Flanders

wow, what an incredibly unrealistic film. if a film is subtitled, does it automaticaly win awards now? three more words

Interesting look at the White manner of waging war. Despite their self-proclaimed superiority; justifying the waging of aggressive - as opposed to defensive - wars; the bestial behavior is no different. What is interesting here is that sexuality is shown as the root of the problems depicted. The rape of dark-skinned civilians mirrors the sexual behavior at home with girlfriends these soldiers do not respect and whom they use as little more than unpaid prostitutes. Here is presented an ethically empty culture that can only take its own failings and export them to an unwilling world.

Given that this is a French film and the French have largely stayed out of an any direct involvement in the so-called War on Terror, it is strange that they should have made such a perspicacious movie about it; albeit one elevated by universalizing the affects of war by refusing to name this particular conflict.

By using non-professional actors, there is a sincerity on screen that is refreshing in its implied intensity. Where this film goes wrong lies in it merely describing - albeit accurately - the situation depicted but in never suggesting a way out for the characters - while the character-driven nature of the narrative threatens to overwhelm the all-important plot.

Like another reviewer I thought this film was about the mud and trenches of World War One but I was very disappointed. Not because it wasn't a historical epic but that it is simply one of the worst films I have ever seen. There's nothing wrong with gritty, gory movies about the horrors of war but this fails to engage the viewer on that level if that was its intention. And as for the goings on back home - for goodness sake just get a grip woman! I enjoy a lot of foreign films and expect (no hope) to sometimes come across something different from time to time. Some high brow reviewers might look down their noses at me because I don't get the 'minimalism' of this. But I do. Here it is. One Star. Avoid.

It becomes clear watching the first minutes of the film that Dumont is not creating a piece that succumbs to the usual pace that viewers accept as the traditional rhythm of film, not that this is particularly unusual in French cinema. Often Dumont is compared to Bresson and again this is a reductive but cogent comparison. The film is careful, sparse, and is obsessed with a realism that can make the viewer impatient and later in the film, repulsed. But it has an undeniable power, and even more so it contains a remnant of importance because it reflects the brutality and hopelessness of both war and the traditional pattern of existence. It could be seen as a masterpiece, but this would be hyperbole. It certainly haunts and leaves its mark if you are willing to watch it on its own terms. The simplicity of its execution makes the story all the more vital, but that's just one opinion.

Unfortunately this is not the film I thought it to be; I thought it to be a film featuring the First World War but in fact it was not. In fact the film is set in the present day but what strikes is minimalism of the film and the surrounding Flanders countryside.

The film is somewhat violent.

However if you likecinema this may be the film for you.