IMDb RATING
7.0/10
1.2K
YOUR RATING
Leo, 21, tells his rural family that he is HIV-positive. They choose to hide it from 11-year-old Marcel. But Marcel senses something is wrong with his brother and, during a trip to Paris, co... Read allLeo, 21, tells his rural family that he is HIV-positive. They choose to hide it from 11-year-old Marcel. But Marcel senses something is wrong with his brother and, during a trip to Paris, confronts him about it.Leo, 21, tells his rural family that he is HIV-positive. They choose to hide it from 11-year-old Marcel. But Marcel senses something is wrong with his brother and, during a trip to Paris, confronts him about it.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
7.01.1K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Featured reviews
How Would WE?
How DOES a person react to the news that they have HIV and how does their family act? In fact, how do we think WE would act? Well, regarding that second question, I honestly don't have the slightest idea and fortunately, haven't had to find out. But I am guessing that it would involve a vast variety of conflicting and changeable emotions and behaviors, both rational and irrational, as was expressed here in this, what I can only believe is a very realistic film...because each individual and family may have their own responses. I think all emotional responses and behaviors are realistic and justified under the circumstances, even some that might generate distaste among some viewers of this film. A family, with its shock, fear, grief, and shame, if they feel those emotions, may decide to protect whom they believe is a more vulnerable member of the family. Then they may decide that that was the wrong tack to follow. Or maybe not. Who knows WHAT to do, really? Sometimes paralysis is bound to take over to the extent of collapsing into semi-catatonia, or maybe the opposite, such as running wildly toward a futile sense of escape. Any and everything may happen, and all are valid.
Isn't it realistic that one so stricken might want to reach out to people who had held meaning in the past, but not really have any idea how to go about that in a prudent way? Or maybe there will be feelings of hatred or envy of those who are able to peacefully go through the normalcy of their lives, because they do not have this issue to suddenly contend with. Maybe one might for a moment become utterly irresponsible and uncaring, or self-destructive, for in the face of death, or certain pain and anguish, what of any shreds of a former morality may seem to truly matter?
I believe that this film accurately explores the potential universe of reactions in a powerfully communicative way. This maybe made the "narrative story" jerky or uncomfortable to watch or understand, but if so, welcome to THEIR world.
I don't believe that the makers of this film believe that this film, or any other, shows the definitive way things will happen under these circumstances. I think they know more than that...that they know that we all DON'T know and all bets are off, but in their work, here, they are going to explore and have the viewer live some of the possibilities. And I felt that as a viewer, they were very successful. I couldn't help but feel throughout this movie, things maybe I didn't want to feel, but I then I shouldn't watch a movie like this if I wanted to be protected. We all knew going into it what the subject matter was.
One thing that I thoroughly appreciated about the film was the physical affection and body contact among the various family members that seemed to disturb the sensibilities of some reviewers, when it is so clear to me that one valid reaction might be the family's desire (either being satisfied in actuality or else communicated metaphorically via the visual language of film) to utterly ABSORB every precious square inch of not only the body of the loved one that is soon to be falling apart, possibly into nothingness, but also those suddenly even-more- precious-than-ever-before who will remain after the one so stricken has gone, all of whom will have to live with this shared loss for the rest of their lives. And for the one stricken, to connect with the sweet human flesh of those whom he loves while he still can effect such a connection, I submit that the most fundamental and reliable communication of all may be through touch and the body, for the emotions and the intellect would be too much in a typhoon to be constant.
Isn't it realistic that one so stricken might want to reach out to people who had held meaning in the past, but not really have any idea how to go about that in a prudent way? Or maybe there will be feelings of hatred or envy of those who are able to peacefully go through the normalcy of their lives, because they do not have this issue to suddenly contend with. Maybe one might for a moment become utterly irresponsible and uncaring, or self-destructive, for in the face of death, or certain pain and anguish, what of any shreds of a former morality may seem to truly matter?
I believe that this film accurately explores the potential universe of reactions in a powerfully communicative way. This maybe made the "narrative story" jerky or uncomfortable to watch or understand, but if so, welcome to THEIR world.
I don't believe that the makers of this film believe that this film, or any other, shows the definitive way things will happen under these circumstances. I think they know more than that...that they know that we all DON'T know and all bets are off, but in their work, here, they are going to explore and have the viewer live some of the possibilities. And I felt that as a viewer, they were very successful. I couldn't help but feel throughout this movie, things maybe I didn't want to feel, but I then I shouldn't watch a movie like this if I wanted to be protected. We all knew going into it what the subject matter was.
One thing that I thoroughly appreciated about the film was the physical affection and body contact among the various family members that seemed to disturb the sensibilities of some reviewers, when it is so clear to me that one valid reaction might be the family's desire (either being satisfied in actuality or else communicated metaphorically via the visual language of film) to utterly ABSORB every precious square inch of not only the body of the loved one that is soon to be falling apart, possibly into nothingness, but also those suddenly even-more- precious-than-ever-before who will remain after the one so stricken has gone, all of whom will have to live with this shared loss for the rest of their lives. And for the one stricken, to connect with the sweet human flesh of those whom he loves while he still can effect such a connection, I submit that the most fundamental and reliable communication of all may be through touch and the body, for the emotions and the intellect would be too much in a typhoon to be constant.
