This Special Friendship (1964) User Reviews

A Magnificent Work

[cmmescalona · 9/10 · 29 December 2007]

French cinema has always been, if not the most profound and analytic in the world, indeed, the one that sets the benchmark. In this beautifully shot film, Delanoy tackles a difficult subject matter (for our days) that wasn't so then. When I saw Les Amities Particulieres for the first time, I simply couldn't realise how important it was. Now, after many years, I find it much more interesting than it would have been in the sixties. Many others have already written about the story. I will delve into a different approach: today's reality, at the beginning of the 21st Century.

The strength of our mediated world has increased exponentially and it will keep on growing. The way we look at our world today is consistently chiseled by the way information is provided, dissected, manipulated and delivered. We just consume it. With it, the apocalyptic view on pedophilia that, by the way, means affinity, love, for boys has been transformed completely.

Maybe we're more than insane today than in the 40's or the 70's, but by then people were not scared at all by this kind of love, even when it was clearly seen as sin if sexuality was involved. For us, pedophile means stalker, assassin, assailant, or, as the media loves to call them: molester.

It's a good idea to watch this film with an open mind. What happens has happened for centuries and will happen ever after, until the human race disappears. May this words imply that I defend pedophiles? Yes. I can't defend a criminal, but I can defend someone who loves another human being and is loved in response. Georges loves Alexandre and Alexandre is absolutely in love with him, despite the age gap (at that age, the gap is even more pronounced). Alexandre makes Georges swear his love for ever, his "special friendship", and writes him touching letters that only lovers can write. They simply can't help not loving each other, despite of the many obstacles in their way.

In today's perspective, Georges is a pedophile, a stalker, a child molester who would never, ever molest a child... a stalker that is stalked by his prey because... he loves him. This bond grows so strong that is shared with close friends that encourage this relationship.

What would the media say about something like this TODAY???? We all know the answer.

This film can teach, too, a lot in cinematographic techniques. The use of the camera is unusual for its time. Maybe one of the most daring movements is when Georges arrives in one of the first scenes of the film. The unique way of depicting the corridors in the cloister is another "first", when the steadycam wasn't even in a dream.

And, story-wise, we have to credit this film with one of the most powerful endings in cinema: after the "Fin" frames we discover the very last testament of Georges unread letter to Alexandre, which ends with the word "amour". All in all, a must-see.

If you want to consider further what I said before (I know it will be hard for many people to swallow) I recommend watching "Wild Tigers I Have Known", a 2006 film made by Cam Archer, 26. It draws a similar scenario assuming life as it is now. I caution you that this film is very experimental (underline very), so it may be confusing and without a clear conclusion. That, is yours to make.

The fine friendship between two boys

[Antonio-37 · 8/10 · 26 April 1999]

Francis Lacombrade stars as the young Comte Georges de Sarre, student at a French boarding school run by the priests. Didier Haudepin is the even younger Alexandre, another student at the same school. It is post WWII France, and the school is run with heavy discipline.

Georges develops a special friendship with Alexandre, hence the title of the novel and the movie made from the novel. Roger Peyreffite is quite a famous French author, and this story is his best work.

The two boys develop their friendship in spite of the rules of the fathers who are dead set against this sort of thing happening at their school. Not that there is anything sensual about the relationship, just a few chaste kisses and poems with Georges describing Alexandre as his "bijoux".

There is a touching scene in the movie with the two boys hidden in a haystack lying besides each other, sharing the joy of their company and a stolen cigarette.

Not to give away the ending, but tragedy befalls the two boys.

Interesting to note that a friend of Peyreffite, who also worked as a French civil servant, Henri de Montherlant also wrote a novel about the love between two boys. The Boys is also set in a Catholic boarding school, but around the turn of the 19th century. And a similar tragic ending.

In both stories, the Church and its rules against too much affection between schoolboys plays a major role in the story as one of the antagonists. We are left wondering just how well both stories might have turned out if the boys had been left alone to share their friendships.

