Rating: 
Summary: A great courtroom drama about the Scapegoats of the Empire
Review: "Breaker Morant" is best military courtroom drama available on videotape and not just because it is based on a true story. Unlike "The Caine Mutiny" or "A Few Good Men," the trial takes up most of the film, with events depicted in flashbacks. Also, the defendants are innocent of (most of) the charges against them. Harry "Breaker" Morant (played by a still unknown Edward Woodward years before "The Equalizer") led a group of Australian horse soldiers who had to deal with guerillas during the Boer War. Because the British government wishes to negotiate a peace, Morant and two of his officers are charged with various violations of military law the most important being the execution of Boer prisoners. Leaving nothing to chance, the British command gives the defendants an Australian lawyer to defend them who has never been in a courtroom; however, the man is inexperienced, he is not stupid. It is clear to everyone that the trial is a sham. This is why "Breaker Morant" has more in common with "Gallipoli," another Australian film about British disdain for their subjects from that colony continent. "Breaker Morant" was directed by Bruce Beresford, who along with Jonathan Hardy and David Stevens was nominated for an Oscar for Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium for adapting Kenneth G. Ross' stage play. This movie also had one of the best trailers I have ever seen and it is impossible to forget Woodward's voice declaring, "We were out on the veldt fighting the Boer the way the Boer fought us." Bryan Brown plays one of the other defendants, but this is Woodward's film even when he is reduced to doing nothing more than sitting in his chair and letting the farce plays itself out to the end (Do not ask me to explain why it was Thompson and not Woodward who won the Australian Film Institute's award for Best Actor in a Drama that year). The conclusion of the film is simple yet powerful: we watch the final scene listening to the last poem written by Morant and then Woodward singing a British military song that hammers home the irony of the film.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best Australian films every made
Review: A subtle masterwork by Australian film maker Bruce Beresford (Driving Miss Daisy), BREAKER MORANT tells the true story (with some historical liberties) of three Australian soldiers put on trial for shooting prisoners during the Boer War in South Africa. The trial revolves around Cpt. Harry Morant (Edward Woodward in a fantastic performance), a soldier and poet who claimed his shooting of Boer prisoners was done under orders from above. It is both a court room drama and a story of the role of ethics in war. Told through the trial with flash backs to the past, Beresford never looses sight of the very human story he is telling. BREAKER MORANT is a jewel of a movie.
Rating:
Summary: Highly recommended
Review: Along with Kubrick's Paths of Glory, this film ranks tops among its genre. During the Boer wars in Austrailia, Morant and his associates are prisoners to be executed for something stupid. While in custody, the Boers attack and Morant and his men are given rifles and fight valiently to stave off the attack. What does this act of bravery earn them! The answer is a big resounding nothing. Like the previously mentioned movie, it shows you how egos in the military get in the way of justice! Great acting and directing along with a story that is compelling to the last scene!
Rating:
Summary: Right or wrong?
Review: 60 years before its involvement in Vietnam, Australia's soldiers were at the forefront of issues about mistreating and shooting prisoners. The question at the centre of Beresford's film is the old Nuremburg war crimes trial excuse: what if the atrocity you perpetrated was ordered by your superiors - is it defensible? Much more than a film that questions obeying orders that require you to commit atrocities, this movie also examines the relationship between Australia, a newly independent nation at the turn of the century, and Britain. Australian troops, recruited from what were then British colonies, went to fight a British war against Boer farmers in South Africa. The courtroom saga of Breaker Morant centres around the animosity between the Australians and their British commanders. Clearly, Beresford is suggesting that the Australians were duped by the British to commit war crimes, only to fall victim to diplomatic moves between the British and the pro-Boer Germans at the war's end. Once again, this is a fine period drama that is one of the great achievements of Australian cinema's new wave of the 1970s. Beautifully shot and brilliantly acted, watch out for a young Bryan Brown and excellent performances by Jack Thompson and Lewis FitzGerald as well as a standout portrayal of The Breaker by Edward Woodward.
Rating:
Summary: "And a man's foes shall be thay of his own household....."
