War films have turned many of us into the seat warriors. We have seen the great, such as “Special Ryan Rescue”, “Full Metal Jacket”, “The End of the World Now”, “The Hurt Locker” and “Platoon”, and each of these films is so alive and experimental that we may give up the illusion that we now understand something essential about the war. But if you are close to someone who was in a war, the first thing you know is that you know nothing about it. Literally nothing. The chaos and terrorism, the spiritual and physical loyalty that the soldiers feel towards each other, the indescribable horror, and the crazy excitement of it – these are things that the films show us just a shadow, and things we cannot know as civilians.
There are filmmakers who fall prey to delusion as well. When “Apocalypse Now”, Francis Ford Coppola, who fell in His Majesty the King, said at the first show of the Festival Festival Festival in 1979, “My movie is not a movie. He is Vietnam. “This is close to being a poetry point, but on the other hand … no.
You may feel that there is a similar feeling for Coppola at work in “Warfare”, a combat film that was placed during the Iraq war in November 2006. The film was directed by Alex Garland, the director of the “Civil War” and “Genilation”, and Rai Mendoza, a warrior in the Iraq war, a driver of the broken realism and small realism (this very small part. And nothing but the direct memories of the soldiers of these events.
The film does not contain exciting hooks, no texts, and there is no conspiracy points, nor personal development, and the audience does not give us our bearings. It is simply staining, on a very black and silent night, in an empty residential neighborhood in Ramdi County in Iraq, where a team of marine seals arrived, along with two Iraqi scouts and two naval infantry, to help ensure the safe passage of the ground forces in the area the next day. The distant machine guns in the background-its sound design-is a “full metal jacket”. Seals enter the forbidden concrete house, divided into three groups. OP 1, which we follow, go to the second story, which is a stand -alone apartment where an Iraqi family lives. The family is afraid, but the soldiers are not present to their terror. They only need a place to hide and maneuver.
The entire film occurs in this house or outside it directly, and in terms of watching a work plan that has been implemented, much does not happen. The first half of the watch is filled with the strange neutral technical terms of soldiers who wander in the symbol of words in their headphones to what I know (as one) I tend to summon the control of the mission. It is not as if the film tells us ever, as the voices of power that departs at the other end come. A driving station in a place, which is almost divine, in monitoring drones. (Seals also connect her drone.) One of the main characters, Cosmo Jarvis, who resembles his smile and mustache, Freddy Mercury, is the group trained snipers, and prepares armed snipers on the table on a table. Iraqis who mix through the street. Most of them are civilians, but it discovers the enemy – for al -Qaeda soldiers. Some see. But he does not shoot them.
Half the opening hour is everything waiting, spying and sitting, with a simple strategy at times. It is somewhat limited, since we do not have a real idea of the plan – or who are these men. According to the film’s press notes, “The OP 1 did not know that they were next to a rebel house.” I didn’t know that either; This is how the flow of information is in the movie. But all of this is part of the design. Alex Garland is not out of making a “war movie”. Oh no. He wants to appear to us …War. The real thing. It was stripped of drama and “shape” of cinematic excitement. Drama, what is there, is in originality.
Finally, something happens. The snipers rifle behaves with a wide eight -inch hole in the wall, and after they discovered that the Americans there, they throw a hand grenade through the hole. It explodes, causing some wounds (although there is nothing close to what we will see in the second half of the film). From this random attack, a plan appears: they will contact a Bradley fighting vehicle (we are used to calling the tank) to whisk the soldiers from there. At some point, it is indicated that a small Canast is referred to as “smoke”, and she thought: What is this symbol? In fact, this means … smoke. When Bradley arrives, they throw the heart outside the door and emit from the columns of blindness, which toured the soldiers out of the door and in the tank.
This is when the bad thing happens. Just as they run away, next to Bradley explodes explosive devices. What we have seen so far is the strange bureaucracy of war. Now we see the rumor of war.
If “Warfare” has a cinematic precedent, it might be “Black Hawk Download”, Ridley Scott for 2001 that we flooded in the fire and task fragments. This is a good thing for a movie to do. However, the challenge makes him control. “Warfare” displays itself as an overwhelming experience, and I think it will be praised as an overwhelming experience. For me, it was not the case. Watch it, I felt shared and separated at the same time. The film sets most of the active elements that overwhelm us in the war-like movie, for example, the soldiers are treated as fully colored characters. Will Polter, as the captain of the team, does his noble noble thing, and makes good actors like Charles Milton and Michael Gandolfni their existence, but in the end we stand and watch them; This is the negative aspect of the “objective” method of the film. (I actually felt more indulging in Ang -Long Long Till.)
“War”, despite what you are trying to bring, does not depict the existential reality of the war in a way that we have not seen before. I would like to claim that the genius of films such Implanted In a spontaneous vision of violence and fear of meat. For me, the sniper sequence takes the last third of the “Full metal jacket”, for me, perhaps the greatest Stanley Cubic sequence ever. When the Arliss Howard’s Cowboy is shot and puts there dies, you touch the power of the hideous war as you do in any movie in history.
In “Warfare”, IDPs are two soldiers, Elliot Wissam (Joseph Quinn). It is Sam’s wounds that define the essence of the movie. Parts of his leg were detonated, lying there, screaming and screaming from pain, for about half an hour. The film rubs our noses in its suffering, as if he was saying, “You thought the war movie – or the war itself – was exciting? Think again.” If you find his suffering hard to see it – well, this is the idea. However, I felt at a level as if the film was using his deadly hell to give our lectures.
What is the major point of the lecture? “War” appears to be one of those films that are welcomed as “anti -war.” However, what does it mean to be an anti -war movie? Many of us believed that the main decision to attack Iraq was dependent on an obscene lie, so you can definitely be the anti -war that was filmed here. Many of us believed that Vietnam was a disaster decreased (the Domino theory that is playing for a long time after its peace ended), so you can be hostile to the war that was filmed in all the great Vietnam films. But “Save Soldier Ryan”, a movie in which Stephen Spielberg was extracted, was not the aesthetic of diving in Ghattis, it was not a film of Vietnam, a movie that could be called against the war, because it is about the war that we all agreed, a war that saved Western civilization. So everything can be “fighting war”, at least in my eyes, a global statement of war.
“War”, you can say, trying to be completely special. It picks up one segment of the experience that was revealed during the Iraq war, and there is no doubt that it is doing it with worrying skill. There are several times when the seals call for a “width of strength”, and this means that an American fighter plane will enlarge, at a terrifying speed and centrifugal energy, over the street, as if the cattle that was noisy. It is a great scene. However, I think the audience for “Warfare” will be limited, because the “objective” movie is so much that it is almost a certain way abstract. It is rid of every other part of the romantic joy of the fighting image, and I think you can say this is an achievement. But this is an achievement, in this case, it seems to revive himself.