Kippur

Rating:
Summary: Dreamlike art house war movie
Review: "Kippur" is not your typical war movie. There are no heroes - just two reservists who get swept up in the backwash of the 1973 Yom Kippur war while looking for their already mobilized and departed unit. It is like one of those nightmares where you know you have to be somewhere to take an exam/go to an interview/go to work, and somehow, you just can't get there.

Kippur tells us almost nothing about the details of the 1973 campaign (which Israel, surprised, came fairly close to losing, since it is really after conveying the sheer randomness and chaos of war from the worm's eye point of view. Unlike our modern Iraq adventures, it is likely the average grunt knew very little about what was happening in the next town or valley, or whether the war was being own or lost. The persepctive was interesting to someone raised with the media-enhanced viewpoint, after the 1967 war, that the Israeli military ran like a Swiss watch. In "Kippur", we learn that like our own army mired in Iraq, these are just weekend soldiers trying to get by.

This is a European-flavoured film, so it is bookended by equally dreamlike sex scenes ("Thin Red Line" tried this in a tamer way) which makes the movies' R-rating well deserved.

Rating:
Summary: Dreamlike art house war movie
Review: "Kippur" is not your typical war movie. There are no heroes - just two reservists who get swept up in the backwash of the 1973 Yom Kippur war while looking for their already mobilized and departed unit. It is like one of those nightmares where you know you have to be somewhere to take an exam/go to an interview/go to work, and somehow, you just can't get there.

Kippur tells us almost nothing about the details of the 1973 campaign (which Israel, surprised, came fairly close to losing, since it is really after conveying the sheer randomness and chaos of war from the worm's eye point of view. Unlike our modern Iraq adventures, it is likely the average grunt knew very little about what was happening in the next town or valley, or whether the war was being own or lost. The persepctive was interesting to someone raised with the media-enhanced viewpoint, after the 1967 war, that the Israeli military ran like a Swiss watch. In "Kippur", we learn that like our own army mired in Iraq, these are just weekend soldiers trying to get by.

This is a European-flavoured film, so it is bookended by equally dreamlike sex scenes ("Thin Red Line" tried this in a tamer way) which makes the movies' R-rating well deserved.

Rating:
Summary: Dissapointing
Review: Although a good effort to convey the horrors of war, the movie lacks an intersting plot. We see scene after scene of rescuing injured soldiers. With very little dialog the viewer does not get to know the characters well. A disappointment.

Rating:
Summary: Buy the new book instead
Review: Although I was already familiar with the work of Amos Gitai, who is probably the most overrated filmmaker in Israel--and one of the most mindlessly left-wing as well--I was still shocked by the treatment the director of this film gives his audience. The Israelis have produced some of the best films about war ever made(e.g., "Avanti Popolo," "Matzgor," "One of Us"), but this is the only Israeli product I've seen that promises to give the viewer a taste of the reality of war and then fails to deliver. Truly great films have been made on extremely low budgets but this isn't one of them. The director's cheap tactic in repeating stills over and over just to extend the time of a movie already too long is inexcusable. And come on, how do you make an anti-war film about those three weeks in October 1973? Anyone hoping to see an exigesis of the political and military thinking involving this two-front war will be bitterly disappointed. They should turn their attention instead to the book "The Yom Kippur War," by Rabinovich which contains a lot of recently declassified material.

Rating:
Summary: Surreal, yet surprisingly real
Review: Cinema has come a long way since "The Dirty Dozen". I think that this portrayal of the 1973 war in the Golan Heights is one of the first films to actually project an image of war as its naked ugly self. No inspirational film score, no inflated heroism. The emotions are of helplessness, confusion, fear, uncertainty. The images are damp, gray, green and mud. This film has been knocked for a lack of coherency, shallow dialogues, drawn out and monotonous scenes - BUT THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT THAT'S BEING MADE!!! The Yom Kippur War was anything but coherent for all sides - Israel, Syria, and Egypt. I think that anyone interested to experience the less glamorous and more frank side of war should see this film.

Rating:
Summary: for those who want to "see"
Review: It happened in 1973. On Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement), October 6, war broke out between Syria-Egypt and Israel. During the 19 days of the Arab-Israel war, director Amos Gitai joined the Israeli Army. But the helicopter which was carrying him and other seven soliders was shot down by a missile attack.

