Credit where it's due: filmmaker Christoph Ruggia and cowriter Olivier Lorelle penned an astonishingly fierce screenplay. Where it occasionally diverts even slightly from its core strength one can readily discern it's troubled by comparison; as a prime example, consider the major moment and curious plot point coming shortly after the one-hour mark. However, in its heavy focus on Joseph, Chloé, and the relationship between them, the writing is sharp and exquisite, often altogether downright brutal, and absolutely spellbinding. Chloé, autistic and all but entirely nonverbal, struggles to interact and grapple with the world, and be understood, in those ways she knows how. Joseph is as angry as the sun is hot, not to mention emotionally disturbed, and he readily lashes out at a moment's notice, while also being immensely protective of Chloé. Put the two of them together and the question quickly becomes who needs who more, and who truly understands who better. These dynamics resonate so deeply that they organically foster significant, heavy emotions regardless of what's happening in a specific scene - but to that point, the scene writing is so strong as Joseph and Chloé stumble about, with increasingly desperate situations in which for that ferocious push and pull to make waves, that the narrative which manifests is inescapably absorbing as the children move forward to an unknown, uncertain future.
That's one thing 'Les diables' unquestionably has going for it. Another is the cast. Everyone on hand gives tight, striking performances, and where usually I'd criticize acting that's as brusque and forceful as it is here - definitely echoing the tenor of Ruggia's direction - in this case I think that aggressive drift is very appropriate for this tale, and these characters. My commendations to all, though by all means Vincent Rottiers is rather captivating all by himself as anguished Joseph. He embodies the furious, bitter agitation of the boy all too well, to the point that it's somewhat difficult to separate part from player, but also illustrates gratifying nuance and range in betraying the underlying hurt and vulnerability. Personally, I'm surprised Rottiers wasn't more celebrated for his portrayal, because I think he's terrific. In fairness, in subsequent years he was quickly outshone by costar Adèle Haenel, who at this point needs no introduction. Even in only her debut role, thirteen years old at the time this was released, Haenel demonstrates a wholehearted commitment in her performance, and an unwavering passion and vitality as an actor, that exemplifies why she would go on to earn such stellar acclaim. If anything I think she's limited here by the nature of how Chloé is written, and perhaps in turn by Ruggia's direction, yet for the fact that even here she impresses so greatly is a fabulous testament to her skills.
We have to talk about the elephant in the room, though, and to do so, it's worth drawing comparisons to another French filmmaker. Louis Malle was a man who quite courted controversy in his career, for he had no qualms about broaching taboo topics - and he committed fully to realizing those topics on film, whatever that meant. Malle was never less than totally sincere, however, so while matters like underage nudity or incest can and should make us flinch in real life, his pictures come across as meaningful storytelling and exploration of these topics instead of the tawdry, dubious exploitation it could so easily be. As 'Les diables' delves into similar murky territory I believe in all earnestness that by and large the inclusions here, uncomfortable at best and almost entirely unwatchable at worst, do come from a place of simply relating a story, ugly though it might get, and not ducking away from the most unseemly aspects of it. On the other hand, the way the camera lingers on Haenel during her nude scenes, and the length and number of them, is distinctly disconcerting. To whatever extent the feature is only being true to the saga on hand, I don't think there's much arguing that it does also cross a line to be more than a little unscrupulous and indiscrete. Unfortunately, that foul notion is bolstered by the revelations in recent years about Ruggia's appalling behavior toward Haenel throughout the production. There's no excuse for what multiple people have accordingly corroborated, and that paints in a new, seedier light the degree to which Ruggia, as director, chose to showcase a thirteen-year old child as he did.
Though it's off-putting at first I do overall admire the direction here from a fundamental standpoint of orchestrating shots and scenes, and guiding the cast. And in all other ways this is splendidly well done, including those stunts and effects that are employed, production design, cinematography, editing, and so on. It bears repeating, too, that Rottiers' debut as Joseph, and Haenel's as Chloé, are outstanding, matching the stark, powerful writing note for note. In every way that counts, this movie is superb - I dare say, even better than I had hoped - a fine credit to (most) all involved, and easily deserving of a solid, high recommendation. This makes it all the more regrettable that Ruggia's poor behavior, and his dubious decisions regarding a select few shots and scenes, append a sketchy, wary asterisk to the title, and very much dampen the enthusiasm of any recommendation. For all the hard work and intelligence that went into 'Les diables,' and those ways in which it succeeds so roundly, it is well worth seeking out whether one is an especial fan of Rottiers, Haenel, or anyone else who participated. For those ways in which Ruggia's stamp was indelibly placed upon the production as a person and as a director, any discussion one would have of this gets a lot more complicated. Watch, if you have the chance, but watch with keen awareness.