Review: Skillful director Brian Beresford, a brilliant ensemble of Australian actors, and the very talented English actor, Edward Woodward, came together in South Australia in 1979 to shoot one of Australia's finest films...a war time courtroom drama that excels in acting, narrative, script and cinematography. Released at a time when the Australian film industry was on the verge of a world wide surge of interest with many other fine films (Mad Max 1979, Gallipoli 1981 etc.)...."Breaker Morant" set a benchmark for quality drama. In the midst of the Boer War, three members of the Bushveldt Carboniers...Harry Morant, Peter Handcock & George Witton stand accused of the murder of Boer prisoners and a German missionary. The men become the subject of a British court martial and it soon becomes clearly evident that they are mere pawns in a far greater diplomatic agenda between warring nations. The film closely tackles the issues of trialling soldiers for murder in times of war...and the differing interpretations of the orders recieved from senior officers. Jack Thompson is outstanding as defence attorney, Major J.F. Thomas, attempting to save the lives of the trio. A youthful Bryan Brown is very memorable as the wild, simple larrikan, Peter Handcock...and Edward Woodward, in a moving and remarkable performance plays the role of the horse breaker-cum-soldier, Harry Hardboard Morant. Add a wonderful support cast including noted Australian actors Charles 'Bud' Tingwell, Alan Cassell, John Waters and Chris Haywood...and it's easy to see why this film garnished several key AFI awards upon it's release, and remains so highly regarded amongst critics and fans alike. An intelligent, moving and thought provoking film "Breaker Morant" will be savoured by those who enjoy intense, challenging historical drama's. Highly Recommended !!
Rating:
Summary: One of the Best Films Ever Made. Period.
Review: This is quite simply one of the best films I have seen. Every person I have recommended this film to has said the same, and every person who has asked me what are the best films I have seen ( I am a true student and fan of film )- I immediately answer "Breaker Morant" either first or second. It brings the British Empire to it`s knees, at least ethically. Interestingly, some scholars have done research in the last decade or so and think that Morant was a cold-blooded killer ( doubtful, I think ). Director Beresford himself, when presented with this evidence said the same. As far as this film is concerned- this "evidence" doesn`t detract from the greatness of " Breaker Morant" at all.(...)
Rating:
Summary: Profoundly thought provoking
Review: This superbly written, directed and acted movie ranks, in my opinion, with All Quiet on the Western Front and Paths of Glory as a critique of the morality of war. Like them, it casts a jaundiced eye on the dishonesty and cynicism of governments, in this case, the duplicitous scapegoating by the British imperial high command against these unwitting Australian colonial soldiers, aided and abetted by the after the fact complicity of their own government (in this regard, I would question what others on this site have said about this movie dealing with the soldier's accountability for following orders that are immoral, inasmuch as their superiors sought to deny that such orders existed in the first place)
However, I believe that this movie transmits a deeper message that the brutality of war inevitably has a brutalizing effect on the souls of those who participate in it even if they are fundamentally decent, honorable human beings, in this case, the protagonist, Breaker Morant, who, though he intially distained to follow the unwritten policy of executing prisoners who were Boer combatants (and perhaps those that aided them as well, such as the German clergyman in this film), was finally moved to an about face in this regard after the trauma of seeing that his best friend and the brother of his fiance had been killed and viciously mutilated by the Boer commandos. Like Oliver Stone's Platoon, this movie displays a post Vietnam, post My Lai sensibility in this respect, but goes deeper in that it does not seek to divide people into good and bad, humane and brutal, as Stone did with the two sergeants, for what is conveyed here is that no one is immune from the corrosion and degradation that the fear and violence of deadly combat inflicts upon the mind and soul.
Strongly recommended!
Rating:
Summary: Scapegoats of War: Is Patriotic Always Political?
