No Man's Land

Rating:
Summary: POIGNANT BATTLE LINES, SUNNY SIDE UP
Review: In the bittersweet anti-war tradition of Dr. Strangelove or Catch-22, but perhaps at a more authentic level, this bare-knuckled film isn't a great war movie because it blows your mind with gory war footage.

It's a great war movie because it's confident in its emotions. It is absurd in its unbearably tense metaphor for the insanity, stubbornness and futility of the Balkan civil wars. It is infectious in its conviction that you'll get the message anyway.

Although the plot can't and doesn't totally escape a sense of being contrived (it's almost too neat a symbol to have the kind of credibility and impact it needs) it never loses sight of the sombreness of warfare.

Instead it sets up its case poignantly within the context of its comedy, and is studded with stirring moments. E.g., when a soldier looks at the mine under his friend and in moving the man's arm brings a tightly gripped photo of his girlfriend into the frame.

It astutely shows us the impact of CNN-style media on modern warfare. The reporters relish their power and everyone is playing to the cameras: especially the U.N. brass, who are so terrified of bad publicity they're morally paralyzed.

Lastly, for a War Movie it sure is pleasant looking. Instead of the usual grungy and muddy battlefields from distant lands, it's set in a picturesque field. The cinematography is fantastic.

A crisp, riveting hour-and-a-half. I've recommended this film to practically everyone I care about.

Rating:
Summary: Brilliant, humorous, and bleak
Review: The problems plaguing the Balkans go on and on without end. Historians, political scientists, sociologists, and a plethora of other academics have isolated a number of these difficulties. There is, for example, the Ottoman domination of the region for roughly 500 years. This occupation cut off the area from the rest of Europe and its attendant social, political, and economic currents. Too, the Turks elevated tensions between ethnic groups in an effort to hold on to power once the Ottoman Empire began disintegrating, tensions that continue to fester today. Finally, don't discount the absolutely atrocious attitudes Western Europe held about the area throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The Great Powers drew up borders with little regard for the peoples in question, virtually ensuring that Serbs, Croats, Bosnians, Macedonians, Albanians, Greeks, and all the rest would continue to fight amongst themselves in an effort to restore their traditional lands. To sit back and wonder why those darn people in the Balkans can't seem to get their act together is to admit an ignorance of history. At the same time, figuring it all out doesn't seem to help either. Understanding what ethnic groups were fighting in the former Yugoslavia, and why they were fighting, was about as easy as deciphering the situation in Beirut in the 1980s.

Enter director Danis Tanovic's "No Man's Land," a film that captures perfectly the mind-boggling conundrums of the Balkan battlefield during the years after the Cold War. The film also transcends the peculiarities of the region to make a statement about the absurdities of war in the age of mass media. It all starts in the early 1990's in Bosnia, where Serbs and Croats are battling it out for control of the region. A small squad (platoon?) of Bosnian soldiers runs smack dab into a Serbian emplacement and pays a heavy price for the mistake. Two of the soldiers, Ciki (Branko Djuric) and Cera (Filip Sovagovic) manage to find refuge in an abandoned trench that just happens to run between Serb and Bosnian lines. While trying to figure out what to do with the seriously wounded Cera, Ciki hears a couple of Serbs coming down the trench. He hides in a bunker, helpless without a weapon, as the Serbs booby trap the prostrate Cera with an especially dangerous landmine. When an opportunity to pick up a gun presents itself, Ciki kills one of the soldiers and holds the other, Nino (Rene Bitorajac), hostage. The two bicker back and forth about who started the war, an interesting argument that radically changes in its answer whenever one of the soldiers gains an advantage over the other.