Heartrending portrayal of a misunderstood passion

[edmund-marlowe · 8/10 · 29 January 2013]

This is the film adaptation of Roger Peyrefitte's novel telling the deeply moving love story of brilliant 16 year-old aristocrat Georges de Sarre and beautiful 12 year-old Alexandre Motier at St. Claude's, a French, Catholic boarding-school in the 1920s. Though chaste, their love is passionately expressed through poems, gazes and the odd kiss, and there is no mistaking the sensuality underpinning it.

Whether consummated or not, for many centuries such intense love affairs between younger and older boys were a feature of boarding-school life that brought joy and relief to some of the more feeling and less hung-up sort of adolescents, as well as grief and catastrophe to the minority whose liaisons were discovered and crushed by the Christian authorities. They were essentially pederastic, satisfying different emotional needs in the younger and older participants, though the disparity in age lent them special intensity for both.

This ancient tradition more or less died a generation or so ago; the boys who would once have partaken or at least have approved of romantic friendships nowadays either never see their appeal, brought up as they are in a society so antagonistic to them, or shun them through terror of being misunderstood and branded as gay. Indeed, the number of reviews of this film implying gayness is proof they are right to fear it is now practically impossible to escape being judged according to the new dogma insisting on a fixed sexual orientation for even early teens.

It is salutary to remember that however responsible the priests at St. Claude's were for the tragedy of Alexandre and Georges and however misguided the abhorrence of sin that drove them to act as they did, they acted as gentle lambs compared to the savagery with which their post-Christian successors today would crush an affair that any older and younger boy had the temerity to get embroiled in. Our new moral dictators would of course destroy Alexandre to save him from an unequal relationship rather than from the sin of homosexuality, but that would make no difference to either the cruel outcome or the monstrous bigotry behind it. Ironically it would actually increase the perverse injustice of such interference: Alexandre is typical of the younger boy in a special friendship in that his emotional need for it is evidently greater and so it is even more vital to his happiness than to Georges's that it should not be broken up.

Considering special friendships at boarding-school seem to have disappeared from our emotional landscape and are now so badly misunderstood, we must be forever thankful that in the short space of time when they were still fairly widely understood and it had also become possible to write candidly about such delicate matters, not only did such a talented writer as Peyrefitte preserve their character for us so evocatively, but that a film was made of it before the moral panic about teenage sexuality which arose in the 80s made such an undertaking unthinkable.

Unsurprisingly, the film is not as outstanding as the novel, though mostly faithful to it. The most significant change is that, in the novel, Georges was only fourteen, but as he seemed a little improbably sophisticated for even a French patrician of that age, this was actually an improvement. The problem with the adaptation to film is largely the common one of condensation. Because we do not get to know the protagonists quite so well, it is harder to be so deeply moved by their plight. Mostly gone too is the richly elaborated conflict in the boys' minds between the influences of puritanical Christian doctrine and the boy-admiring Graeco-Roman attitudes it drove into hiding. Nevertheless, the film is well acted, atmospheric and near the end soars towards the heights of aching pathos achieved in the novel.

Peyrefitte was much involved in the making of the adaptation to film, which makes for a fascinating footnote: he was rewarded by meeting on the set the love of his life, 12-year-old Alain-Philippe Malagnac, who had a minor role in the film as a choirboy and introduced himself to the author as a fan of the novel, a story Peyrefitte recounted in Notre amour (1967).

Edmund Marlowe, author of Alexander's Choice, an Eton love story, www.amazon.com/dp/1481222112

Moving

[Cantoris-2 · 10/10 · 25 February 1999]

I had read the novel (in English translation, one of two which have been published?) several years before seeing the film. It is, I think, characteristically French: carefully descriptive, observant, objective, restrained, but also subtly hypnotic. I read and read, and almost put the book down halfway through because it didn't seem to be going anywhere or making any impact on me. Then, all of a sudden, I was in tears-- but I still couldn't say exactly what had hit me other than everything. It was as though the pieces of a puzzle suddenly fell into place.

