Although everything in the plot is very easy to understand, everything is explained and self-explainable, it is still hard to say what it all is about, but this is the asset of this film. The plot is taking place in a posh, expensive Swiss ski resort, which, of course, implies the other side of the coin: the everyday life of actual inhabitants of the little settlement, who live in a boring building beneath the mountain. The story starts right away with Simon, 12 year old boy, premature for his age, who steals the expensive equipment whereas finds it unattended, and resells it for cheap money to anyone interested, so that he can support himself and his problematic older sister, who keeps changing men and cannot keep the job. Although the plot takes place in Switzerland, one of the wealthiest countries in the world, where even poor or unemployed people live relatively well, it is still interesting that there are many people ready to buy apparently stolen goods if they see an opportunity to make or save money.
This is not really a social drama, because we cannot see financial or bureaucratic reasons for Simon and his sister to live such a delinquent life. On contrary, it seems there are much easier ways for both of them to make the money, than to sell stolen goods.. However, living such an illegal life seems to be a mode they both accepted in order to prove something to each other or to punish themselves , or challenge the traumas of their lives, which will be revealed in the second half of the film. The film is slowly and almost invisibly developing into the resolving narrative mode, so its definitely not boring to watch.
The social dimension of the film is, hence, not about the finances or material issues. Its more about the alienation among humans and ignorance towards the children, which simply does not even reflect the social status. The little Simon is passing by completely unnoticed for most of the time, wandering around the posh ski terrains, cafes, restaurants, because nobody really cares for children, nobody bothers to pay attention to the other human being. Most of the people, both guests and workers, are just visitors, in passing by, nobody cares to check up on him, or call authorities or anything. Simon is not the only child there who often wonders completely unattended. The appearance of the rich English woman, with a proper family, is more like a dream for Simon, like a proper mother he has never had, but she is not real for him, either, and the illusion is just the illusion.
The acting of both leads is interesting. Film shows the development of the Simon from the boy who is a victim, and who steals to buy food, to a little criminal who at certain point simply can't resist stealing, although he does not have the immediate need for that, towards the end of the film. As for the Lea Seydoux, who plays the "sister", the role that will stay little mysterious almost till the very end, somebody has written here already that she is simply too pretty, or too young, or fragile to fit this story. I disagree with that, on contrary, the row instinct is often hidden within the fragility and prettiness, and her acting is all contained in her face which is at the same time beautiful like a doll's face and wild and cruel to the unthinkable measures. In a word, both actors deserve a praise, together with director.
This is not really a social drama, because we cannot see financial or bureaucratic reasons for Simon and his sister to live such a delinquent life. On contrary, it seems there are much easier ways for both of them to make the money, than to sell stolen goods.. However, living such an illegal life seems to be a mode they both accepted in order to prove something to each other or to punish themselves , or challenge the traumas of their lives, which will be revealed in the second half of the film. The film is slowly and almost invisibly developing into the resolving narrative mode, so its definitely not boring to watch.
The social dimension of the film is, hence, not about the finances or material issues. Its more about the alienation among humans and ignorance towards the children, which simply does not even reflect the social status. The little Simon is passing by completely unnoticed for most of the time, wandering around the posh ski terrains, cafes, restaurants, because nobody really cares for children, nobody bothers to pay attention to the other human being. Most of the people, both guests and workers, are just visitors, in passing by, nobody cares to check up on him, or call authorities or anything. Simon is not the only child there who often wonders completely unattended. The appearance of the rich English woman, with a proper family, is more like a dream for Simon, like a proper mother he has never had, but she is not real for him, either, and the illusion is just the illusion.
The acting of both leads is interesting. Film shows the development of the Simon from the boy who is a victim, and who steals to buy food, to a little criminal who at certain point simply can't resist stealing, although he does not have the immediate need for that, towards the end of the film. As for the Lea Seydoux, who plays the "sister", the role that will stay little mysterious almost till the very end, somebody has written here already that she is simply too pretty, or too young, or fragile to fit this story. I disagree with that, on contrary, the row instinct is often hidden within the fragility and prettiness, and her acting is all contained in her face which is at the same time beautiful like a doll's face and wild and cruel to the unthinkable measures. In a word, both actors deserve a praise, together with director.