The Battle of Algiers (2016)

Thanks for the memories!

Surprisingly incoherent and boring

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

A well structured, written and performed piece of cinematic legend. The lack of familiar faces in the cast permits great immersion and sense of realism. Shot choices and composition are fantastic and tonally perfect for the film. Editing is tight and gives depth to the script. Shows the good vs evil dynamic of rebellion and the cost of "doing whatever it takes" for freedom, and the fine line between governance and fascism. Look: 9/10 Performance: 8/10 Writing and Structure: 10/10 Editing: 10/10

The Battle of Algiers is a controversial film about the struggle of Algerian rebels to throw off French occupation. The film depicts the guerrilla tactics of the Algerian insurgency as well as the French counter-insurgency designed to contain and squash the rebellion. Shot in a documentary/newsreel style, the film follows several narrative threads, and takes us inside the command structures on both sides of the conflict. The film ironically points out that the French commander was part of the resistance against the Nazis, and now he's in the role of the occupier, using his knowledge of resistance against those struggling for freedom. Though The Battle of Algiers has a natural back and forth rhythm, showing attacks by one side and then counter attacks by the other, in the end the film's conscience sides with the Algerians struggling for independence and against colonialism. Even though both sides are shown committing acts of violence against civilians, leading some to believe the film is being objective and neutral, the film gives a clear sense of purpose to the Algerians and celebrates their ultimate victory, even though they lose the battle portrayed in the film. As a result The Battle of Algiers was banned in France for 5 years, and the film stands as a powerful depiction of revolutionary struggle against foreign occupation, as well as the lengths colonial powers will go to in order to maintain their empires.

Independence, Rebellion, Guerrilla warfare, military exercise, propaganda, state sponsored torture, clashes between local civilians and foreign tyrants. This may have been the history of most developing countries in the world. India can be a bright example. But, I have not seen a finer depiction of a rebellion for independence than this movie. I would rate it along with Battleship Potemkin, as the best propaganda movie, I have ever seen. The specialty of this movie is the way it is filmed. Black and white cinematography which also gives the impression of a documentary. I really thought, I was watching a documentary in History Channel than an actual movie. Editing is crisp as well, which really helps in not lingering in the death scenes which is the case in many other movies. The movie does not have a single protagonist or antagonist which according to me is the victory of the movie.I am so glad I watched this movie as not only a part of movie history, but a part of world history as well.Rating : 9/10

Algerian Government subsidized and hired Italian director Gillo Pontecorvo to shoot a film to recount the bloody clash between FLN (Algerian National Liberation Front) and French colonial only few years after its independence (1962). The film was not only won GOLDEN LION in Venice in 1966 and an Academy Awards nomination for BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM in 1967 but also was nominated for BEST DIRECTOR and SCREENPLAY in 1969 for a rare second round. THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS impresses its viewers with a haunting collection of close-up portraits of various people (both French and Algerian) under a soul-searching orchestration emphasized by stark chiaroscuro, it was years after Italian Neo-Realism, but the non-professional cast (the only pro is a wiry and bulged-eyed Jean Martin, who commands a stance of military mettle perfectly) and locale-revamping contributes a great amount of authenticity in the final work. There are plenty of overlooking angles with extensive depth of focus to examine and the city and enlighten one's appreciation, plus there are fleeting montages of torture under interrogation are disturbing but can potently generates a sense of boldness to show audience the cruelty in reality. However the most indelible ones are the waiting-for-the-bombs-to-explode experiences, with camera panning over innocent white victims-to-be unwittingly relish their last moment of hedonism, utterly guarantee a surge of compassion out of shock value terms. Therefore, the film should also be extolled by its unbiased perspective in telling its stories from both parts, dispassionately channels viewers to witness the vindictive constitution lying underneath common humanity and the aimless and reproachable tit-for-tat acts ensuring. There are radical debates as regards the essence of revolution, a much more penetrating motto is revolution doesn't mean war and terrorism is not a means to win a revolution, which should be indoctrinated all over the world, especially to those tinderboxes where religious and political threats are pervading rampantly at present. Showing no partiality to either sides is not an easy move since the production was backed and green-lit by one of the government, thus the film is a genuine gem in retaining the integrity and fabricating a gripping panorama of a chain of bloodshed and baring its true color under the stark daylight.