The Battle of Algiers Should Be Viewed By Anyone Concerned About the Iraq War
Timothy Sexton
January 29, 2007
It is a sad commentary on the state of the art of the film in the 21st century and the precipitous drop in quality over the last decade that the best film I watched for the first time in 2006 actually came out forty years ago. The film is The Battle of Algiers and it tells the story of the Algerian fight for independence against the French occupation. Change a few names here and there and it may as well as be telling the story of Iraq today.
If you find it odd that the French were at one time in the position of being fascist occupiers of a foreign country considering their own experience during World War II, well, just remember that very often a child who is abused grows up to be a child abuser himself. And the fact is that this movie—shot in glorious black and white—may remind many viewers of Steven Spielberg’s Schindler’s List, at least in those sequences before the liquidation of the ghetto. There is an eerie and uncomfortable correlation between the Nazi treatment of Jews and the French treatment of Arabs; such that one really does begin to question just what in the name of all that is good and decent were the French thinking? Lending a further sting to this comparison is the revelation that the French Colonel who takes on the part of Amon Goeth in this movie—to a much, much lesser extent, mind you—was himself a survivor of a Nazi concentration camp. Again, it just goes to point out that no one will ever fully understand the mechanics of the human mind.
You may read other reviews of The Battle of Algiers that take pains to convince you that it is a fair and balanced movie that doesn’t take sides. Well, I guess if you mean by not taking sides it doesn’t paint the French in bold strokes, then yes. But since there was really only one moral side you could be on during the Algerian war for independence—either you were for freedom or against it—it is a mistake to view The Battle of Algiers as being anything other than pro-Algerian. True, Colonel Mathieu is not just a Nazi speaking in a French accent, but his alarming response to the charges of torture is just as shattering as the fact that so many Americans support Pres. Bush’s torture programs. And the scenes of torture in the movie do nothing to lend credence to the idea that the French are presented as equally humane.
The idea that The Battle of Algiers is a balanced film may stem from the fact that it doesn’t shy away from presenting the ugliness of terrorism. Children are used by the Algerian freedom fighters. And in one particularly gripping sequence—a sequence that points how just how unsuccessfully manipulative Steven Spielberg’s Munich was—three Muslim women doll themselves up to look French so they can easily plant bombs in the European section of Algiers. But even that is undercut by the fact that the cinematic language used in these scenes are such that, well, to be perfectly honest you wind up rooting for the women and hoping they get away it. The sequence is pure artistry, but it most certainly is not balanced and impartial.
In one particularly biting sequence in The Battle of Algiers—the kind of thing that if George W. Bush possessed even one iota of conscience would result in his entire body breaking out in goosebumps were he to watch it—one of the leaders of the Algerian resistance is confronted by the press (he is being paraded out in a dog and pony show by the French after his capture) and is asked if it isn’t cowardly to send young boys and women out with bombs. He replies that it is assuredly less cowardly than killing thousands at a time by dropping napalm from jets and then twists the knife in even further by saying he would be more than willing to trade his baskets for their jets
Supposedly, The Battle of Algiers was aired at the Pentagon shortly before Pres. Bush sent strangers into Iraq to die for his ever-changing cause. And also supposedly the response was basically along the lines of “Well, we really can’t learn anything from this movie.” (Such was not the case with Rambo III, I’m guessing.) There is a scene in the movie in which the French Colonel compares fighting against an insurrection to trying to kill a tapeworm; you can kill off millions of a tapeworm's individual segments, but if you don’t kill the head it won’t die. Obviously, the analogy is not clean since killing the head of any organization only means that you will soon be facing a new head, but even the underlying message of the analogy apparently flew right over the heads of even the best and brightest in the room at the Pentagon like so much calamari at a food fight in a Japanese boarding school.
Another chilling scene occurs near the end of the film after the French have finally stamped out the last of the leaders of the opposition. It should remind you of nothing so much as Pres. Bush standing on that aircraft carrier, basking in the glow of his gigantic Mission Accomplished sign (I wonder how much that sign would go for on eBay if it was still around, which I doubt seriously). As the equally clueless French officers leave the wreckage of a bomb site, the tapeworm reference wriggles its way back into play and they arrogantly declare that the Algerian opposition movement has been decapitated, hopefully forever. Another surrender monkey makes the racist observation that the Arabs are basically good decent people with whom they got along fine for 130 years. I’ll leave you to make your own connections on current day policy in America to that idea.
Probably the greatest accomplishment of The Battle of Algiers is its stubborn refusal to distinguish between “good” terrorism and “bad” terrorism. To listen to the US media, when our bombs kill civilians it is completely different from when their bombs kill civilians; likewise, to listen to Al-Jazeerza is to hear the opposite. As The Battle of Algiers makes painfully clear, when civilians are killed for any reason, regardless of how noble that reason may be, it should be defined as terrorism.
The Battle of Algiers is must-see viewing for any American who makes a claim on either side of the issue regarding the morality of the war in Iraq. It is available on Netflix, so you have no excuse not to rent it. For those who are influenced by such things, you should also be aware that currently The Battle of Algiers is ranked #149 by IMDB users. Aside from the great lesson it teaches concerning the utter futility of attempting to occupy a nation foreign in every way from language to religion to sexuality, The Battle of Algiers is also a necessity as a lesson in how to make a movie. Instead of wasting your time renting Talladega Nights or going to the theater to see Rocky Balboa, do yourself one big helping of a solid by checking out The Battle of Algiers.