Excellent french COA movie
This movie was for a while in my collection, but it wasn't before a friend of mine reminded me about it until I decided that I should watch it. I did not know much about Close to Leo just that it was supposed to be excellent coming out of age movie and it deals with a very serious topic Aids.
Although the person who has aids is Leo the scenario wraps around the way in which Marcel (the youngest brother of Leo) coupes with the sickness of his relative. At first everyone is trying to hide the truth from Marcel he is believed to be too young to understand the sickness of his brother the fact that Leo is also a homosexual contributes to the unwillingness of the parents to discus the matter with the young Marcel. I know from experience that on many occasions most older people do not want to accept the fact that sometimes even when someone is young this does not automatically means that he will not be able to accept the reality and act in more adequate manner then even themselves . With exception of the fact that the family tried to conceal the truth from Marcel, they have left quite an impression for me the way they supported their son even after discovering the truth about his sexuality and his sickness. The fact that they allowed the young Marcel to travel along with Leo to Paris to meet his ex boyfriend was quite a gesture from them most families I know will be reluctant to do that. There is a lot of warmth in the scenes in which the brothers spend some time together you can see them being real friends , concern about each other.
Close to Leo is an excellent drama, which I strongly recommend
Although the person who has aids is Leo the scenario wraps around the way in which Marcel (the youngest brother of Leo) coupes with the sickness of his relative. At first everyone is trying to hide the truth from Marcel he is believed to be too young to understand the sickness of his brother the fact that Leo is also a homosexual contributes to the unwillingness of the parents to discus the matter with the young Marcel. I know from experience that on many occasions most older people do not want to accept the fact that sometimes even when someone is young this does not automatically means that he will not be able to accept the reality and act in more adequate manner then even themselves . With exception of the fact that the family tried to conceal the truth from Marcel, they have left quite an impression for me the way they supported their son even after discovering the truth about his sexuality and his sickness. The fact that they allowed the young Marcel to travel along with Leo to Paris to meet his ex boyfriend was quite a gesture from them most families I know will be reluctant to do that. There is a lot of warmth in the scenes in which the brothers spend some time together you can see them being real friends , concern about each other.
Close to Leo is an excellent drama, which I strongly recommend
A movie that centres on the relationship between a young man HIV+ and his family
I loved this movie. First, because it is a family movie. Second, because it offers a refreshing take on dealing with the news of HIV in a family, with far less hysteria than what I have normally seen in the movies. The brothers are very close, yet are not judgmental. Their desire to protect the youngest brother is noble, but not needed in the end. I understand that Leo's choice on how to deal with his treatment may not have been the most popular one with people, but I believed it was the right choice for him. I can't believe that this was a french television programme. It had great production values. I gave this movie a ten, and I think you will too, once you have seen it.
More realistic than most.
This film is about Leo. The oldest of four brothers who returns home to inform his family that he has aids.
His family is keen to keep this information from his youngest brother (who is 12). Naturally, his young brother hears this conversation and the film mostly follows his brother as he processes and deals with this information.
I found the reactions of most of the characters quite realistic and believable. From Marcel being angry about his family trying to keep everything, to various family members having emotional outbursts.
All in all the film handles its subject matter with a lot more maturity than most films about this subject that are made in places like America or England... particularly given when this film was made.
My main criticism is that it does come to a rather sudden end. Don't get me wrong... the end is conclusive. But it just felt to me like there was more story to be told. In-between the events of most of the film and the rather abrupt conclusion.
His family is keen to keep this information from his youngest brother (who is 12). Naturally, his young brother hears this conversation and the film mostly follows his brother as he processes and deals with this information.
I found the reactions of most of the characters quite realistic and believable. From Marcel being angry about his family trying to keep everything, to various family members having emotional outbursts.
All in all the film handles its subject matter with a lot more maturity than most films about this subject that are made in places like America or England... particularly given when this film was made.
My main criticism is that it does come to a rather sudden end. Don't get me wrong... the end is conclusive. But it just felt to me like there was more story to be told. In-between the events of most of the film and the rather abrupt conclusion.
Touching look at a family dealing with a crisis
I found this film to be a fascinating study of a family in crisis. When Leo, the oldest announces that he is HIV+ the reactions of the family members alone and with each other was touching and yet strange.
I have never seen a family that was as physically demonstrative as this one; nor one as likely to shout at each other. I didn't understand why the family felt that youngest couldn't deal with the news but once past that difficult I found this a thoroughly moving film.
I have never seen a family that was as physically demonstrative as this one; nor one as likely to shout at each other. I didn't understand why the family felt that youngest couldn't deal with the news but once past that difficult I found this a thoroughly moving film.
Did you know
- ConnectionsReferences Saturday Night Fever (1977)
Details
- Runtime
- 1h 28m(88 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.78 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content



