Kirpianuscus different by novel. first - for intentions. because it is a war film. with the tension and shadows who define this genre. but it has the sin to not be the most convincing war film. but this remains only a detail. because the surprise is the status of secondary character of the original game. against good work of children actors. against the possibilities of a fascinating answer to The boys from Pal street. and this is the source of disappointment - a confuse message, reflecting, as premises, all. the universe of adults, the world of children, Laetitia Casta and Guillame Cannet as the impossible couple, the not real convincing facts, gestures and dialogues, the desire of return to the book as consolation for a too ambitious adaptation of it.

Mathias Dubois If you're as old as me and you grew up in a french-speaking environment, you've probably been affected in one way or another by Yve Robert's adaptation of Louis Pergaud's novel from 1962.This new adaptation alternates the focus from the kid's perspective to its parallels in the grown-up's world. The time is now the mid-40's and the war of two groups of kids from two villages fades behind the gruesome reality of the Nazi occupation, persecution of the Jews and collaboration, thus turning the original story into a rather undramatic sideshow. Since the late 60's at least, French cinema has been obsessed with the deep flesh wound left by the Nazi occupation in French society, which had torn the country into heroes and traitors. The idea to set the story in this context possibly sprung from the issue of a new, rising antisemitism, as the story now features a clandestine Jewish girl and her ruthless antagonist: the spineless french militiaman. Unfortunately, the new terror of antisemitism has long 'evolved' and has grown deaf to the sort of reasoning used in this movie, leaving its message only audible to those who already agree, which is a shame. What's left is a rather campy, at times charming but mostly predictable story that leaves no doubt about its message of humanism.Finally, the screenplay is passable. A movie to watch if there's really nothing else to do. For a better experience: Yves Robert's cult classic's still the real deal.BTW: Amazing how much the cult figure of the 1962 movie, "Petit Gibus", resembles the actor of this movie. Seems like the producers knew the movie couldn't live without resurrecting this charming character. Amazingly, they didn't go as far as to revive his signature phrase ("Si j'aurais su, j'aurais pas venu" - "If I'd known, I'd not come").

Jeliosjelios The book (Pergaud's novel 1913) is now part of the public domain, that's why there're two films this year about this story.No very big interests, It's looks like mainly and only as a business movie.Despite a good mechanic and good kid casting and pictures (with a little bit too much works with numeric computer); the story is far from the film "la guerre des boutons" (1962).The background of the WW2 become most important than the war between the two villages. This background is here only for a most efficient drama of the story, because they don't know written and do simple and efficient story and make movie like, for example, the old one "la guerre des boutons"(1962). They forget something with the money's attractiveness: It's mainly a kids story not adults story! (They're a parallelism between kids and adults but adults have just adults place in the original one)...........

dbdumonteil 50 years after Yves Robert's famous version which was successful but was carefully kept "suitable for all audiences" and thus avoided Pergaud's Rabelaisian style .Louis Pergaud is barely mentioned in the cast and credits ,the "screenwriters" taking the lion's share ;it must be said that the book has undergone lots of changes as Robert did in the early sixties:but whereas Robert transposed the action to his era,this new version chose the end of WW2,with its resistant fighters,the collaborators and traitors,the Jews protected by the Justs.It allows a parallel between the buttons war and the "real" war which is somewhat artificial though (who has not guessed the truth about the nice schoolteacher -played by talented Canet-? about Violette?)Pergaud's novel was written in 1913,and the writer died in the war that was about to break out.The children remain true to form,particularly the young actor who plays Lebrac ,in love with Violette (who replaces the female character of the book ,La Marie-Tintin ,not always with good results : sometimes it flounders in the intellectual girl/boy dunce cliché ) who ,like Anne Frank ,writes a diary;Petit Gibus is funny ,although perhaps not as much as that of Yves Robert.This is pleasant to watch ,but full of WW2 clichés and ,as far as the forthrightness of the language is concerned,not an improvement on its predecessor;I personally would take this black and white priceless early version any day.