The film is faithful to the spirit as well as the letter of the book. Both were remarkably bold gestures for their time, describing an earlier generation and environment which were even more strait-laced. Like me, you may fall gently under its spell, then-- wham! Sheer magic.

A Very Special Friendship

[thinker1691 · 10/10 · 21 October 2004]

This Special Friendship was created in 1964 combining all the elements of a masterpiece. Born in the mind of Roger Peyrefitte, superbly adapted to the screen by Jean Delannoy, and exquisitely acted out by Francis LaCombrade and Didier Haudepin, this movie has become a timeless work of art. Set in France, in a religious Jesuit school, two boys, one sixteen, one twelve, intrigued by each other's company embark on a special friendship. This particular friendship which possesses all the unique qualities of genuine love and empathy is viewed as unholy by their priests who set about to destroy such a concept. The film is fashioned in black and white as were the rules of friendship in 1964. A classic, if ever there was one. Be prepared for some heart wrenching pathos. *****

Le Petit Prince

[dbdumonteil · 21 January 2007]

Another Delannoy 's film which needs restoring to favor in its native France where the director's reputation,because of the stupidity of the fusty Cahiers du Cinema,has definitely sunk.Delannoy,almost a centenarian,worked till 1995 ,but "Les Amitiés Particulières" is his last good movie.I'm happy to notice that there's not one single negative comment on it.Proof positive that non-French are better at judging French Films.Maybe the rating is currently a bit too high (8,9),but if it can help Delannoy get out of oblivion where he has fallen,so much the better.

Delannoy ,transferring a novel which was very popular in the sixties,depicts a world which no longer exists.Lines warn us before the cast and credits:times have changed,iron discipline is now a thing of the past,but there are things which never change: the first emotions of the adolescence.

Some people wrote there was a "gay interest" in the movie.I do not think it is so.If Georges falls for Alexandre ,it is because he lives in a man's man's man's world.Except for the scene of the prize giving day,there are no women,a fortiori girls in the film.And this is a world where religion reigns everywhere,a world where young aristocrats or wealthy bourgeois study under the priests' extremely watchful eye.

Best performance comes from Didier Haudepin,a wunderkind (like Brigitte Fossey in "Jeux Interdits" ) who grew up to become a director ("Paco l'Infallible " starring the late Patrick Dewaere) and an actor ("Les Assassins de l'Ordre" one of Marcel Carné's last efforts) but without any real success.When he appears ,holding the lamb,it is a transparent metaphor of purity.Alexandre's and Georges's love will remain pure and platonic .Their relationship reminds me of that between Le Petit Prince and the aviator in Saint-Exupery's famous novel.Their meetings in the greenhouse are extremely well filmed .That was not such an easy subject for the sixties and the pejorative word "academic" with which the highbrows often label Delannoy does not make any sense here.

controversial topic, standard portrayal

[lasttimeisaw · 6/10 · 7 October 2014]

Out of curiosity, how come French writer Roger Peyrefitte's first novel LES AMITIÉS PARTICULIÈRES (published in 1943), which daringly depicts two boys' forbidden love in a boarding school could get a film adaptation in as early as 1964? Considering its thematic story conspicuously nudges such social taboos like pedophile and the dark corner in the priesthood.

Shot in Black and White by the late French director Jean Delannoy, the film is largely faithful to the source novel, Georges de Sarre (Lacombrade), a newly-arrived senior student in a Catholic boarding school for upper-class boys, soon emerges as the pick of his peers and will be admitted to the school academy any day, when he first lays his eyes on a much younger schoolmate Alexandre Motier (Haudepin), a cherubic boy with the face of an angel, the two mutually attract to each other, through love letters and secret rendezvous, their "special friendship" cannot continue without the punishment by the school, after several bouts of wrestling with several fathers (Bouquet as Father Trennes, Seigner as Father Lauzon and Nat as Father Superior), eventually they are unmatchable to the rigorous church, their future becomes ominous.