In the meantime, Cera suddenly wakes up and attempts to move. Both Nino and Ciki, realizing they will die too if the landmine goes off, try to keep the wounded man stable. How to resolve such a dilemma? Why, call in the good old United Nations and its blue helmeted peacekeeping forces, of course! Yeah, right. The UN is about as helpless in this conflict as a rat caught in a trap. Even when a series of incidents eventually alert the peacekeepers to the unfolding events in the trench, the smarmy UN General Soft (played by an oily Simon Callow) oscillates between helping the trapped soldiers and writing them off as a lost cause. A pushy reporter at the scene, Jane Livingstone (Katrin Cartlidge) doesn't help matters much. She constantly badgers the French peacekeepers to allow her access to the trench so she can broadcast the whole thing live for stellar ratings. The peacekeepers don't know what to do; they only gained access to the trench by negotiating a temporary ceasefire that could end at any second, and they are hard pressed to keep Ciki and Nino from killing each other. Poor Cera, caught up in all this brouhaha. A German mine expert brought in to defuse the device can do little to help.

The conclusion to the film is grim, but Tanovic infuses many parts of his film with great humor. The image of first Nino and then Ciki dancing around in "No Man's Land" in only their underwear, trying desperately to send a signal to their countrymen not to shoot, is hilarious. So are their arguments about the war and who the aggressors are. These disagreements essentially degenerate into a pouty, childlike exchange along the lines of "You did." "No, you did." It's nicely done how Tanovic uses such dialogue to show us the banality of war. He also uses the two men as a symbol of the larger ethnic squabbles. For instance, notice how the two achieve an uneasy peace after learning that they spent time in the same town and have a common acquaintance. This is very much in keeping with the Balkan conflicts, where many of the combatants lived and worked together in the same town for years before picking up rifles to kill each other. The role of the media in the incident comes in for especially severe criticism from Tanovic. Through the Jane Livingstone character we see how the hysterical push for a story at all costs shapes how the United Nations responds to the tragedy. The threat of bad press is the only thing that pushes Soft to take action. "No Man's Land" takes a unequivocally negative view of everyone involved in the conflict.

Don't expect to see many extras on this disc. MGM is notorious for being rather spotty in the supplements department. I remember seeing a trailer for the film, and nothing more. Oh well, the film is good enough that you don't need much to understand what it is trying to say. I applaud Danis Tanovic for making such a pitch black, piercing statement about the Balkan conflicts. This one places him right up there with Kubrick's "Dr. Strangelove," a position that few attain.







Rating:
Summary: Futility, Shown on a Small Scale
Review: It's in the middle of the Serb/Bosnian war and three soldiers, two Bosnians and a Serb, find themselves in a trench trying to figure out a way to survive. Things are complicated because one of the Bosnians had been shot and presumed dead. Serb soldiers had placed him on a bouncing mine as a booby trap. They in turn were killed by the other wounded Bosnian, with the exception of the one Serb. The soldier thought dead comes to, badly hurt, and if he moves he'll set off the mine, killing all three. The Serb and the Bosnian cooperate enough to get the attention of a small UN intervention force which arrives with a bomb expert and followed by the media.

This is a very good film that moves all the arguments about just wars down to the level of the soldiers, where the arguments don't make a lot of sense compared to the consequences. The UN role is portrayed here as ineffectual with a morally corrupt commander and a sergeant who wants to try to do the right thing if only he knew what that was.

This is a movie that is quite effective in portraying the futility and pointlessness of much conflict. The DVD transfer is very good.

Rating:
Summary: Neutrality does not exist in the face of murder.
Review: No Man's Land is an extremely social film about the absurdity of war and the lack of humanity that surrounds it. It takes a very recent conflict with the Bosnians and Serbs and translates it into a message that is very relevant in today's current Iraq conflict. While it begins as our normal, mundane and cliché war film, it quickly changes "when the fog lifts" and our two heroes are forced into a situation that they never chose to be in. Director Danis Tanovic uses a new trick of storytelling by eliminating the hordes of soldiers and limiting our interaction with just two people that are to represent their own country. This impressed me about this film. Each character in this film represents their own country. Nino is the Serbs, Ciki is the Bosnians, and the French officer tries to place the peacekeeping French. When you take the human away from the picture, you begin to see this as a battle between countries with a "neutral" character standing in. It also reminded me of a boxing match. We had our two fighters whom never really became friends because they had to fight, and the referee called the UN who was there to blow the whistle if it was ever too rough.