Though one was killed and many severely injured, Gitai survived it, and 27 years later he turned his experience into this movie. (The final scene of the film actually comes directly from his own experience.) Therefore, "Kippur" is a very personal look on war, avoiding cross-fire battle-scenes we ususlly see in so-called war movies. Rather, the film depicts the confusion of war as the director himself once witnessed; there is no "enemy" (of course, from the viewpoint of Israel) in sight. Lots of tanks are wildly running with roaring engines, and they keep on shooting cannons, but we don't see the results of these attacks. We hear the sound of shells and airplanes, but we don't see soldiers killed by them (though many dead bodies appear). And the soldiers yell and shout to each other, but their voices are not often intelligible. But this total confusion is the point of the film.

Consequeltly, the story is very thin. We follow the protagonist Weinraub (Liron Levo), but he cannot report to his section of the Amry because it already started, leaving him and his friend behind. They accidentally join the rescue team (because a doctor whose car is broken asked them to give him a lift), which must carry the injured soldiers back to hospital by helicopter. All those "actions" are shot with as few cuts as possible; once the camera starts to shoot the soldiers, it dwells on them, following closely their confused behaviors, which do not always go smooth.

So, complaints about the film's lingering camera shots, which may make some of viewers sleepy, are understandable. Still we sense the director's intention there, and we should respect it. The final scene of rescuing a heavily wounded pilot is especially time-comsuming, and may be boring to some though its potential power of realism is undeniable. The soldiers struggle in the muddy ground of the Golan Hights (where the film was shot); they slip and fall many times; they can little advance; one of them almost loses his mind; these haunting scenes, which are slowly developed on screen, are exactly the strength of the film, which conveys the reality of the war in Gitai's unique and even daring fashion.

I must admit "Kippur" is not for everybody. However, if you prefer something original, you got it here. Like Samuel Fuller's "The Big Red One," it is very personal, but at the same time very universal and immediate.

Rating:
Summary: Very Personal and Realistic Look on War Uniquely Captured
Review: It happened in 1973. On Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement), October 6, war broke out between Syria-Egypt and Israel. During the 19 days of the Arab-Israel war, director Amos Gitai joined the Israeli Army. But the helicopter which was carrying him and other seven soliders was shot down by a missile attack.

Though one was killed and many severely injured, Gitai survived it, and 27 years later he turned his experience into this movie. (The final scene of the film actually comes directly from his own experience.) Therefore, "Kippur" is a very personal look on war, avoiding cross-fire battle-scenes we ususlly see in so-called war movies. Rather, the film depicts the confusion of war as the director himself once witnessed; there is no "enemy" (of course, from the viewpoint of Israel) in sight. Lots of tanks are wildly running with roaring engines, and they keep on shooting cannons, but we don't see the results of these attacks. We hear the sound of shells and airplanes, but we don't see soldiers killed by them (though many dead bodies appear). And the soldiers yell and shout to each other, but their voices are not often intelligible. But this total confusion is the point of the film.

Consequeltly, the story is very thin. We follow the protagonist Weinraub (Liron Levo), but he cannot report to his section of the Amry because it already started, leaving him and his friend behind. They accidentally join the rescue team (because a doctor whose car is broken asked them to give him a lift), which must carry the injured soldiers back to hospital by helicopter. All those "actions" are shot with as few cuts as possible; once the camera starts to shoot the soldiers, it dwells on them, following closely their confused behaviors, which do not always go smooth.

So, complaints about the film's lingering camera shots, which may make some of viewers sleepy, are understandable. Still we sense the director's intention there, and we should respect it. The final scene of rescuing a heavily wounded pilot is especially time-comsuming, and may be boring to some though its potential power of realism is undeniable. The soldiers struggle in the muddy ground of the Golan Hights (where the film was shot); they slip and fall many times; they can little advance; one of them almost loses his mind; these haunting scenes, which are slowly developed on screen, are exactly the strength of the film, which conveys the reality of the war in Gitai's unique and even daring fashion.

I must admit "Kippur" is not for everybody. However, if you prefer something original, you got it here. Like Samuel Fuller's "The Big Red One," it is very personal, but at the same time very universal and immediate.

Rating:
Summary: This film is so powerful that you feel it
Review: Its good to see an Isreali film-maker show an un-flattering portrait of war. Past films about Isreal have always lauded the so-called heroic frontier spirit of Isreali's farmers living on the lands taken from the moribund palestinians. Here we see some of the price Isrealis have paid in order to maintain their state amidst a hostile and confused Arab world.

