The War Zone (1999)

Excellent adaptation.

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Saw the movie first, then read the book. Usually its the other way around. In the extras to the book, the author describes his meetings with Tim Roth, how impressed he was by his charisma. What he didn't explain is why he allowed Tim Roth to completely change the characters personalities and distort his book and still film it under the same name. Not that the film was bad, just that they give two fundamentally opposed paradigms about many of the events.In the movie, she confronts the father about sexually abusing her, the implication during the hospital scene confirms our total hatred of the father and total sympathy for the two teen siblings.In the book Tom who's perspective we get almost exclusively, regularly talks to himself about how he is going to find the courage to get a knife and kill both his father and sister. His sister is portrayed as a girl of great beauty and in total control. The family visit the local bar where every guy in the place drools over her. She takes it in her stride. SHe is promiscious and strings along boyfriends dismissing them at leisure. SHe and Tom go into the big city where she initiates a threesome with them and one of her friends. Tom questions him about her relationship with her father, and she is either dismissive, or congruently indicates that she was not only the one who initiated their first incestuous liason but she often propositions the father for sex when she wants it and enjoys herself. After the revelations are made (her motorcycle riding BF drops by to accuse the father) we read a little after story, the mother won't let dad see the young girl. Mum won't talk to her daughter. Tom peacemaker in the middle. Finally Tom meets up with her at a Caribbean island and the book ends with him getting what he reveals he wanted all along, a chance to be with her sexually.

Prima facie, "The War Zone" comes across as a misnomer for this brutally disturbing drama directed by Tim Roth. This reviewer thought it is set against the backdrop of a war, but when the film unfolded, the underlying meaning of the title became clearer; the only war this film deals with is a personal war; a war within!15-year old Tom (Freddie Cunliffe) is the hero of this sad story. His family, consisting of 18 year old sister Jessie (Lara Belmont), Dad (Ray Winstone), and Mum (A bloated Tilda Swinton) have moved to the Devonshire countryside to live on an isolated property, leaving their London city life behind. Tom is bored and feels lonely, clearly misses London. There hardly are neighbours; the area is mostly desolate. Pregnant mum just delivers a baby amidst difficult circumstances (a car accident!) and yet the baby is born healthy. Everyone is slightly injured, but in the end it's all hunky dory and life goes on. The isolation and modest living conditions have also made these people used to casual nudity around the house. Tom is a curious teen, and he seems to have taken fancy to a neighbouring girl, Lucy (Kate Ashfeld).The seemingly peaceful environment in the family is disrupted one day when Tom comes face to face with a shattering truth about an incestuous relationship between his Dad and sister…But haven't we seen so many other films that deal with incest? Maybe so, but what makes "The War Zone" distinct, is in its non-adherence to rendering simplistic treatment to its characters. These characters are complex, they aren't necessarily pigeon-holed to predictable traits. So then, when we witness the dynamics of these characters we are forced to ask ourselves several questions. The dad seems to be a really nice and loving father. Why then, does he develop the sick desire to sexually abuse his own daughter? Is he even aware of what he is doing? Is he aware of the gravity of his heinous act? Or is it rather casual to him; ....perhaps he himself has a history of abuse dating back to his childhood?And then there's Jessie; she is well aware of the implications of the deeds she is involving herself in. Or is she? Maybe she is going along with it, maybe she is enjoying it. Or perhaps suffering (?) silently, because she is too afraid to bring it out in the open; maybe just too ashamed. And the mother is blissfully unaware of what is happening....will she be able to take it once she realizes?Which brings us to Tom, who is at the epicenter of this explosive situation. It is actually through his eyes that we see the film. You can't help but yield to a hint somewhere in the middle of the film that there's a curious voyeur inside him who wants to videotape the action. And you wish deep within that it is only to expose the sick act. But it can't be ignored that Tom is a 15 year old teen struggling with his own transition into adulthood. And call it a case of bad timing; fate is playing a cruel joke on the boy by invoking the adult inside this vulnerable teen by bringing him face to face with the most aberrant of sexual acts inside his own home! At a point of time the sister almost hits the nail on the head after a confrontation, "This isn't just about me and dad is it?" further insinuating that actually Tom wants to know about sex and himself wants to experience it!Tom is thus, a soul torn apart. Maybe he knows the difference between right and wrong but is finding himself succumbing to a perverse temptation, given his unstable transition phase! Jessie tries to put her assumption about Tom to the test in a bizarre episode at her friend Carol's place in London; then again, perhaps her intentions are different altogether! Her eventual action further clouds any hopes the viewer may have about gaining an insight on Jessie's thought process. It is in this unpredictability of the characters that most of the success of this excellent handling of a fine screenplay by Alexander Stuart lies. Tim Roth, a fine actor of our time, proves that he can handle the director's job with an equal finesse. He clearly understands his characters' complexities and his vision of the characters' personae enables him to deliver their perfect transition to the motion picture.The soul is all there, but what about the body? No complaints there either; Roth captures some of the finest images of the isolated, rain-soaked country side and the rocky seashore. The feeling of desolation is further enhanced by the achingly beautiful score by Simon Boswell. The choice of actors is spot on. Winstone and Swinton are simply great in their respective roles. But special mention must be made of the actors who play the siblings, Lara Belmont and Freddie Cunliffe who had no prior acting experience but emerge winners with their effortless performances.Do not miss Tim Roth's "The War Zone". It is a disturbing look at something as warped as incest but a patient and an open-minded viewing would ensure that instead of turning your head away in shame, you'll end up thanking yourself for subjecting yourself to this mind-numbing yet rewarding film experience.