Review: This film addresses (and won the Australian "Oscar" for best film over 20 years ago) a vexing, eternal question in the history of humankind and human conflict. Military discipline is invoked to control what would otherwise become a savage horde. Men (and now women) are taught to kill in the name of some identity (national, religious, subversive, for example). When to the combatants go "too far" in engaging their minds to the task before them? Protecting their own, perhaps putting the enemy at some risk (psychological or physical) doing so? Saving lives. Is war never acceptable as a form of handling conflict, and what should be the consequences of going "out of bounds?" Where is the rulebook? Who does it apply to? This question is as fresh today as at the near-end of the Boer War, a hundred years ago and on the other side of the world, but not further from the questions it raises than nightly news reports on NBC, CBS, ABC, and other media that "report." I chance upon this film during a late night (or should I say early morning) showing about five years after its release, and have considered it one of my top ten films of all time. It is engaging, the script is excellent, the portrayals of these actual soldiers and their superiors (including Lord Kitchener) during what no one knew then were the waning days of the British Empire, the soundtrack, all would be worthy of "Oscar" nominations even in the Politically Correct climate today. We see south African blacks treated as nonexistent, the pride of "colonials" as part of the Empire, the arrogance of "true Britons"--all with counterparts in every conflict. A highly political "court martial" is held for three Australians serving in the Bushveldt Carbineers--a unit using recently developed "commando" techniques. It is a new word applied to war, and something quite different from the Napoleonic tactics seen not only at the entrance of the 19th century, but repeated again and again in armed conflicts throughout. These three men applied their intelligence and their compassion (for the death of their commanding officer) to the reduction of casualties, and psychological (propaganda) techniques aimed at the Boers, Dutch colonials living in South Africa. It was a highly political occurence...after all, the Kaiser (Emperor) of Germany, recently united and no doubt ready to enter a "real" conflict, was the late Queen Victoria's grandson!!! If three Australian "colonials" were to be sacrificed in that pursuit, what of it? With stiff upper lips (camouflaged with mustaches for the most part), we see this tragedy laid out in the most "civilized manner" possible.
You will have strong feelings for and about the men involved. The United States of America appears to be the last land-occupying miltary superpower (does the sun set on the "American Empire"?). Given the paradoxes and tactical problems encountered in dozens of "humanitarian" and "military" conflicts following the first Gulf War, the lessons of "Breaker Morant" are no less compelling than in any other time in the history of warfare. In fact, this drama makes draws one to surmise that many "military tribunal" concoctions--in legal language, "off point." Thankfully, the DVD edition of this classic is crisp, compelling, and produced to the highest standards. I recommend purchasing it--you will watch it more than once!
Rating:
Summary: Compelling historical drama
Review: Harry 'Breaker' Morant, was an immigrant Australian who served in the Boer war (1900-1903), where Dutch/German Boers wanted independence from England. This was intolerable to the British Empire at the time and Lord Kitchener despatched the army to put down this 'revolt'. Empire troops were drafted in to help, among them Australians from the new nation. The Boers were waging early guerrilla-style warfare, picking off English troops before melting away and Britain was steadily losing the war. Lord Kitchener decided to engage troops of the Australian 'Bushveldt Carbineers', among them Harry 'Breaker' Morant, his superior officer and future brother in law Captain Hunt, as well as fellow soldiers Handcock and Witton to adopt the same guerrilla tactics. Although they (somewhat conveniently) received no written orders, it was 'made patently clear' they were to take no prisoners, and to shoot anyone wearing stolen British uniform. After their well-liked Captain hunt was captured after an ambush and his body later found horribly mutilated, Morant and others found the perpetrators and vowing vengeance, carried out their orders. Several of the Boer soldiers were subsequently executed along with a collaborating German missionary. With Germany possibly about to enter the war, Britain needed heads on a plate and three 'expendable colonials' were found who fitted the bill. The compelling courtroom drama shows how the defendants (innocent or otherwise) were manoeuvred towards a guilty verdict for political expediency and are mere pawns in a far greater drama. In an age where failure to obey any orders, written or otherwise, in the British army was mutiny punishable by firing squad, our three defendants are damned if they do carry out orders and damned if they don't. A compelling look at the often blurry nature of war, it's hardening effect on human attitudes and how power sometimes corrupts justice. Whether guilty or not, these men still deserved a fair trial and this powerful film conveys that well.
Rating:
Summary: How warriors are expendable by politics... Excellent script.
Review: The first time I saw it was amazed by the similarity with Kubrick's "Paths of Glory", but there is a BIG difference, we are dealing with OFFICERS instead of common soldiers (but of course they were "colonials"). A deeper thougt provoking film you can not find about military coalitions...
A MUST HAVE FOR MILITARY ENTHUSIASTS.
| 
