VERY POWERFUL CAUTIONARY TALE
Added 2/7/2009
I finally got around to seeing this 1967 film, depicting the French occupation of colonial Algiers in the 1950s, which eventually led to the independence of this Muslim nation. It is well worth watching in order to learn lessons about the Iraq aftermath, although one should not make too many connections. The biggest difference is that the French wanted to stay and maintain the country as a colony, whereas the U.S. cannot wait to get the heck out of Iraq as soon as it is semi-secure. This film is black-and-white with sub-titles. It is very revealing in its descriptions of how terrorists (or freedom fighters) fight guerrilla war, and it is the last straw (after Diem bien Phu) for French militarism. Read Camus to get a perspective on their mindset at the time. The film ends with the French having destroyed the cell responsible for a series of bombings, but in its denoument shows that a few years later an uprising occurred, out of nowhere really, that finally left the French with the conclusion that they did not have the stomach for colonialization. This story should be studied in light of French failures in Syria, Lebanon, its Foreign Legion's wars (plus Belgium's failure in the Congo), and the determination of this study is that the French have contributed mightily to destabilization of the Middle East, a little known fact in today's discourse.
3 out of 3 people found this helpful.
|
4 stars out of 4
Added 1/28/2009
The Bottom Line:
A riveting war film and an incredibly compelling treatise on de-colonialism, The Battle of Algiers is a fascinating film which is no less interesting or topical today than it was upon its release.
2 out of 2 people found this helpful.
|
Dated Sensibilities
Added 10/22/2008
I recently saw this movie and for me it has some interesting features but is far from being the ultimate war movie it was supposed to be. Maybe at the time it was released it had something new to tell but after more than 40 years I think its sensibilities are dated.
I do not like the glorification of violence in the name of leftist politics, even though their cause could be considered as just the methods the Algerian FNLN guerrilla used were despicable, the cowardly murder of police and army personnel and the bombing of civilians is far from heroic. We can empathize with the anger of the Algerian people at being dominated by a white French minority but resorting to criminal brutality was unjustified even if at the end the aims were achieved and indeed Algeria won its independence (more because of negative political sentiment in France that ultimately sapped the moral of the troops and led the nation to finally give up in this struggle). The director clearly aims at creating a sympathy with the urban guerrillas true to sixties sensibilities at a time when Che Guevara and Ho Chi Min were considered heroes by the young and the leftist inclined intellectuals and lay people. Today we are seeing the devastating effects these so called heroes created in their societies bringing not the final redemption of the masses but brutal dictatorships and ultimately economic failure of their economies and now we have only Cuba openly professing Communism and supporting guerrilla groups such as the soon to be defunct FARC in Colombia. So I do not support left wing freedom fighters knowing what we know today but in the early sixties still the Soviet Union was going strong creating a sixth column around the world aided by the bleeding heart leftist intellectuals and the youth openly professing revolutionary ideas all over the world and movies such as this aided in this aim.
I commend the director (Pontecorvo) in presenting a well balanced character in Col. Mathieu, the French paratroop commander. Considering the ideological leanings of the film it could have been easy to present a caricature of a nazi sadist but we are given a more profound character that indeed addresses the tough necessities in fighting a dirty war but with a sense of morality.
I cannot root for the French either as they were only trying to preserve a colonial rule that by the time was outdated and in moral bankrupcy, of course they were tough and at times brutal but the enemy did not give them other choice, that is the sad truth of fighting urban guerrillas, you cannot recognize the combatants from the civilians and to find them you have to bend the rules of decency and civilized warfare. Thus we have torture being used as a necessity, spies, informers and traitors also were used in order to reach the safe houses and hiding places the guerrillas used and to ultimately find the few die-hards that are hiding among the society that only wants to be left in peace to resume normal life, this is the essence of dirty war that leftist groups and freedom fighters have forced armies to use.