After you begin to see that we have moved from a platoon war film to a simple two-person fight (worthy of the stage) of which each symbolize their own country, the rest of this film falls into place. Well, I was hoping that it would at least. I wasn't crazy about this film. I was expecting to see a tour de Force of imagery and triumph because it was able to beat out Amelie for best picture, but sadly I think the Academy went with this film because of the message that it sent throughout the picture. As I said before, this is a very social film. It dabbles in the idea that wars are sometimes fought for the wrong reasons and for forgotten times. There is a conversation between the Serb and Bosnian near the beginning of the film that I thought was interesting. They were talking about how this war started, and neither could remember who was the aggressor and who was the pacifist. Why was this war still happening? Nobody knew, but the anger and hatred was still in full demand. They each continue fighting over who caused this accident to happen to our man under the mine. Instead of helping and trying to save him, they fight. I saw this as yet another "jab" against war. Most of the time the soldiers are so upset that being a savior comes second nature to fighting. We can definitely see this in our current battles overseas.

Another key element in this film was the lack of use in the media, and the way that the UN is portrayed. First, the role of the media in this film. While they were key in brining the UN to the site of the accident, they are not very forceful in knowing the truth. I found this to be shocking and very realistic at the same time. They got their story, they pulled their ratings out of the ground, but the need to know the truth and to be of some help was obviously lacking. This was a huge punch in the media's faces. They are portrayed as cold, heartless celebrities that use the camera as their weapon of choice. Let us not forget the UN as well. No Man's Land hugely knocks the role of the UN in this conflict. One of the quotes from this film, "Neutrality does not exist in the face of murder. Doing nothing to stop it is, in fact, choosing. It is not being neutral" is a direct slam on to the policies of the UN. For most of these conflicts, troops are there to keep the peace, not to interfere. Therefore, the UN is asking their troops to ignore the violence, and allow the UN to be there just to say they were there. This is obviously the way that director Danis Tanovic wanted to portray the UN and it came out very clearly. It was a genuinely emotional scene that seemed to resonate from the director's heart.

Overall, this was a decent film. I was expecting much more than what was present due to the fact that it beat out Amelie for best Foreign Film at the Oscars, but it carried itself well. I felt it could have been more comical and a little less politically social commentary. By the first thirty minutes of this film I could see what the director wanted to accomplish and I needed something different. I wanted to be shocked and surprised, but instead I found a half-creative film that could have pushed the envelope a bit more to allow it to reach new heights. I think you should see it once, but a second viewing is right out of the question. Instead, spend more time seeing Amelie.

Grade: *** out of *****

Rating:
Summary: Powerful statement!
Review: This film is very far to be only a more anti war film . It's much more than this . This film is deeply disturbing because it challenges you about the wildness inmersed in this coward act to a simple man in the middle of that evil conflict among the ancient Yugoeslavian . Since this perspective the film maker set us in front a serious moral crossroad .
The Red Cross tries to make all what they can do but this help it is not enough . Since this fact is a punch notice , this dramatic circunstance becomes in a rating subject . The film is opened and it is carefully objective in its proposals .
This picture won the best foreign film in 2001 , competing with Amelie .

Rating:
Summary: Bitter film !
Review: It was - March 24, 2002 - the day we were all waiting for the 74th Academy awards to be announced. I was living at Sunnyvale, CA at that point of time and was very much interested in Best Foriegn film category. I am from india and was obviously interested in the movie LAGAAN - A musical and a great movie as well - which was nominated for the same. When the time came to the announcement of result - i was disappointed. It was a movie called NO MANS LAND that has won the award. Wondered was the heck the movie has to grab the award competing against `AMELIE` - french film and `LAGAAN`.
Rented out the movie and was blown away. Such a beautifully scripted and directed movie from the man who was himself was affected by the serbia/bosnia war. A must watch for anyone who want to know more about the bosnia/serbia conflict. Take my word you will never regret for buying this movie.