Das Boot, without the Nazis, meets Waltzing With Bashir, with real actors. Claustrophobia, traumatisation, atrocity and extreme moral dilemmas.
Lots of you, especially women, won't go and see LEBANON because it's a war film. Others won't see it because it is an Israeli film and you fear a whitewash of that country's invasion of Lebanon in 1982. Some of you won't see it because you are Jewish and you fear a condemnation of ditto.
That would be a shame.
First because this is an excellent and well-made film with high production values and so ticks all the artistic boxes.
Second because it cleverly manages a balance between honestly exposing some of Israel's less appealing actions in that conflict, with enabling us to enter into the world of ordinary young Israeli men who find themselves in combat and terrified.
The film enables a strong identification with the four-man Israeli tank crew. LEBANON'S USP is that through the whole film we are inside the tank. Our only view of the outside world comes via the viewfinder and cross-hairs of the tank's gunner. Sharing his point of view we see vividly the horror of war and especially the tragic and brutal fate of civilians caught in the way of the invading Israeli war machine.
Punches are not pulled. A breach of international law over weapons options is made clear. The worst horror of that conflict, the actions of Israel's Christian Phalangist allies, is referenced when a Syrian solider is captured.
But macro-politics is brought down to the level of individual distress and dilemma. Our gunner sees, in shocking technologically-enabled close up, the faces of civilians fixed in his cross-hairs. He is ordered to fire. Will he pull the trigger?
One review of LEBANON praised it for it's understanding that war is hell for soldiers. But criticised it's failure to address the reasons why the Israeli troops were in that situation in the first place. I disagree entirely with that view. Our gunner is traumatised by being in peril. But even before the tank reaches that stage it is clearly he is equally traumatised by his moral dilemmas and just by witnessing the horrors of civilian casualties. For whether he pulls the trigger or not, there are dreadful consequences either way.
LEBANON is based on writer-director Samuel Maoz's experiences as a conscript in 1982 Lebanon. Hence his focus is on the claustrophobic and terrifying experiences of his tank crew. The Guardian has called this an 'anti-war' film.
Two criticisms.
The photography is beautiful. Lots of light reflecting off liquids and glass. Sweaty, dirty faces caught with one side lit and the other dark. Splendid close ups. But after a while I stopped enjoying this and thought maybe it's a bit discordant? Does this, almost Malick like cinematography really fit the subject matter? Make your own mind up.
Also a bit too pretty are the four actors who play the tank crew. Had me imagining those pastiches of Hollywood movies in which everyone could be a model. The Chippendales Go To War. Maybe this was to enhance the audience's identification with these poor young men in danger. After all, who cares if an ugly fat guy gets killed?
But all in all this is a fine movie, with excellent performances all-round.
I hope women will go and see it. Many years ago a UK TV documentary revealed for the first time the day to day lives of soldiers in combat. Next day at the water cooler, I remember vividly one female colleague's astonished reaction. "I never imagined they would not be able to wash!". LEBANON takes this to a whole new level. When you are in a tank and under fire, what happens when you need to pee?
No comments:
Post a Comment