Under the envelope of strong religious incense, with organ music reverberating around, the film constructs a puppy love in the purest way, even it is between two boys, Lacombrade and Haudepin are new faces in the acting line, from their interactions and responses, one can detect that all is rigidly rehearsed beforehand, albeit acting as natural as they can, it doesn't ring true and frankly the entire scenario is too challenging for any child actor to pull off the desire with genuine affection. Georges is a very complex character, from his struggle with his belief in the routine confession to his sabotage to separate his best friend Lucien (Leccia) from his lover, it is pretty unsatisfied to see Lacombrade's stiff performance play out without any substantial underlining.

So, the acting borders on amateur, save Michel Bouquet's ambivalent accuracy as a father conflicts with his own unspeakable impulse. But as a whole, the film emits its visual intensity and forbidden fruit moderately in the luster which reminds us French masterpiece like THE 400 BLOWS (1959, 9/10), DIABOLIQUE (1955, 9/10) and other austere religious drama, with the exception of their dining spectacle does prefigure Harry Potter's Hogwarts school.

Anyhow, it is a bold film, which ironically is very difficult to be remade at present time even half a century has passed, we become more and more intolerant and squeamish. Nevertheless the novel itself is a tough one to be transposed to a different media form, so better leave it in its primary savor and even this film only scratches the surface, it is already quite an achievement for its own sensational existence at the first place.

A beautiful, poignant masterpiece

[ricbigi · 10/10 · 15 September 2010]

I have long wished to see this film and finally a DVD of it has been made available, so I watched it with enormous curiosity. I must say I am very much touched by LES AMITIÉS PARTICULIÈRES, for everything rings absolutely true in this film. The screenplay by Jean Aurenche and Pierre Bost is perfection itself, rending Peyrefitte's autobiographical novel totally cinematic, visually striking and emotionally devastating. The acting by the two leading men is beyond anything I could have expected from such young performers. Didier Haudepin gives the best performance by a child actor I have ever seen in fifty-some years of film-going, standing alongside the likes of Patty Duke in THE MIRACLE WORKER, Brigitte Fossey in LES JEUX INTERDITS and Enzo Staiola in LADRI DI BICICLETTE. The supporting cast is equally to be praised, particularly the great Michel Bouquet. Frankly, Jean Delannoy deserves ample credit for having brought to the screen a film of such beauty and flawless artistry. I believe François Truffaut has never done anything that even approaches such a high level of film-making.

Ahead of time then, slightly timeworn now

[BeneCumb · 7/10 · 24 January 2017]

Prior to different emancipations starting off in the 1960ies, many topics "normal" today were covered up or suppressed, or were handled and depicted in an off-putting manner. So were relations between boys in strict catholic schools, where tender souls and bodies had to grow up without the presence of females and much older men whose interpretation of purity and love did not conform to the secular grasps either...

In the film in question, we obtain a good overview with this, with bearing in mind that the events take place in France, in a "Southern- European" country where many expressions of affection and endearment are much more intense and common as e.g. in Northern or Eastern Europe. The plot has its twists, but the story-line let me, before long, guess how the ending/solution would be, and the plot was full of hints and references to medieval comprehension of love and romance. The performances were just good, not more - apart from Didier Haudepin as Alexandre Motier, who as a child, boldly presented a difficult and controversial character.

Usually, with the exception of e.g. Chaplin or Lloyd, I am not into black-and-white films, but here, as most of the events took place in the monastery environment, it did not perturb.

Les amitiés particulières is undoubtedly a distinct film, but as following decades have brought along lots of revelation and new angles as for monastery schools and gay issues, then, as it seems to me, the main approaches and dramatics of the film do not bespeak current generations any more.

