America culturally at the time.

mattinsa Whilst the film does get somewhat lost 'in translation' and the fact it could have been one of the best films of all time, it does go that extra mile in being what is 'cult' cinema.It is one of the few films I have witnessed in my time, as a freak cinema goer, that has received such a commendable rating in my eyes. It could have been a 10/10 if only one thing could have been achieved... the middle peak period could have been so much better.Characters brilliant, Cinematography brilliant, Continuity brilliant... just a pity that fourth C, 'Content' couldn't have been that little bit more satisfying.As mentioned I believe it does get lost, or somewhat dragged down by one element, that being the flat situation of the peak middle period being the expulsion of one of the characters because of 'lude' material displayed in his room. Whilst it does merit the young individual's choice in the situation, and the basis of the story itself, the whole point to this movie seems to be about same sex love in essence. I mean, look at the final scene! It outweighs a lot of he story in many scenes. Distracting it by this event - the expulsion - somewhat drags it down and distracts from the true essence of what this film really sets out to achieve.If you want to create a film with a final scene, and many other scenes that primarily display homosexual interaction between individuals by choice, then why would you make the peak event that of complete difference? Regardless of this small pitfall - from making it an absolute masterpiece - everything else just fits perfectly. The honesty, the innocence revealed, as we knew it as children it compels the viewer into a realism. You feel engrossed in the character's lives, and their emotions so profoundly. Not to mention the brilliant acting by the kids! Outstanding! And all because of brilliant Casting and Direction as well! The Danish have always been well known for their wonderful storytelling and film making in general. This would have to rate as one of their legendary films.This is one film I rate as one of my favourites of all time. Certainly not my favourite, but definitely up there. If I were to change anything it would be that element that should have been a sub story, and perhaps making a more moving moment one where the headmaster's son was caught in a situation of uncompromise to some people perhaps? In all, we probably don't know where the film-makers were coming from with this film. In some ways I don't anyways. And this is the only element that lets it down. Hindsight is great for one thing only... this instance now! I honestly don't think it's too taboo, it's just very honest and true. That's what makes it different and 'real' cinema! And unique in the sense that few films these days, even though it was in the late 70's, challenge the narrow-minded world governed by the US and the UK that kids these days have thoughts and feelings about being 'people'! The only thing that makes them feel wrong about themselves, what they've done and everything else around them, including what happens to them in their eyes, is what society tells them! And we can blame the US and UK for that! TOO protective!!! Get a grip you Yankee/Pommy B******S!!! And thanks for finally uncensoring it you twits!!!

raverkidinnyc I have to say I found this movie touching, insightful, and refreshingly reminiscent of the innocence of the late 1960's and early 1970's. It seemed a bit choppy, but I think that is because it was much longer originally and was edited significantly for various reasons. It is a sweet movie about a sensitive topic, done tastefully with sincerity and without pretensions. I'd recommend this for viewing in health classes if our society wasn't so hung up about sex, homosexuality and the possibility it might be viewed as pedophilia because of the brief nudity in the shower scenes and the "revealing" clothing worn during the era. Some responses to other comments I saw here: Bo, the older boy, is shown in a constant state of conflict because of the emotions his unusual desires are creating. He wants to be a regular kid and have typical relationships with other boys, but finds himself attracted to some boys in a sexual way. That is why you see him acting so hesitantly in his overtures towards Kim. He is attracted to Kim, but is concerned about the difference in age and uncertain how to deal with Kim's own innocent interest. As for the younger kid, Kim, he is just happy to be there. Try to remember what it was like to be 12 or 13, still innocent about sexual things, but wanting desperately to be accepted and included by the older kids. Then imagine a kid like that having a Bo come along in his life. It's very easy to convert that kind of hero worship into a sexual thing, and I think Bo is being cautious because he really likes Kim and doesn't want to take advantage. Besides, he isn't that much more knowledgeable than Kim, he's just slightly older, and also pretty confused about what to do himself.Keep in mind that this is filmed in Denmark around 1977-78. I noted several comments concerning the apparent lack of interest on the part of the other boys in the school to Kim and Bo's obvious physical closeness. In the first place, many European cultures are not so concerned about physical displays of affection between same-sex friends which stop short of actual sexual play. This is especially true of Scandinavian cultures such as Denmark, where nudity is not a big deal and sharing showers like the scene between Bo and Kim is quite innocent and playful. The other bathroom scene between the Lars character and some random kid that Bo walks in on is another story, and Lars was extremely lucky it was Bo who caught them and not some other less tolerant character, like Ole or a teacher.In the second place it's typically in restrictive, Victorian cultures like the USA and the UK where boys have a heightened sense of concern for inappropriate touching. As we become teens we worry more and more about being labeled geeks and fags and so we try as hard as possible to be the opposite. Since the USA is the main "superpower" now, this Victorian attitude is slowly integrating into other societies and is starting to be a major problem. However, in the film's 1970's culture, the kids are not so concerned about each other that way, although Ole does show some about one of the teachers who touches him. Still, its obvious from Aske's (the intelligent, sensitive group leader) diplomatic response to Ole's comment, supported by the other kids, that this is something most don't seem very worried about. I think Ole's concern is shown to be based on his own insecurities, which is a truly insightful point the film is trying to make about why anyone would have such negative feelings about these relationships.Finally, one guy said he was made uncomfortable about a "female teacher taking advantage" of one of the kids. This is Lars, the same kid Bo catches with another boy in the bathroom. The older girl was not a teacher, it was a girl a year or two older than the boys who was working as a cook in the school kitchen. Lars would be about 15 and the girl might have been 16 or 17. Take another look carefully and you will see this is the same girl they go to the picnic with. It's not a scene supporting pedophilia, it is a scene showing how an older teen might explain to a less knowledgeable partner how to perform. I think that is something ALL of us have experienced at some point in our own teen-aged lives.This is a good movie and I enjoyed watching it. Makes me wish I was a kid again, but only in a more open and accepting society like the one in the film.

pazu7 I saw "You Are Not Alone" years ago, when it first came out, and was prompted to write this after reading a rather dimwitted review that called it child porn. I guess this addled criticism was based on the shower scene. I can only respond that "A man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest." If that's all you take from this film, then that's all you deserve.Though this film will never get wide spread attention, it actually deserves the accolades for bravery and honesty that "Brokeback Mountain" received. And takes on a much more controversial topic. It is a touching and honest film, for those with a heart, and it has an appropriate subtext of class struggle and denunciation of warfare. It has wit as well. It's actually rather funny in many places. It has a 70's tone and score, with a 60's sense of innocence and idealism.But there is nudity and scenes of boys kissing one another. If you can't deal with real depictions of human sexuality, then maybe you'd better rent something off the Disney rack. This is not a film for the narrow-minded or those caustic neo-Victorians whose tedious maledictions are so unfortunately unavoidable now-a-days.I suggest you see it and decide for yourself. It is supposed be on DVD June of 2006, but you might have a hard time finding it on the shelves in "The Land Of The Free".