This is not your standard war movie. There are virtually no combat scenes. Once the war is shown it consists of a series of rescues from the battlefield by medical personnel. We see the aftermath and cost of combat, without the usual heroics involved. The style of the film is a bit redundant, but perhaps purposely so. The average viewer may become quickly bored, but its worth sticking it out to the end more or less. The main scene of action are the constant rescues from the ongoing battle, mostly Isreali tankers who suffered heavy losses in the 1973 War as a result of Improved Soviet anti-tank technology which the Syrians and Egyptians poossessd. The Yom Kipper War cost Isreal some 3,000 casualties, and the Arabs more than 8,000. It was a brutal, costly war, and the film shows the price Isreal paid to repel the invasion. I give this Isreali film-maker a lot of credit for making a film like this, even if a bit slow and monotonous at times. You do get to see a lot of Chieftain tanks churning around in the background moving from position to position while under fire. The end scene where the protagonists are shot down in the helocoptor by the surface to air missile is very realistic and quite shocking.

The film has a symetry to it in that the lead character ends up back with his girl friend where they indulge in some interesting kinky sex with paints and oils which I suppose are meant to reflect the colors of peace and war. Oddly enough I found this one of the most interesting aspects of the movie! Considering this is probably one of the only films available in the English speaking world about the 1973 Yom Kippur War its worth looking at just for that reason. I doubt the Arabs could or would produce anything different or better. I am glad to see that Isreali cinema has the courage to make a film like this. Ariel Sharon should see this film to remind him again what the costs of war can be. He played a principle part in the conflict.

Rating:
Summary: Film Shows the Price of Isreal
Review: Its good to see an Isreali film-maker show an un-flattering portrait of war. Past films about Isreal have always lauded the so-called heroic frontier spirit of Isreali's farmers living on the lands taken from the moribund palestinians. Here we see some of the price Isrealis have paid in order to maintain their state amidst a hostile and confused Arab world.

This is not your standard war movie. There are virtually no combat scenes. Once the war is shown it consists of a series of rescues from the battlefield by medical personnel. We see the aftermath and cost of combat, without the usual heroics involved. The style of the film is a bit redundant, but perhaps purposely so. The average viewer may become quickly bored, but its worth sticking it out to the end more or less. The main scene of action are the constant rescues from the ongoing battle, mostly Isreali tankers who suffered heavy losses in the 1973 War as a result of Improved Soviet anti-tank technology which the Syrians and Egyptians poossessd. The Yom Kipper War cost Isreal some 3,000 casualties, and the Arabs more than 8,000. It was a brutal, costly war, and the film shows the price Isreal paid to repel the invasion. I give this Isreali film-maker a lot of credit for making a film like this, even if a bit slow and monotonous at times. You do get to see a lot of Chieftain tanks churning around in the background moving from position to position while under fire. The end scene where the protagonists are shot down in the helocoptor by the surface to air missile is very realistic and quite shocking.

The film has a symetry to it in that the lead character ends up back with his girl friend where they indulge in some interesting kinky sex with paints and oils which I suppose are meant to reflect the colors of peace and war. Oddly enough I found this one of the most interesting aspects of the movie! Considering this is probably one of the only films available in the English speaking world about the 1973 Yom Kippur War its worth looking at just for that reason. I doubt the Arabs could or would produce anything different or better. I am glad to see that Isreali cinema has the courage to make a film like this. Ariel Sharon should see this film to remind him again what the costs of war can be. He played a principle part in the conflict.

Rating:
Summary: A GREAT film!! Destined to get a lukewarm response.
Review: KIPPUR is a great film that is bound to get a negative response from general American audiences that are too used to the narrative cliques, characters, scenarios and general plot devises that have become the prerequisite elements in American war films of the past several decades(i.e. fast and disorienting battle scenes cut with slow metaphorical dramatic moments and flashback sequences). KIPPUR intellingently avoids these things NOT just for the sake of being different or to bore or annoy the audience but to show that the particular war being portrayed is an entirely different one altogether. What KIPPUR has accomplished through it's one-day time frame and linear narrative is the banality and monotany of a conflict like this. A war that seems almost like a dream to its inhabitants(the films moody slow jazz score contributes to this feel). The two main characters at the beginning of the film are literally "driving" to war, shooting the breeze as if going to a regular day of work. Here is a conflict that has dragged on for so long, that is has become engraved in the very culture and everyday routines of its people. You can see it in the faces of emotionally repressed men who have become desensitized to the violence and only become distraught when their initial defenses are broken down. The long take of the soldiers dragging and dropping the injured through the mud culminating in the weaping and arguing of the men clearly conveys the pointlessness of it all. These men cry not mainly because of a sense of indignation or sorrow but more out of sheer frustration. However, even despite these epiphanal moments of the human condition that are supposed to be self changing, the men really just want to get through the day and go home and continue there regular lives. Indeed, they do return home, unchanged, continuing their domestic routines, Slowly losing their soul. RECOMMEDED VIEWING.