Flags Of Our Fathers

The Verdict: Self-important, soporific, slow-moving stuff. A short story told long-windedly in a very disjointed and heavy-handed manner.

The Rating: 5/10

Ok, first things first, and just to get it out of the way, Clint Eastwood is a legend. I have a habit on this site of reminding you of work someone has previously done, just in case you were unfamiliar with other stuff they've worked on, but in this case, I'm going to presume you've heard of Clint Eastwood, and possibly even seen one or two of his films. (Probably a safe enough bet - Ed). In 'Flags of Our Fathers', the first of an inter-continental tag-team of tales treating the battles of Iwo Jima in WWII, Clint tells a story of war with some contemporary relevance, and possibly even some personal relevance to himself.

The story involves the use of the iconic image - also used in the movie poster - of the U.S. troops raising a stars'n'stripes on the island of Iwo Jima in 1944. The image was used to promote the war effort back home, and it was so iconic and representative of courage and effort that it galvanised the American nation, convincing the folks back home that they were winning the war. The men in the photo were made heroes by the political establishment, symbols of a victorious war effort, and a reason for you folks to buy War Bonds to further fund the military effort...


The thing is, the flag was raised five days into a 40-day battle. The guys who were plucked out of the military to promote this image of victory were the only survivors out of the group of roughly twelve men there to raise the flags (there were actually two flags raised). Ira, the indian private, did not even raise the flag, but was named as one of the heroes.

The theme here is possible one close to Clint's own experiences: people need heroes. It is a theme universal to all cultures that heroes, with their legendary tales of execptional bravery, form part of our cultural make-up. Symbols, too are important, and the idea of an image travelling round the world to signal military success has contemporary relevance. Remember the statue of Saddam being toppled? Hooray, the witch is dead! ... the symbol is powerful, and even though the reality following that moment has been less than ideal, politicians and the media used it for endless mileage.. the same situation happens in this movie.

However, the thing is, the story of Flags of our Fathers doesn't really take that long to tell. (Um, didn't you just tell it? - Ed) As with 'Million Dollar Baby', I felt this movie would have benefitted from losing roughly half an hour. Certainly, in the last twenty minutes I descended into a bit of a bored stupor. I imagine that, towards the end, when the narrator started lines with something like 'And as for Ira..', his writer was aiming for the gravitas of Richard Dreyfus in 'Stand By Me'. Unfortunately, this voice-over ended up more like Kevin from 'the Wonder Years.'

However, the battle footage, as you would expect nowadays, is jaw-droppingly good stuff. The air battles feel more like 'Star Wars' than 'Dambusters', and the infantry-led beach-storming scenes are gritty, bloody and evocative of 'The Big Red One' or of course the deservedly ubiquitous 'Private Ryan'.

However, overall I didn't particularly like this movie as a piece of entertainment. The cast were generally pretty average, with Barry Pepper possibly the only one standing out as Mike, one of the unsung heroes who died on the island without any recognition or fanfare. The rest of the cast were pretty much perfunctory, with Adam Beach as Ira in particular doing a average job with a thoroughly annoying lead character. This guy bursts into tears in about seven separate scenes, and it just became grating after a while.

The choppy, incoherent narrative takes us from present day to the battelefield and the aftermath alternatively, and was unnecessarily confusing, which is surprising, considering the omni-present Paul Haggis co-wrote the screenplay.

So, overall, it's an intelligent film but not very entertaining. It's an 'interesting' story that fans of the war movie genre will probably get something out of, but for a more rounded war-movie experience deaing with themes of racial integration in the military in a gripping and intelligent manner, 'Indigènes' is far superior, and a much more enertaining film.

Rumour has it 'Letters From Iwo Jima' is the better of Clint's Iwo Jima twin-set, but apologies Mr. Eastwood, I didn't like this one all that much.

Indigènes (Days of Glory)

The Verdict: Relevant, moving and extremely well-crafted, this ensemble piece is a fantastic addition to the cinematic cadre of war movies.

The Rating: 8/10

Since donning the movie reviewing mantle, I've become increasingly aware of the disparity between what film critics think audiences should see at the cinema, and what the punters really go and watch. As for the punters, they seem more than willing to - in their droves - watch movies that are universally panned by critics. Witness some of the recent top ten flicks across the pond: 'Wild Hogs', 'Ghost Rider', 'Premonition', 'Epic Movie', the list goes on. On the flip-side of this, there are the movies the critics call 'must-sees', 'if you only see one movie this year...' and so on. 'Thank You For Smoking' springs to mind as well as the excellent 'Half-Nelson' and these would fall into this category. For some reason, the marketing men can't get the wide distribution or the audiences for these pictures, despite them being recognised by critics and awards ceremonies alike as 'best of breed'.