A pair of of star-crossed lovers

[hadock4 · 10/10 · 28 September 2008]

People who have loved the novel by Roger Peyrefitte should equally love the film by Delannoy. This story of a thwarted love between two young boys in a french Catholic college in the 50's, faithfully transcribes the nearly oppressive atmosphere which prevailed in religious boarding schools in those days. The climate of repressed, contained passion at times culminates in sublimated eroticism as when Georges kisses the medal worn by Alexandre against his breast. The film perfectly renders the perversity of some priests who secretly encourage the forbidden love, sharing it by proxy, while openly condemning it. A remake of this film could not possibly be made nowadays. It tells a story of a time when,as the great Burke wrote, though at a far anterior period, "vice itself lost half its evil by losing all its grossness". The cast is excellent and the Black & White pictures superb.

A brave movie

[yusufpiskin · 7/10 · 11 April 2020]

This film was really sweet, as well as very sad. Some scenes were painfully cute, and I think it's interesting to note that the author of the book actually started a relationship with one of the 12 year old extras.

"On the set of the film, Peyrefitte met the 12-year-old aristocrat Alain-Philippe Malagnac d'Argens de Villèle who had been cast as a choir boy and was a big fan of the book. Not only did Peyrefitte sign Alain-Philippe's copy of the book but the two also fell in love, pursuing a stormy relationship that Peyrefitte chronicled in some of his later novels such as Notre Amour (1967) and L'Enfant de coeur (1978).

Extremely powerful, moving and poignant. Unmissable.

[RichardvonLust · 10/10 · 7 November 2014]

There are very few films made today that can remotely equal the stunning power of this production. From the outset we are drawn into that magical world of schoolboy love where raw purity and awakening sexuality march side by side on the path to maturity.

Georges is 17 and struggling to qualify for higher learning. At his Catholic Choir school he meets 12 year old Alexander, a boy of rare spirit and beauty. They are drawn to each other with relentless force. Nonetheless their love is not homosexual although it might be interpreted as such. Indeed it is that misinterpretation of this most common infatuation that forms the basis of this profound drama. Every adult attempts to crush their friendship despite the innocence and harmlessness of it. And in the end we are left wondering whether society effects greater child abuse through its condemnation of such relationships than any of the participants could possibly do to each other. This film should be shown in every school.

This Special Friendship

[CinemaSerf · 7/10 · 12 January 2024]

As love stories go, this has to be one of the more touching I've seen on film. Set amidst the controlling but not oppressive environment of a Jesuit run school, we meet the young "Comte Georges" (Francis Lacombrade) who develops a friendship with the younger "Alexandre (Didier Haudepin). Now it's not in any way a sexual or predatory relationship, but the two instantly click with the younger lad clearly infatuated with his older friend who sees in "Alexandre" an opportunity to nurture a genuine love and affection. Naturally, the fathers take a fairly dim view of any friendship that suggests even the most platonic degree of intimacies between the boys, and so "Fr. Superior" (Lucien Nat) attempts to put a stop to things by threatening to send "George" away from the school. What now ensues are a series of decisions to be faced by people too young and immature to fully comprehend, let alone, rationalise - and a tragic denouement starts to look increasingly likely as young "Alexandre" really does come across more and more as a "lost sheep". What struck me about this is it's positivity. It's not about abusive priests with canes and excessive doctrine - the Father Superior comes across as a decent man genuinely concerned with the souls of his charges, whilst the two - especially the thoroughly charming Haudepin - just engage as two people whom you could image being friends forever. It has moments of poignancy, of disappointment and of fun - and although maybe it could have taken a bit longer to build the characters more, it is still a potent look at two boys in love - forbidden yet thriving.

about the story

[giorgio-6 · 10/10 · 24 April 1999]

I think that film was ill-treated at Venice in 1964, when it was presented, the reason is obviously due to the fact there was a particular section devoted to films dedicated at young people enhancement. No matter. This film never has been promoted and distributed in Italy, simply it was forgotten. The only projection was made in Milan in time of carnival (it was a joke?), no one can say it.

The story is one of those, that any sensible male youth, can mirror himself over the tragedy that it brings with. and I hope in its rescue.

True friendship do exist !

[ninoguapo · 2 February 2007]

At first I did not think that the movie will be interesting. But I soon changed my opinion. The fact that the movie is in black and white makes it even more appealing than if it was in colour. The action takes place in a boarding school located in France. Actually the scenes from the dinning room reminded me of the movies for Harry Potter.