The movie was well crafted, the style was almost a documentary, the use of native actors gives it some authenticity. Being a little bit pedantic I found it rather annoying to listen to the dialogs in Italian as the movie took place in French speaking Algeria and I would certainly have preferred to see it in French for authenticity.
In summation this was a good movie, not very revealing, its outdated with current sensibilities but the hype surrounding it does not match with the quality or impact of this movie.
2 out of 4 people found this helpful.
|
An Uncommonly Powerful Film
Added 10/9/2008
There are few films with the power of The Battle Of Algiers. It is a film based on real events that gives you, the audience, the feel of those events actually unfolding before your eyes, which is a rarity to say the least. What is even rarer is what makes this film so good: it is perhaps the most successful documentary approach recreation of actual events ever produced.
Perhaps the biggest key to the documentary approach of the film is the fact that the actors do not seem to be acting. Often it is the very fact that actors do seems to be acting that can kill the reality of a film like this one yet this represents one of the successful attempts at using not just actors but non-actors to create a seamless whole. In fact one of the best decisions made by Gillo Pontecorvo was to cast Saadi Yacef who was directly involved in the real events to effectively play himself. The advantage of this is that it adds an even greater degree of verisimilitude to the film and its approach.
The documentary approach is in fact the very key to the success of The Battle Of Algiers. The cinematography wobbles, zooms and frames in the way that a documentary film would if filming these events as they were taking place and gives the film the visual reference of a documentary. The result of this is the feeling in the midst of riots, shooting, bombings, meetings, torturing etc. In short the film gives the feeling of being in the midst of a modern revolution from both sides of it.
In fact it is the very fact that The Battle Of Algiers covers both sides that makes the film stand-out. It is true that the filmmakers have an obvious bias for the FLN, yet one must look deeper into the film. Despite that bias the film pulls no punches on the morals of terrorism. The very fact that is shows shooting and bombings up close and personal and the aftermaths as well in perhaps the single best example of this. Neither side be it the FLN with their terrorist attacks of the French with their paratroopers using torture is portrayed as the definite good guys or bad guys to put it in more conventional, literal terms. The film proves that one point of view is as valid as the other, something rather unique to this film. The bias is for the FLN and the journey of Ali La Pointe from average Algerian to revolutionary yet the fact is that the film shows both sides. The point of this: nobody is right yet nobodies wrong and both sides of any conflict must understand this. That fact alone makes the film as relevant today as it was forty plus years ago.
Another strong element of the film is its rather sparse score. The score was a collaboration between films core master Ennio Morricone and Pontecorvo and it is proof of the old saying less is more. The score provided emotional clout to an all ready emotionally charged film from the almost thunderous paratrooper theme to the heartbreaking piece used in the aftermath of both the French and FLN bombings. In fact that latter piece alone makes clear the intent of those scenes: human suffering in universal no matter which side of a conflict you are on. It is a unique score for a unique film.
The Battle Of Algiers is a unique film in many ways. From the verisimilitude of its cast to its documentary approach and unique view of modern revolutions and terrorism, few films can match the sheer power and realism of this film. It is this uncommon aspect that makes the film unique even some four decades after it was made. For anyone seeking a unique insight into modern terrorism or seeking a fine example of how a film can bring history to life after the event I recommend The Battle Of Algiers without hesitation. Watch it, learn from it and be all the better for it.
3 out of 3 people found this helpful.
|
perhaps the most important film today
Added 9/26/2008
A great film 60 years ago, today this might be the most important film one can watch, especially given the current political situation. This movie is probably my favorite movie of all time. I love it and it should be watched by anyone and everyone in our society. Ali La Pointe!
