Holstra Boring, long, and too preachy.

Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

Lollivan It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Arcadio Bolanos Can homosexuality be successfully articulated in society? According to some, homosexuals are doomed to be secluded and restricted to marginalized worlds. As filmmaker, Gaël Morel has often chosen to portray such worlds, enquiring deeply below the surface of what actually means to be an outcast.In "Le Clan", for example, Morel digs into the lives of outcast youngsters, which share an obvious resemblance to some of the protagonists of "À toute vitesse". There is, however, a much subtler approach of such topics in this film, perhaps as part of André Téchiné's influence (who appears listed in the credits).Spivak's book "Can the Subaltern Speak?" explains that authority is built upon a specific loci of enunciation. In this film, traditional society has already attributed a certain loci or place to those who dare to defy the heterosexual normative.Nonetheless, Morel goes much deeper than that. Handsome and talented Quentin is a young writer that has just won an award and is on his way to success. He does have quite an ambivalent position about marginalization. For example, he accuses the French bourgeois of misunderstanding his novel, as he has no intentions of depicting outcasts because for him they are normal people; he affirms that it is the bourgeois who constantly ostracize and discriminate others. Clearly, some of that is truth, as the mesocratic class tends to judge harshly those who do not fit into the symbolic order.As the film goes on, Quentin starts spending time with Samir, an Algerian boy that is still grieving the loss of his boyfriend; Quentin's tantalizing physic presence serves as cannon fodder for Samir's masturbatory urges as can be explicitly seen in one scene. Will the two boys consummate their passion or is only one of them interested in such consummation? Quentin apparently defends the rights of the Algerians as he publicly accuses acts of racism and violence, but at the same time he despises Samir just as much as he spurns Julie, his girlfriend or Jimmy, his best friend (interpreted by Stéphane Rideau, an actor extremely familiarized with gay productions). Over and over again, Quentin is seen as someone who takes advantage of social unfairness in order to gain publicity for himself, and certainly once he starts making his way in the publishing world he decides to move to Paris, quickly discarding friends and love interests.Jimmy is a jobless guy, with no real prospects of a 'decent' future. And Samir is a boy who barely has enough money to pay the rent. Except for Julie, all other characters are on the edge of poverty or delinquency. They are, however, strong and coherent. Julie trusts in the possibility to have a good relationship whether with Quentin or someone else, Samir decides to defend himself against French fascists that brutally assault him while Jimmy bravely defends Samir even if that means risking his physical integrity. Quentin, on the contrary, is unable to find coherence, his loci of enunciation becomes so firmly inserted in the symbolic order that he loses all true authority. That's how we can understand the lack of commitment in his acts: he has a relationship with Julie but seems willing to let her go as he sees fit; he starts a sentimental relationship with Samir only until he completes enough research for his next book; he supports gays or Algerians only as a marketing strategy, but he is never there when his friends need him. Despise all that, Morel manages to create a fascinating, talented, smart young man that carries the traits of a hero although none of the true virtues.

thesar-2 'Full Speed' is like 'Speed 2'; neither contained any sort of momentum. Perhaps I missed the boat on this one; sure, it was foreign, but it was very hard to follow. I guess there was this writer and some friends, some loved some, some were just loyal. It's labeled as a 'gay themed' movie and there was at least one gay person here, but it seemed like just a side character. For the most part, I was bored, waiting for that signature big-bad event that happens in almost all independent movies. When this one comes, no spoiler, it's so left-field it was hard to believe. Nothing really new here, nothing exciting. I seriously don't know how it got the title as slow as this was, but then again, like I said, I probably missed the boat. I've seen literally one hundred gay themed movies, including a multiple of foreign films. This does not rank anywhere in the top 90 of those. No one really to root for, no real character development. In fact, the acting in a lot of scenes was laughable. The funniest scene seems to be the most tragic: one character dies and all but does a 'Brady Bunch' death scene – so bad when his/her head hits the window that I was waiting for either the fake, studio audience laugh-track or "Oooohhh" to come. Since there was no real character to root for, no one that stood out as too evil or too good, it was all so ho-hum with very little direction. I see others giving this high ratings, and more power to them that they enjoyed it. Hopefully they'll realize there's dozens upon dozens better than this and move on to explore real visions of love and plight of gay characters.

CARLOS SARASOLA A sensitive film debut that tackles human relationships between 4 youngsters against the usual backdrop of Racism, Homophobia, Violence and Teenage unrest in modern multicultural France. Although it has and a quite nice photography, it resembles too much to its predecessor "Wild Reeds", a beautiful moving film by director Andre Techine. The four main characters are nearly a grown-up transcription of the ones' in Techine's film; the French countryside, the mixed feelings, the motorbike rides, the young intellectual-director's alter ego, the Algerian question,...nearly everything looks like a rework but in a less subtle and intelligent way. Nevertheless the film is worth to see, certainly if you liked "Wild Reeds", because of its gay sub-text (always exciting in French Cinema), the powerful performance of E.Bouchez and S.Rideau and the sensitive direction of Gael Morel. If you liked this film check "Les Terres froides" (just on French TV), "Presque Rien" and "Krampack", and not forget to watch "The Battle of Algiers" for a harsh realistic account of the events that lead to the independence of Algeria from France.

notmicro Interesting primarily in relation to an earlier French film "Wild Reeds" (1994), which was the first film featuring several of the young actors here. Unfortunately it just does not "translate" - the interwoven themes of French political, racial and class tensions, and fallout from the Algerian conflict (which no doubt have great resonance with French youth) will be almost entirely lost on American viewers, who may see the film primarily due to its minor gay sub-text. The motivation behind some key scenes, particularly involving violent conflicts between groups of young guys, is pretty much incomprehensible.