The main characters are Georges de Sarre – 16 years old student and the young Alexandre (age 12) who is a student at the same school. Their friendship is really beautiful – and heart touching. It sure brought some old memories too. There is a lot of poetry in this movie – it seems that I am getting hocked to poetry- again! Few years ago there was a girl who was sending me sonnets of Shakespeare. I even tried to write some poems myself. I still haven't finished watching the movie – it turned out to be on two CDs and I only got one of them, but will get the second one soon- then I will complete this review.

I have finished watching the movie and its ending made me sad – sad and disgust. Disgust that there are such people who refuse to accept that a true, special friendship can exist and interfere – to hurt everyone, but their pity selves. And do I know of such people – because they are not only shown in the movies you know – they lurk amongst us – trying to make the rest believe and thing what they do – such people really disgust me….

Les amitiés particulières is based on 1943 novel by French writer Roger Peyrefitte.

The best film I have ever seen

[derekvictorharvey · 10/10 · 27 February 2012]

This will be a review for Les Amities particulieres and a comparison to the 're-make' The fire that burns. However, before I begin I'd like to warn you this will be very detailed and long. Feel free to skim and such, but if you really want to know my opinion, please read throughly. So sit back, grab a drink, and enjoy this review.

~*I: Background *~

Les Amities particulieres is a movie which in my opinion is the greatest film of all time. You might disagree with this, but hopefully after I present my review of the movie you'll think differently. This movie is a forgotten piece of work, and it's a kind of movie that you'd never get bored watching. There are certain motifs in this film that play huge part and things you ought to know about the movie as well, such as characters.

Georges: The main protagonist in this movie, an upperclassman, son of a marquis. Short black hair, brooding eyes, a real looker.

Alexandre: This is George's lover. He's in the forth grade during this movie. Has long almost shaggy brown hair, and real energetic eyes. He has a million different expressions. (I counted 23) and he is very attractive. Sad he's sixty now.

Religion is a very big contributor in this movie as there are very strict traditions in this movie. Such as up early, not allowed to sleep a certain way, communion, and other things like this. This school is a place that I'd never wish anyone would go it. It's very strict and the people are ignorant of the ideals of a rational person, but rather motivated by foolish and religious beliefs that have dictated this school for years.

This movie is filmed in black and white and that gives it's brilliance more meaning in my opinion. It shows the scenes as more theatrical and makes them more dramatic to happen. It makes one feel happy when it's filmed this way. (This changed in the supposed remake) and it makes everything seem dull, and this matches the movie.

The beginning of this movie is a heart-warming scene of our protagonist saying good bye to his parents as he embarks to his new school. In this movie people seem to make friends, really, really fast. Almost instantaneous and it makes me wonder if real life is actually like this. Can one become friends with some one, best friends in minutes? I would like to test this theory some time.

Also, all the students that go to this school seem to be really, really smart, and they all come here because they're smart. Some of them even are arrogant when it comes to their intelligence.

One of the main character's friends, I wont mention you, has a single event in the movie which exposes his homosexuality, and they even show his boyfriend. Sorry, they are of the same age, we're not to the good part yet, but this allows the protagonist to realize some things about himself and open up. Sadly something happens to the boyfriend, again won't spoil it and you will have to figure out what.

The way that the protagonist and his young lover meet is quite sweet. I think of it as any other cinematic experience. On a public forum, having a sweet starring back and forth, finally saying hello, and then switching into a good game. Yes, the protagonist meets his future love somewhat early on in the film, and it's like love at first site.

The middle of this movie has to be the sweetest part of the whole movie and it really lays it down for what's to come in this movie. The first exchange of love between the two is a verse the older boy writes to the younger boy. How he gets it to him, and how the other boy reacts is up to you to find out, but I have to say it was very sweet and they were almost on the same wavelength and they act based off each other without having to talk about it.