Sadly, I have the distinct feeling that 'Indigènes' will be the a bit of a critic's darling, while remaining a stranger to most of the cinematic audience outside of France. And that's a real shame, because it's the type of movie that could really have a wide appeal. Quite simply, it's a great war movie.

The title roughly translates as 'Natives' ('Days of Glory' sounds more like a Will Ferrell vehicle - Ed) and the story is set against the backdrop of the Second World War, where regiments of North African soldiers from Morocco and Algeria are enlisted to fight on the side of the French Army in the 'motherland'. The main characters in 'Indigènes' all experience different facets of the complex relationship between a colonised people and their motherland, especially in the context of fighting for a country that for the most part, they've never seen before. Although the motto of the motherland is 'liberté, egalité, fraternité', the war-time reality faced by the North African infantrymen was far from free, equal or fraternal.

Their training consists of written exams, and when the North African recruits arrive at the front, they are hardly prepared for battle. Led by the grizzled sergeant Martinez (Bernard Blancan) this rag-tag bunch of recruits soon learn the realities of battle, but this story is about more than that.

Jamel Debbouze is a comedian by trade, but he produced this drama, and takes the lead role as the likeable Said, a one-armed peasant who his mother behind in the desert sands of Morocco. Sergeant Martinez takes Said under his wing as his dogsbody/assistant, and the two develop a strong bond. This bond develops despite the constant tension between the sergeant and the rest of his men, who give Said grief for making the sergeant's coffee and fetching his shirts and what have you.

Messaoud (Roschdy Zem) is a sharp-shooter, who falls in love with a French belle in Marseilles, and then cannot understand why his letters to her seem to go unanswered. Abdelkader (Sami Bouajila) is ambitious, and wants to get ahead in the army. Yassir (Samy Naceri) just wants to get through his tour with his skin, and that of his constant companion and younger brother, intact. (Incidentally, Naceri is almost unrecognisable here as the cab driver from the phenomenally successful 'Taxi' franchise.) Martinez, meanwhile, is actually a North African, but is hiding the fact because of the impact he knows it will have on his army career.

This ensemble cast jointly received the best actor award at Cannes last year, and the film had such an impact that Jacques Chirac, after seeing the movie, decided to resolve the situation it highlighted, that of unpaid pensions to the recruits from French colonies during the war. This fact alone should be an indication of how powerful the film is.

It is dark in parts, as each character is exposed to a different level of institutionalsed racism in the French military. Messaoud's letters are censored, Abdelkader is passed over for promotion, and the troop are consistently passed over for shore leave, exposing them to the harsh winters of the Vosges and Provence. Martinez constantly fights between keeping the men in line with his command, and encouraging the powers that be to recognize the 'pieds noirs' - as they are derogatively called - the same rights as the rest of the French military. However, in spite of the military powers, this group of characters continually struggle to maintain their dignity. As one by one, they seem to lose faith in the value of their mission, Abdelkader's leadership becomes more prominent, but will his unshakable loyalty and belief to convinve his war-weary colleagues to continue fighting for their recalcitrant motherland, and perhaps even paying the ultimate cost?

The scale of this movie is perfectly measured, to allow the audiene to gradually get to know each of the central characters. As the movie builds towards it's inevitable climax, when this small group is charged with defending Alsace against the Nazis until reinforcements arrive, each character is well defined and familiar to us, and I found I was genuinely interested in how each character would end up.

Let me be clear though, this is not a war movie in the same vein as 'Saving Private Ryan'. The battle scenes are not sweeping and wide in scope. The view the audience is given of the battles is either up close and personal, from the point of view of the central characters, or seen from a safe distance, from the point of view of the generals surveying the battlefield through binoclulars. The one I would most readily compare it to is possibly 'The Dirty Dozen', if only because the spirit of the story is similar. These guys start the story from the very bottom of the ladder, and struggle through the entire movie. PCMR has a soft spot for movies like this, where the central characters spend most of the movie trying to cope, or figure out the situation they find themselves in. (think 'Empire Strikes Back', 'The Matrix', 'Seven', 'The Big Lebowski')

Also, the Ireland and U.K. audience in particular should be able to relate to the difficult theme of colonialism and the complex relationship between a colonised people and the colonial power pulling the strings on their behalf. This runs through the core of what Indigenes is all about, and is at the heart of the difficult situations with which each of the central characters is faced.

So, I though it was great, and despite my increasing despair as to whether the critic's voice really has any impact on the audience in the case of movies like this, I'm going to heartily recommend 'Indigenes'. (Jeez, chin up PCMR, one man's irrelevance is another man's.. er... important stuff.. - Ed) I really hope you do get to see it, because it's worthy of your time and won't disappoint.