3 out of 3 people found this helpful.
|
VERY POWERFUL CAUTIONARY TALE
Added 2/7/2009
I finally got around to seeing this 1967 film, depicting the French occupation of colonial Algiers in the 1950s, which eventually led to the independence of this Muslim nation. It is well worth watching in order to learn lessons about the Iraq aftermath, although one should not make too many connections. The biggest difference is that the French wanted to stay and maintain the country as a colony, whereas the U.S. cannot wait to get the heck out of Iraq as soon as it is semi-secure. This film is black-and-white with sub-titles. It is very revealing in its descriptions of how terrorists (or freedom fighters) fight guerrilla war, and it is the last straw (after Diem bien Phu) for French militarism. Read Camus to get a perspective on their mindset at the time. The film ends with the French having destroyed the cell responsible for a series of bombings, but in its denoument shows that a few years later an uprising occurred, out of nowhere really, that finally left the French with the conclusion that they did not have the stomach for colonialization. This story should be studied in light of French failures in Syria, Lebanon, its Foreign Legion's wars (plus Belgium's failure in the Congo), and the determination of this study is that the French have contributed mightily to destabilization of the Middle East, a little known fact in today's discourse.
3 out of 3 people found this helpful.
|
4 stars out of 4
Added 1/28/2009
The Bottom Line:
A riveting war film and an incredibly compelling treatise on de-colonialism, The Battle of Algiers is a fascinating film which is no less interesting or topical today than it was upon its release.
2 out of 2 people found this helpful.
|
Dated Sensibilities
Added 10/22/2008
I recently saw this movie and for me it has some interesting features but is far from being the ultimate war movie it was supposed to be. Maybe at the time it was released it had something new to tell but after more than 40 years I think its sensibilities are dated.
I do not like the glorification of violence in the name of leftist politics, even though their cause could be considered as just the methods the Algerian FNLN guerrilla used were despicable, the cowardly murder of police and army personnel and the bombing of civilians is far from heroic. We can empathize with the anger of the Algerian people at being dominated by a white French minority but resorting to criminal brutality was unjustified even if at the end the aims were achieved and indeed Algeria won its independence (more because of negative political sentiment in France that ultimately sapped the moral of the troops and led the nation to finally give up in this struggle). The director clearly aims at creating a sympathy with the urban guerrillas true to sixties sensibilities at a time when Che Guevara and Ho Chi Min were considered heroes by the young and the leftist inclined intellectuals and lay people. Today we are seeing the devastating effects these so called heroes created in their societies bringing not the final redemption of the masses but brutal dictatorships and ultimately economic failure of their economies and now we have only Cuba openly professing Communism and supporting guerrilla groups such as the soon to be defunct FARC in Colombia. So I do not support left wing freedom fighters knowing what we know today but in the early sixties still the Soviet Union was going strong creating a sixth column around the world aided by the bleeding heart leftist intellectuals and the youth openly professing revolutionary ideas all over the world and movies such as this aided in this aim.
I commend the director (Pontecorvo) in presenting a well balanced character in Col. Mathieu, the French paratroop commander. Considering the ideological leanings of the film it could have been easy to present a caricature of a nazi sadist but we are given a more profound character that indeed addresses the tough necessities in fighting a dirty war but with a sense of morality.
I cannot root for the French either as they were only trying to preserve a colonial rule that by the time was outdated and in moral bankrupcy, of course they were tough and at times brutal but the enemy did not give them other choice, that is the sad truth of fighting urban guerrillas, you cannot recognize the combatants from the civilians and to find them you have to bend the rules of decency and civilized warfare. Thus we have torture being used as a necessity, spies, informers and traitors also were used in order to reach the safe houses and hiding places the guerrillas used and to ultimately find the few die-hards that are hiding among the society that only wants to be left in peace to resume normal life, this is the essence of dirty war that leftist groups and freedom fighters have forced armies to use.
The movie was well crafted, the style was almost a documentary, the use of native actors gives it some authenticity. Being a little bit pedantic I found it rather annoying to listen to the dialogs in Italian as the movie took place in French speaking Algeria and I would certainly have preferred to see it in French for authenticity.
In summation this was a good movie, not very revealing, its outdated with current sensibilities but the hype surrounding it does not match with the quality or impact of this movie.
2 out of 4 people found this helpful.
|