If you find it odd that the French were at one time in the position of being fascist occupiers of a foreign country considering their own experience during World War II, well, just remember that very often a child who is abused grows up to be a child abuser himself. And the fact is that this movie—shot in glorious black and white—may remind many viewers of Steven Spielberg’s Schindler’s List, at least in those sequences before the liquidation of the ghetto. There is an eerie and uncomfortable correlation between the Nazi treatment of Jews and the French treatment of Arabs; such that one really does begin to question just what in the name of all that is good and decent were the French thinking? Lending a further sting to this comparison is the revelation that the French Colonel who takes on the part of Amon Goeth in this movie—to a much, much lesser extent, mind you—was himself a survivor of a Nazi concentration camp. Again, it just goes to point out that no one will ever fully understand the mechanics of the human mind.
You may read other reviews of The Battle of Algiers that take pains to convince you that it is a fair and balanced movie that doesn’t take sides. Well, I guess if you mean by not taking sides it doesn’t paint the French in bold strokes, then yes. But since there was really only one moral side you could be on during the Algerian war for independence—either you were for freedom or against it—it is a mistake to view The Battle of Algiers as being anything other than pro-Algerian. True, Colonel Mathieu is not just a Nazi speaking in a French accent, but his alarming response to the charges of torture is just as shattering as the fact that so many Americans support Pres. Bush’s torture programs. And the scenes of torture in the movie do nothing to lend credence to the idea that the French are presented as equally humane.
The idea that The Battle of Algiers is a balanced film may stem from the fact that it doesn’t shy away from presenting the ugliness of terrorism. Children are used by the Algerian freedom fighters. And in one particularly gripping sequence—a sequence that points how just how unsuccessfully manipulative Steven Spielberg’s Munich was—three Muslim women doll themselves up to look French so they can easily plant bombs in the European section of Algiers. But even that is undercut by the fact that the cinematic language used in these scenes are such that, well, to be perfectly honest you wind up rooting for the women and hoping they get away it. The sequence is pure artistry, but it most certainly is not balanced and impartial.
In one particularly biting sequence in The Battle of Algiers—the kind of thing that if George W. Bush possessed even one iota of conscience would result in his entire body breaking out in goosebumps were he to watch it—one of the leaders of the Algerian resistance is confronted by the press (he is being paraded out in a dog and pony show by the French after his capture) and is asked if it isn’t cowardly to send young boys and women out with bombs. He replies that it is assuredly less cowardly than killing thousands at a time by dropping napalm from jets and then twists the knife in even further by saying he would be more than willing to trade his baskets for their jets
Supposedly, The Battle of Algiers was aired at the Pentagon shortly before Pres. Bush sent strangers into Iraq to die for his ever-changing cause. And also supposedly the response was basically along the lines of “Well, we really can’t learn anything from this movie.” (Such was not the case with Rambo III, I’m guessing.) There is a scene in the movie in which the French Colonel compares fighting against an insurrection to trying to kill a tapeworm; you can kill off millions of a tapeworm's individual segments, but if you don’t kill the head it won’t die. Obviously, the analogy is not clean since killing the head of any organization only means that you will soon be facing a new head, but even the underlying message of the analogy apparently flew right over the heads of even the best and brightest in the room at the Pentagon like so much calamari at a food fight in a Japanese boarding school.
Another chilling scene occurs near the end of the film after the French have finally stamped out the last of the leaders of the opposition. It should remind you of nothing so much as Pres. Bush standing on that aircraft carrier, basking in the glow of his gigantic Mission Accomplished sign (I wonder how much that sign would go for on eBay if it was still around, which I doubt seriously). As the equally clueless French officers leave the wreckage of a bomb site, the tapeworm reference wriggles its way back into play and they arrogantly declare that the Algerian opposition movement has been decapitated, hopefully forever. Another surrender monkey makes the racist observation that the Arabs are basically good decent people with whom they got along fine for 130 years. I’ll leave you to make your own connections on current day policy in America to that idea.
Probably the greatest accomplishment of The Battle of Algiers is its stubborn refusal to distinguish between “good” terrorism and “bad” terrorism. To listen to the US media, when our bombs kill civilians it is completely different from when their bombs kill civilians; likewise, to listen to Al-Jazeerza is to hear the opposite. As The Battle of Algiers makes painfully clear, when civilians are killed for any reason, regardless of how noble that reason may be, it should be defined as terrorism.
The Battle of Algiers is must-see viewing for any American who makes a claim on either side of the issue regarding the morality of the war in Iraq. It is available on Netflix, so you have no excuse not to rent it. For those who are influenced by such things, you should also be aware that currently The Battle of Algiers is ranked #149 by IMDB users. Aside from the great lesson it teaches concerning the utter futility of attempting to occupy a nation foreign in every way from language to religion to sexuality, The Battle of Algiers is also a necessity as a lesson in how to make a movie. Instead of wasting your time renting Talladega Nights or going to the theater to see Rocky Balboa, do yourself one big helping of a solid by checking out The Battle of Algiers.
Print
Email
