cppguy I found it tough to rate this movie. First off, the acting and cinematography are great. The plot idea is superb. There are some great political and social overtones. (Kudos to the reviewer who said this was "Lord of the Flies meets Facebook." That's a great analogy.) It's clear that this is a "Peanuts" world where adults are out there somewhere, but can't be seen or heard. However, if the writers wanted to go that direction, they can't create a world with adults that's totally without them. In Golding's vision, the adults were simply not present. In this world, the adults are there, but totally inert. This ruins the movie in a few ways. I won't give away plot elements here, but there's a fight in the film. It's preceded by a chase through library, halls, classrooms, etc. and students pour out of those rooms. The fight continues unabated until one of the protagonists is defeated and hauled off. Yet no teacher intervenes when students abandon classrooms; nobody appears to halt the fight, help the injured or otherwise restore order. This is rubbish and the plot point could have been written many other ways to accomplish the same purpose.I'm not giving a rating below 5 because it's not that bad. However, the basic plot and social situations exploited in this film had huge potential... potential I'd have given a 9-10 rating for... yet somehow flopped. Maybe in 10-20 years someone will give another go at this plot. In the meantime, only watch it if your current string of movies-to-see lacks better rated movies.

doug_park2001 WY is a violent, disturbing, low-budget Australian film whose plot and conflict are a bit similar to "Betrayed at 17" but go to lengths far beyond those of the Lifetime B-17. While it focuses mainly on the very darkest aspects of adolescence, it's pretty and sadly moving in a few spots, and the acting/characterization are undeniably real. WY also has a touch of the artsy and the surreal; it does a nice job of meshing certain characters' fantasies with their realities. Another interesting aspect of this film is how, although a few sparse adult voices are heard, the only visible characters are the teenagers, something I haven't seen anywhere outside of "Charlie Brown." The pace of WY often plods (particularly in the middle), and the scope is limited almost exclusively to the teenagers' school and homes. Those qualities, along with the fact that WY's just generally a real downer, will obviously not appeal to some tastes. Others will find, as I did, that its better, more unique qualities make it a memorable and worthwhile experience.

Raul Faust A big school party happens and young people get together to listen to loud music and take some drugs-- which aren't revealed, leaving it to spectator's imagination. After this party, a girl is supposedly raped by some of the guys out there-- in fact, I don't know if she was only raped or raped and murdered, since I found the plot extremely confusing. Actually, the whole story is complicated and spectator needs to pay big attention to understand what's going on-- in my case, it wasn't enough. Photography direction is beautiful and I believe director wanted to show the whole thing in the eyes of a ketamine user-- not that I experienced it but I read a lot about this drug. In the end, I sadly couldn't understand if the girl died, who died, what was real and what was not. Maybe I didn't pay enough attention, or maybe "Wasted on the Young" isn't an understandable movie at all.

Karl Ericsson I cannot give this film a full 10 because it explains certain things too much and other things too little.Before I go on, I want to disclose a further warning. This review does not only contain spoilers but indeed wishes to discuss the final spoiler, which elevates this film from teenage fluff to meaningful cinema.Seen as the ending of thriller movie, the end of this film is really not all that exiting. It's not really a whodunit that is being disclosed if you tell about the end. However, if you do not consider the end for spoiler reasons, then any review of this film will be beside the point and meaningless just like it would be meaningless to discuss "The Bicycle Thief" without mentioning the slapping of the father in the end of that film.Furthermore, for reasons that I stated above which gave this film only seven stars, I'm not totally sure that my interpretation of the film is the correct one, although I have some pretty significant details to point out that make my interpretation plausible.First of all, there is this total omitting of grown-ups in the film, which is so extreme that it cannot be coincidental. This makes it plausible that the film, at least in part, is an allegory for society as a whole reduced to the more manageable world of teenagers, which contains the embryo of all that will later play out in grown-up everyday society as we know it. What happens in this teenager-world should therefore not be confined to this world alone as it would be if this was a film, which only dealt with teenage-problems. The reluctance that is felt at the other end of the line, when the girl phones one of her parents wanting to be picked up in the wilderness where she was dumped after she was raped, is not the reluctance of that parent really - it is much more the reluctance of society to deal with a problem that, in truth, that society bears the responsibility for. Likewise, Zack, the villain, is obviously not treated very harshly by the headmaster he is called to (not shown) and we can assume that the society (headmaster) in which Zack lives appreciates him as a proper lackey only doing what he is supposed to be doing. In fact it becomes more and more clear as the film moves along, that Zack is the embodiment of the status quo in present society, raping, killing and lying his way though life as in the end when he states to the populace, like any true politician, that he only did what he could do for the poor troubled girl and cannot be blamed for her confusion.And now we come to the final scene in this film, where my interpretation of it may seem fantastic and round the bend, wore it not for some details, that I now immediately want to point out before disappearing too far into the rabbit-hole.In the messages sent to the mobile-phones the text is clearly displayed more than once stating "You can stop this now". This indicates that all receiving that message just have to push a button to stop the execution that will otherwise follow. The decision not to push the button must therefore be interpreted as an unanimous decision. Apparently this message is sent to bystanders of the procedures going on and not to principal players involved in the drama (about this I am however not quite sure). These uninvolved bystanders could be said to be on the same level as the public viewing the film.In the final scene, the hero points out that his killing of the fiend would just be like killing a momentary symptom of the malady in society and that he has another idea in store for us. He realizes that the decision must be made by the public should it have any effect on the malady itself. The public must decide if it is to loose the captain of the swimming-team and the national vanity coupled to that loss or loose the possibility for justice instead. In other words: Only if the public is prepared to loose its idiotic common vanity can it also hope to accomplish justice.Those are indeed strong statements belonging in a film of quite a different standard than a teenage-flick. To make sure this is not a statement for or against capital punishment. In this scene Zack is no longer a person to be executed but the malady itself that can only be overcome by loosing vanity.Had all this been a little clearer, then we would have had a milestone of a film. However, as things are now, we would maybe then have had no film at all. Therefore this is a solid seven stars that however becomes a solid ten stars if many interpret this film as I just did.Incidentally, if the director of this film reads this review, would he then please let me know if I was totally wrong with my interpretation or if I hit the bulls-eye.