I chose the alternate film called “No Man’s Land.” A very fitting title for the setting of the film which portrayed the war between the Serbians and the Bosnians during the 1990’s Balkan conflict. Although the setting of the film took place in one place (middle trench
), I thought the film displayed the frustration of both sides regarding the war. Judging from the film’s title, I expected a lot of blood and guts and many battle wounds from both sides. However, it was quite contrary. The movie depicted forced companionship of two enemies trapped in the middle trench between enemy lines. The two found themselves at odds on several issues, such as who started the war. In the meanwhile, a second Bosnian solider that was booby trapped with and improvised explosive device (IED) was miraculously discovered alive. Initially, I thought the two enemies were going to work together to attract the help of the UN to defuse the explosive. However, the frustration of both gentlemen ultimately got the best of them that led to death. I though the film was excellently directed to keep the audience’s attention. It was a great example of how hate can block progress. Overall, I thought the film deserved a good review. It provided comic while implementing historical events of the Balkan conflict.
I chose the review by James Berardinelli from an internet search. I totally agree with his review of the film. He best described it as a film that had no heroes, just victims. The film did a great job of depicting the media and the UN role in helping the conflict. The media’s threat to reveal to the public the military’s lack of intervention caused military assistance. However, the media was out smarted to believe that aid was rendered. I thought the movie delivered well, putting the conflict on a world stage.
), I thought the film displayed the frustration of both sides regarding the war. Judging from the film’s title, I expected a lot of blood and guts and many battle wounds from both sides. However, it was quite contrary. The movie depicted forced companionship of two enemies trapped in the middle trench between enemy lines. The two found themselves at odds on several issues, such as who started the war. In the meanwhile, a second Bosnian solider that was booby trapped with and improvised explosive device (IED) was miraculously discovered alive. Initially, I thought the two enemies were going to work together to attract the help of the UN to defuse the explosive. However, the frustration of both gentlemen ultimately got the best of them that led to death. I though the film was excellently directed to keep the audience’s attention. It was a great example of how hate can block progress. Overall, I thought the film deserved a good review. It provided comic while implementing historical events of the Balkan conflict.I chose the review by James Berardinelli from an internet search. I totally agree with his review of the film. He best described it as a film that had no heroes, just victims. The film did a great job of depicting the media and the UN role in helping the conflict. The media’s threat to reveal to the public the military’s lack of intervention caused military assistance. However, the media was out smarted to believe that aid was rendered. I thought the movie delivered well, putting the conflict on a world stage.