During the movie they have a secret hiding spot where they go. I wont tell you what it is, but they come here often and they have many love felt exchanges with each other. Now, they never really do stuff with each other in this film. They barely even hug in his film, they hold hands once, and the younger boy kisses the older boy on the cheek twice. So for all of you hoping for something more to happen. Nothing ever does.

The next part is my favorite scene and a SPOILER, so skip over the next paragraph if you haven't seen it.

My favorite scene is definitely the Piano scene, it's very cute and a adorable. Alexandre had the audacity to come into his piano lesson and stand there, even mess with him, as the teacher was there. Even after he left, they played piano together, and Alexandre made it very clear that he didn't care what happened, they'd escape together and live together forever. Which in my opinion is very brave for a kid in the forth grade. Of course Georges agrees with him, and they make their plans together.

~* IV: Ending *~

The ending I didn't like at all. I'm sorry, but I won't spoil it for you.The ending is where everything began to unwind, and I think it all happened to quickly. I can't really discuss further without giving details that'll ruin it. All I have to say is to watch this movie.

Actual age of George in the book

[ggray33 · 10/10 · 8 January 2015]

Many reviews of this film state that George is 16 or 17 (and he appears so in the film) which leads to all the comments that he is a pedophile. But in the book by the author, his age is given as 14 (page 1) when he enters the school. To me, this changes the dynamics completely about the story. It becomes one of puppy love--although deeply and profoundly felt. There is no doubt that early in the book, he feels attraction for a Lucien, a classmate, and that he is possibly gay. I challenge anyone to cite in the book where it says that George is 16 or 17.

The movie is so beautifully made that the love between the two is totally believable. But I wish that it had been made as the author wrote it.

Contrast

[harrysdixonjr · 10/10 · 17 March 2012]

This movie makes an superb contrast to the Dutch movie "For a Lost Soldier" (1992).

This Dutch movie is from a book by a choreographer. The novel, which is openly autobiographical, is much more inflammatory than the movie.

Among other things, the movie shows that a superb director and cast can retain good taste as they depict things that some might find offensive.

Other than to say that the theme of the novel and movie is that there is no life without Eros, Passion, I say nothing for or against either.

The opening of the movie shows how the Dutch middle class saved their children from starvation during the final days of World War II.

Black sheep are to be kept out of the flock.

[brogmiller · 10/10 · 13 March 2020]

Diirector Jean Delannoy is on top form here with this stupendous film based on the largely autobiographical novel of Roger Peyrefitte, superbly adapted by the prolific Aurenche and Bost. I never miss the opportunity of singing the praises of editor Louisette Hautecoeur and her work here is exemplary whilst the cinematography of Christian Matras is immaculate. The performances are uniformly excellent but mention must be made of Francis Lacombrade who as Georges is, in effect, the author's alter ego, Michel Bouquet as Father Trennes who prides himself on 'deciphering the secrets of others' whilst concealing his own and stalwart Louis Seigner as Father Lauzon who genuinely believes that he is battling with Satan for the soul of young Alexandre played by Didier Haudepin. The film really belongs however to Haudepin whose performance is wondrous. Excellent use of J.S.Bach and Aquinas while the use of Allouette in the tragic train sequence is devastating. I have no hesitation in nominating this beautifully constructed, poignant, haunting and heartfelt film as one of Delannoy's best and rate it accordingly.

The sins of the fathers have repercussions

[[e-mail] · 10/10 · 27 May 2018]

An all-out attack on the repressive nature of Catholic boarding schools in the post-wwII period, this film examines the (platonic) love between two boys, two years apart, in the same school, and the attempts by the school to condemn homosexuality amid the burgeoning changes within society, which are embodied in the attitudes of the school's students. Beautifully acted, and a difficult subject deftly handled by both leads.

legendary

[Kirpianuscus · 31 July 2018]

Or mgic. or refreshing. or mysterious. or provocative. the film is the long shadow of the novel. and the novel is the right challenge for discover and explore an universe , in strange way, more familiar than you expect. a film about a sort of friendship. not comfortable, many, for a part of public. but useful. not exactly for the message. but a perspective about love, life and young ages , escaping from the ordinary definitions.

