Watch Private Lessons For Free

I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

It is rather difficult to separate the presentation from the message, especially when the content of this film is undeniably disturbing (and exceedingly complex), no matter how liberal and open-minded some reviewers may wish to portray themselves. The story, the acting, the directing and the final product are all exceedingly well done, regardless of how one is angered and disturbed by what happens to Jonas, the central character in the film. In fact, the resulting emotional response to it all is testament to how well it was done. Towards the end of the movie Jonas, the young man who is the central focus of the story, angrily declares to his "mentor" that he has been abused by him. The stark reality of this, while hardly revelatory to the viewer, appears to come as a shock to both the abused and the abuser. In fact, most of the adults in the film have abused him, either actively or through neglect or incompetence or indifference. While the sexual aspect of it is the most glaring and disturbing, it is not the only way in which adults have failed him. At his age, he might be thought of as being on the border between child and young adult, but he is clearly child-like in his emotional development and vulnerabilities.The title, élève libre, has been translated to "Private Lessons." A more accurate meaning of the original title would be, in American English at least, an "auditing student" or an "unregistered student," someone studying outside of the normal student-in-school setting. Because Jonas believes, or has been led to believe, that he has the potential to become a professional tennis player, he has neglected his school work. Since he is already several years older than the other students in his class, his school refuses to allow him to repeat his studies again. They recommend that he enter a vocational school, which Jonas regards as a place for losers. Coincident with this personal trauma, his mediocre performance in tennis means he must face the fact that he will never become a tennis pro. His core family offers no support for him in his hope to once again prepare for his exams. Enter Didier, Nathalie and Pierre, friends of his mother. Initially they appear to offer Jonas support, both practical and emotional, in his quest to prepare for re-sitting his exams. They, in particular Pierre, take on the role that might better have been played by his family. At the same time that Jonas is dealing with problems with family, school and tennis, he is trying to understand the mysteries of sex and romance. He has a girlfriend, Delphine. They are both virgins and they begin to explore their sexuality together to their mutual satisfaction, but because of all the other "failures" in his life, Jonas wonders whether he is failing in this too.At first it seems the trio of adults in his life are also going to provide him with the benefit of their experience and wisdom in matters sexual, but what begins as dinner table conversations offering reassurance and some helpful advice, turns into an increasingly obsessive interest by them in Jonas and his sexual performance. Following their advice and sharing with them the intimacy of his relationship with Delphine eventually, understandably offends Delphine and ruins their relationship. The adults then become sexually involved with Jonas in a way that even the most open-minded person cannot deny is totally exploitative and abusive. I've read some reviews where the writer feels that the story is dragged out excessively by the lengthy conversations between the characters, especially the dinner table discussion between Jonas and the three adults, but these were essential to the development of those characters and the increasingly obsessive, disturbing interest they had in Jonas as someone to exploit for their own pleasure.This film will undoubtedly disturb or anger or titillate or otherwise provoke an emotional response from viewers. It is certainly not a feel-good experience with a happy ending (although there is a somewhat lame final scene that might be considered a happy ending). That the hetero and homosexual target of the abuse is a beautiful young man rather than a girl will probably be all the more offensive to some. Objectively it can only be considered an excellent production that deals with an unpleasant topic.

This movie depicts a sexual abuse of a male child by his "friends" who help him with his tennis training and school exams.The child has three elder "friends", one of them is a female. His mother and father are far away and he is alone with "them".There are 5 abuses depicted in the movie which take place when the child is in the "protection" of those elders.At first, the child is exposed to a sexual discussion in which the "elders" try to indoctrinate him about "infidelity" and they try to convince him to have sex with one of them.In the second, an elder, finally forces and convinces him to have sex with her while the child is drunk. The child's eyes are tied. Other two people watch him at that abuse.The third is a homosexual child abuse. While the second abuse is continuing, one of the male elders "take turn" and abuse him. At that moment, the child doesn't know a male is giving blow-job to him. He thinks a woman is doing it.The fourth is another homosexual child abuse. The second elder, who helps with exams, pushes to, convinces, and gives the boy a blow-job while the boy is trying to study to his exams.The fifth is again another homosexual child abuse. Like the previous, same elder "gay" person first gives him a blow-job then he penetrates the boy making it an "anal intercourse with a child".The elders use/abuse "Position of trust" to convince and push him to have sex with each of them.When the child accuses them for abusing him, the last abuser accuses him back with being an "opportunist". The movie takes side with the elders and it is depicted as if it is "normal" for elders to have sex with a child.The last guy says "I never did anything that you refused" or something like "I never forced you to do anything." And the child is showed as walking back into house as a justification of all this sexual abuse.I think producers, writers, and directors of this movie think that it is normal for an elder to have sex with a child if he or she doesn't "refuse." They should have known that a child isn't equipped with mental competency to cope with child abusers. You can't justify having sex with a child by saying "he/she didn't say no!" This is a crime against humanity.I condemn who contributed to this movie.

