More a chronicle than a real story ,"Vandal" was critically-acclaimed but failed at the box office.It is sure easy to see why:the hip hop culture ,although no longer that of a marginal group,is not really mainstream either.Chérif ,sent to the east of France by his discouraged mom,has found a straight-laced cousin who is part of a pack of taggers who ,when the night has Fallen,go bombing on the walls of Strasbourg town.These rebellious minds are very competitive and there's a mysterious tagger who leaves his "artworks" in out-of-the-way places.One night,however,an accident happens.The night scenes ,with these hooded youngsters recalling the "villains " of the serials of the French silent age ,are not devoid of charm and poetry;we are spared rap music (and music which passes for rock in MTV works),which is a blessing .The Young director (32) did not try to create his "rebel without a cause" and he avoids the usual clichés .Nevertheless,his depiction of the milieu in which his hero is nurtured is too superficial :his work as a bricklayer's apprentice ,for instance ,is underwritten ;the mother (and grandma) hardly appear.The last picture may puzzle the viewer.

(Screened as part of the myFrenchFilmFestival.com that is underway only on screens - the TV link does not work for most of the features and the shorts, no matter what anyone else might tell you).We have seen many, many movies about disturbed youth trying to let off some steam in various ways, and for all intents and purposes, they have all needed to be really intense in their narrations, and show an arc to their protagonists.This one's no different. In that it has intensity in spades, angry adults who may/may not be responsible for the waywardness of their wards too, in spades.What this has, that makes it a better study in comparison to (some/most, depending on who you're talking to) its contemporaries, is a throbbing, fab soundtrack, and suitably real-like characters, who seem and behave in an (for lack of a better word at this time) earthy manner/fashion. There's not much exposition going into the tale, but by the end of it all, we have a fairly decent idea on what propels our protagonist. And yes, he's more the protagonist material than the antagonist material, though the background is seeped in Grey for most of the running time.Speaking of which, the lack of a suitably strong antagonist (I thought there was one for part of the running time, the eponymous 'one', so to speak) kinda goes against the grain of the flick, esp. since the 'anger' of the protagonist needs a decent outlet, so to speak, and though he's suitably self-destructive enough for us to see that aspect unfold, it still makes for (relatively) less-engaging viewing. The performances match the characterization, and the casting supports it to the extent expected. This is a work from someone in control of all aspects involved in narrating the movie, and it shows in the control implicit in all of those aspects coming to fruition on the screen as we are swept into the events that unfold.What goes against this tale, in my humble opinion, especially for seasoned movie-watchers / book-readers, is the predictability of it all. In spite of all the things it does get right, when you lay it bare, especially in hindsight, there's nothing new about any of the events you get to watch. Keeping that in mind, the fact that it is nevertheless narrated at a crisp pace, and still makes for engrossing viewing, is definitely a decent achievement.A good watch, preferably with a like-minded audience, preferably on the big screen, and with a decent sound system.