"Teenage Angst" is a German thriller from 2008, so this one will have its 10th anniversary next year. The director is Thomas Stuber (recently very successful with "Herbert") and after some short film work, this his his very first full feature film, at slightly over 60 minutes (including credits a really short one though). Maybe that is the reason the film lacks in the story-telling department quite a bit. We have a group of four young men and we see what the "advantages" of their parents' wealth turned them into: sadists, criminals, masochists, indifferent followers, but the humanity is pretty much gone in all of these. Admittedly, the grown-up characters in here are not helping matters (i.e. the boys) either. Nonetheless the film delivers really as nothing but a story of shock value and humiliation. You don't care for any of the characters or their well-being really. In terms of the character study component, it is really an underwhelming outcome I must say. The young actors are nothing special either and I don't really see promise in them. Or perspective. For a decent and especially for a long career in the industry, they need to step things up. Same for the duo who wrote this. Then again, it's been almost 10 years since this came out, so here's hoping they managed to improve already. For daddy Schweighöfer all hope is lost though perhaps age-wise. Then again he probably isn't any worse in here than his equally untalented and horribly overrated son. This film offers almost nothing below the surface and I give it a thumbs-down. It's not a failure, but also miles away from being a good movie. I am glad it was this short. Not recommended. Oh yeah, final note: This film is also known as Spieltrieb and you should not mistake it for the other later title (by Gregor Schnitzler) with that name because that one is actually fairly decent.

Teenage Angst is a film I felt was cut by the half. OK, it's an European film, things are supposed to be guessed more than explained, but this was too much to me. So: spoiler alert! What was all that bashing of the guy meant for? It has some gay eroticism in itself, and that's why it's marked of gay interest, but why didn't he reacted at some point? Just to be part of a mini-fraternity? Too little to explain his behavior, after he was nearly drowned, isn't it? That's a film in which I would demand an explanation, as it's given in most American comfortable movies. The school itself is hardly convincing. Just some pals in classes with someone that seems to be the sole prof, director, adviser, etc. But so much lack of information p. me off.

As another reviewer stated, the story idea had potential, but the production failed to deliver. In the synopsis we're told that the setting is an elite border (boarding?) school where a group of four students form a clique. A "clique" would suggest that there was some effort to exclude others, but there didn't seem to be any others about the school to exclude.Elite or otherwise, there was little evidence that it was actually even a school … few students other than the main four, no teachers and no classes. And there was little to suggest that it was elite aside from the vague notion that the boys came from wealthy, privileged homes and that the school appeared to be in a derelict castle. The only faculty member was a creepy, slovenly bearded creature whose main function was to give students breathalyzer tests & to rummage through their rooms and who became decidedly unhinged in his efforts to obtain a urine sample from one student. I was never quite clear whether he was meant to be the head of school, a counselor or a teacher … or possibly all of the above since no one else was manning the establishment.There was no evident reason why these four students would feel the urge to form a clique or why they would feel compelled to maintain it other than the fact there seemed no one else around with whom they could become friends. On a couple of occasions a few other boys were seen running, presumably as part of their physical education program, but otherwise the school and dormitory were eerily vacant.The idea that our four characters had varying unfulfilled social needs (hardly what most people would think of as teenage angst) and that over time their relationships and behavior towards one another became progressively cruel, exploitative and sociopathic was never developed, it just happened. Left to their own devices and largely unsupervised, their little alliance supposedly went horribly wrong, in the style of The Lord of the Flies I suppose, but in the Lord of the Flies you observed the metamorphosis and saw things unravel. In this case it was just four incompatible, socially challenged boys maintaining a mini-fraternity for no apparent reason.The idea that the one student who suffered the most from the association did so in the hope of finding acceptance and friendship was never convincing nor was the idea that they found enjoyment in drink and drugs.The dramatic ending to this story was even more bizarre than all that preceded it, involving the creepy faculty member determined to obtain a urine sample. It had virtually no cause and effect relationship to the machinations of the "clique" and was largely irrelevant to the presumed point of the story. Quite a disappointment.

The movie seems to have some influence of "The Young Törless", Robert Musil's novel was adapted for the screen by Volker Schlöndorff. The theme is similar: in an elite school, a group of students think they are "beyond good and evil" and bully on of its members, in a way that resembles the fascism."Reject the moral" means to them: massive alcohol and drug abuse, and various forms of rape and torture.Unfortunately, the movie don't develops its interesting premise. What we see is only a strong graphic content with obvious homo-erotic subtext.It's a weird school, where there is only one teacher and few students, and they are mere adjuncts. The author failed to portray a real school environment.Maybe the story would be better if there were more brain and less eye candy.