Okay, this movie may not be everyone's cup of tea. Whichever way you look at it, the main theme is undeniably a one-sided sexual relationship between an overbearing adult and a naive and gullible adolescent boy. Jonas being "already" sixteen years of age may make sexual intercourse with him legally permitted, but the fact remains that there's a huge unbalance between the two of them: the adult party acting as a self-appointed teacher and as the last hope of Jonas' ambition to succeed for his final exams, while young Jonas is (or at least feels to be) totally dependent of Pierre. If Pierre had been his actual professor at school, he would without any doubt have risked expulsion because of sexual harassment. So Pierre could have known (and was intelligent enough to actually know) that he was wrong. It's only in the very end of the movie that the balance weighs a little bit back in favor of Jonas, who - with the sleek opportunism of his age- , sees that his knowledge of Pierre now gives him control over him and makes him get what he wants: a degree.This doesn't sound as a fun movie, and it isn't. It's appalling to witness the machinations of Pierre and his two equally adult friends, who very gradually but deliberately succeed in sexual corrupting Jonas. They make his first sexual experience with his (equally inexperienced) girlfriend into the favorite topic at the dinner table ("does she has a vaginal or a clitoral orgasm?"), with total disregard to Jonas' uneasiness on the subject, and at some point start to "teach" him the real stuff: making him witness them having sexual intercourse and giving him blow-jobs, in the process teaching him so many adult tricks that his girlfriend can't cope with it and shies away. It's all the more appalling because Jonas is a vulnerable child, with his parents divorced, he and his brother living with his mother but she's all the time away on some vague missions and the boys are totally on their own. Jonas does bad at school, his tennis doesn't work-out either and he feels like a total looser. And now he also feels like he's a looser with sex, because these adults make fun of him and his girlfriend backs off. As said before, it's only at the end of the movie that Jonas discovers that he can stand up for himself. If the choice he makes is morally a good one is questionable, apparently the director wants us to judge for ourselves.The acting in this movie is mostly strong, although these adults all three of them have a pompous way of delivering their lines, but maybe that's just to emphasize their deliberate and self-righteous character. But I was especially impressed with young Bloquet as Jonas, he seems like a natural and is totally convincing as the naive, slightly dumb but eager to learn, impressionable adolescent who outwardly shrugs away his problems rather than face or discuss them, but all the while subtly showing the inner turmoils and doubts he harbors. The actor cannot have been much older than the character he plays here, so it makes you wonder how he coped with all this.The direction calmly lets unfold the story by itself, there are no artistic mannerisms to distract the viewer; on the contrary, the direction is almost clinical and with that chillingly effective. The script is great. I loved the fact that we seem to step on board of a riding train and never get anything explained, so things only very gradually begin to dawn on you or just stay in the dark. What's Jonas' mother going away for? What is the role of his silent (older?) brother? How did he encounter Pierre and his friends and why does his mother trusts them so much to allow her son to spend so much time with them? It's like the script cut-off all the fringes to make the bleak story all the more visible. It's the same with the ending: we see Jonas finally getting his degree. But how things with Pierre will go from there on we don't learn. We will have to guess.To sum it up: it's an impressive and bold movie with a repulsive story and a questionable morale, that lingers in your head for a long time and can cause some serious discussion on the topics of sexual exploitation and opportunism. Movies like this, that shake you up rather than entertain you are not a bad thing at all.

I'm sorry, that the previous critiques on this 2010 French/Belgian movie paint such a dark, horrific and - most of all - wrong picture of it's content and meaning.First off, let's get the plot right: Jonas, a young man around 17/18, lives alone with his brother near the Belgian border of France. His parents separated and his mother moved away and just visits them once ore twice a month. Jonas usually spends most of his time practicing to be a tennis-pro (just to get to a critique formally posted: you can not expect every young French actor to play tennis like a pro, bro) or with Didier, Nathalie and Pierre, friends of his mother, who play in the same tennis-club as Jonas does. As Jonas spends most of his time on the tennis-court, his academical achievements are not quite the top of the crops, actually he already is 3 years older than most of his classmates. Anyway, as most young man at his age, Jonas makes first contact witch sexuality (with a young girl from his school: Delphine) This stirs the interest of Didier, Nathalie and Pierre, who seem to have a very very good relationship with Jonas, as they talk (almost) openly about Jonas' experiences with Delphine.When Jonas isn't allowed to take the regular exams, Pierre offers, to prepare him for a special test to replace it. During this "private lessons" (which by the way is the German title of the movie) Pierre (Nathalie and Didier also) start to get very very VERY close to Jonas in the process of "teaching" him how everything works concerning sex.The movie does not (as previously claimed) deal with a "pedophile pervert" or "mid-thirties giving blow jobs to minors" but with the sometimes thin borders between being helpful, being close and being abused. Joachim Lafosse (the director) depicts in a very distant but still not cold way the subtle changes that lead to... well I don't wanna tell you to much ;-)After I watched the movie, I, personally, asked myself the question: When did this road towards "abuse" start? was it planned by Pierre from the beginning? Or was it Jonas' decision in the end?I think you should get your own answers and watch this astoundingly intense movie, perfectly fitting into the wave of Western-European new-age movies (for example the German movie "Everyone Else")Thanks for readingMaikP.s. : Excuse my weak English, it's actually 2.30am, but I just had to get some things right here ;-)