A timeless masterpiece

[lelouchlorenzo · 9/10 · 21 September 2019]

I couldn't believe myself enjoying an LGBT themed film, black and white, and a French one. A typical plot, but portrayed stylistically and emotionally driven with innocence, purity and angelic tone throughout. The film enjoys several themes that are significantly critical by the time it was created especially the hypocrisy in Catholic church and tragic consequences of love that left a classic, timeless yet simple depiction.

a classic, cute and heartbreaking take on young love

[wjmlorenzo · 9/10 · 13 June 2020]

A cute and heartbreaking take about brewing a homosexual attraction with your classmate in an all-boys catholic school. It managed to pull controversial themes with delicate care.

Les Amities Particulieres is narratively simple film with mellow pacing. It's significantly symbolic as seen when Alexandre was holding a lamb conveying innocence, and the choir music in the background echoing sacredness. The movie captured the sheer thrills and bliss of two boys falling in love inside the den of priests, and the overall commotion happening in these schools.

The appeal of the movie includes the aesthetic punch for being not colorized. It became its original flavor. It unintentionally serves a key element in invoking a sad, closed upbringing of their school, suppressing growing love interests within those walls. It blends pleasantly to the tone, the era, and emotion of the film.

Aside from the monotone color, the film speaks the language of simplicity. Expressed in the story, the dress, dialogues, and even the location. It's so simple that it allows you to feel the moment that gives you a valid feeling of nothingness, of embracing those ordinary details of life that in some occasion, usually means more. Most of the time it displays nothing but walls, augmenting the notion of seclusion and unexplored areas from their school, which not only glimmered us view on these building structures but establishes a story as to how cornered the characters' emotional development that has been barred by their school's religious teaching.

One of the most noticeable piece in the film is the music choice - silence and choir. It embraces the choir in the background to set the mood and dose more nostalgia.

This movie is a must watch for gay film lovers. It underpins important aspects of film-making --- being brave and honest. It's sweet, oftentimes touching, and overall painful to great extent it becomes unforgettable.

Moving and poignantly realized

[avenuesf · 9/10 · 19 November 2022]

This is a beautifully made and acted film that most likely couldn't be made today. The story deals with the love between two boys in a Jesuit school, one being considerably older than the other, and the priests who become aware of the relationship and insist they put an end to it. Thirteen year-old Didier Haudepin's performance as Alexandre, the younger of the two boys is outstanding. His eyes alone convey a multitude of emotions throughout the film and his final few minutes in the film are nothing short of heartbreaking. If anything, the film shows just why older/younger relationships are dangerous... Alexandre is not emotionally equipped to handle the denouement of the relationship and as a result things end tragically. Despite the film's subject matter being handled very subtly, I can't help but wonder what audience and critical reactions were when it was released in 1964. I have to add that I find a couple of the reviewers here who insist that the film is not about homosexuality to be in some serious denial... the two boys are obviously in love, they write and talk openly about it, and at one point are clearly about to take things farther right before they're caught in the greenhouse by a priest. The film is also based on the novel by Roger Peyrefitte, an openly gay writer who according to IMDB's trivia,"lived older/younger male love with a fan of his book." The film is available on YouTube in what looks like a vhs transfer. It deserves to be seen, I'd enjoy seeing it again after a digital remaster.

Simply incredible.

[stefanopires · 10/10 · 29 December 2023]

I just watched this movie for the first time. And that leads me to think that I urgently need to start digging for works like this. It is worth saying that a comparison with the Belgian film Close is inevitable. Although Close is a good film, this one is a masterpiece. The plot, the growing tension, the fear of discovery, and the way the friendship evolves takes us to another level. And most intriguing of all is the time in which this film was made. A great film is one that is not just well made, but a film that intrigues us, that leads us to reflect on society and the world. A film ahead of its time. Rating 10.