If you have seen how many comments are saying "The best movie of the 90's" (and such) and how many are saying"This is a dull/boring story" you can begin to thinking "Wow, this should be a great film! How many controversy about it". But it is wrong, the movie is not controversy, just boring.Well, for me was difficult to concentrate on the story, I confess. It is very straight forward one, I was just wondering what should be happening even more in the next 50, 30, 10 minutes. You just know what happens on the end from the very beginning. A classical Oedipus story, but told on a very miserable way. You know at every moment what'll follow, I have read here "Sudden end". Oh, really? But the main drawback of the film is that it fails on logic and background of the characters. Why they are acting in such a way? It is not enough to say "Hey, I am bad!" but (s)he have to imply some secret, obscure menace. Nothing of it! The characters seem to be some harmless persons, OK, they could be somehow, too; but nevertheless they should not be not innocent at last.The dad delivers some very naive explanation for his outrages, rather freaky — not implausible, but like some monotone reading from a psychological book.Actually the movie suggests that what happen doesn't really happen and it is just an imaginary world of the protagonists. Well, that could be interesting if it is made in a proper way. Instead, the movie is so poor directed that what happen is rather unimportant. The theme is difficult, no doubt, but it is difficult because it must be convincing.I think the debut of Tim Roth will remain his last movie as filmmaker and it should be the right answer of the disaster.

THE WAR ZONE is as compelling and powerful as it is disturbing and sickening. This motion picture is not for everyone, but those who manage to sit through its ~95 minute run-time will feel like they have experienced an almost unrivaled cinematic journey.I will not give away the plot/synopsis here for the benefit of those who would like to be surprised. Just know that while the film itself is not about 'War' in the conventional sense, the title is appropriate, if one realises that War can also be defined as active hostility or contention; conflict; struggle.Tim Roth is masterful in his debut as director, as he ably pushes the envelope to limits that veteran film-makers seem fearsome to approach. Roth is helped by an outstanding lead cast, half of whom are virtual unknowns. Ray Winstone and Tilda Swinton are reliable and dedicated as always, and should have garnered some more recognised plaudits for their roles. For me, the real star of this film is newcomer Lara Belmont, who delivers a stunning performance, encompassing and portraying a range of powerful emotions that will leave most veteran actresses somewhat jealous. If this film deserved only one Oscar nomination, it should have been for Supporting Actress (If it deserved two, the other should have been for Screenplay). Suffice it to say that due to its powerfully realistic approach to sensitive content, the Academy seemed to 'graciously' shun this film. I myself was not surprised, as mainstream success would have come hand-in-hand with widespread protestations.The location (shot almost entirely in Devon, England) is suitably haunting, as is the musical score. Both go long ways to emphasising and enhancing the overall theme of the motion picture. In almost every outdoor shot, the weather is bleak and rainy, which suits the atmosphere inside the house, and inside the infamous bunker. The scenic shots of the beach are especially beautiful.I say that this is one of the best films you will NEVER see because it was doomed to fail at the box office, due to its subject matter. It is very unlikely that any Cable company will show this during prime-time either. As such, your best bet will be to visit the local DVD video-store. I strongly urge you to use whatever means to see this motion picture. You will be shocked; your jaw will drop for most of the last half of the film; you will feel sickened, angry, and saddened; you will be sporadically moved to tears even long after you have left your seat. But at the end of this experience you will come to accept that you have witnessed one of the most powerful events in cinematic history. This will haunt you for some time to come.I will give this movie 4 stars (out of the conventional 4) simply because I think everyone should see it. It focuses on one of the most taboo and commonplace themes in modern families (note that statistics do very little to highlight the common nature of this theme since most of the victims remain silent) and should not be bypassed, even if it takes you more than one sitting to get through.10/10. Should enter my Top 60 at #55 or so. Unreservedly recommended.