Although there are many directors in France who use this theme, the glorious years is the first film to shoot this theme in the way of modern popular movies.
At the beginning of the film, while those production credits were still rolling, director Bouchareb inserted clips from historical documents that Algeria was playing on TV at the time. Those clips and images were originally used to make colonial postcards or to show to the French, which also created the impression of Algeria. In the clip, there are vegetable markets, women dancing, etc., showing the residents of the colony both comfortable and exotic, and showing their differences with French culture. They were more like a crowd of condescending watchers from France. And this impression is subverted by the brave and desperate colonial soldiers in the later films. From this point of view, the purpose of this clip is twofold, the first is to show the injustice of the French in their historical records of colonial soldiers, and the second is to set the stage for the film, telling the audience that this film will uncover for you The curtain behind history tells you the truth!
Bouchareb said in an interview that he spent a lot of time looking for historical records of those soldiers, but he found how difficult it was, and how little they were recorded in history. The French can be said to deliberately want to obliterate them.
In fact, this is also clearly shown at the end of the movie, when in the end the colonial soldiers defended the town I forgot what it was called, sacrificing everyone except the corporal, the French soldiers just happened to arrive and took the credit. The French soldiers took pictures with the villagers, but no one cared about the colonial soldiers. Only when the corporal walked away silently, several villagers gave him some sporadic applause.
In fact, at this point, I think the director also wants to show a certain degree of objectivity and pertinence. Those colonial soldiers are not completely disrespected, at least, the eyes of the people are sharp, but their strength is meager.
In the movie, every time the soldiers walk through a place, there will be a small opening, a long shot, shooting a piece of land with the place name and time written on it. As the clouds slowly drift away, black and white turns into color, transporting the audience into the world of History 9. This scene drives the audience's perception, giving the audience a more realistic sense of being brought into history. At the same time, it also tells the audience that there is some history, not just history, it still affects those colonial soldiers who are still alive.
Like the colonial soldiers whose pensions were stopped.
And in the end, the corporal opened the door of the small apartment by himself, and there was only a simple bed inside, no relatives, no company, just him, sitting there, waiting for a hopeless tomorrow. This is in sharp contrast to the ambition and vision he showed in the opening film, and his fearlessness on the battlefield. The shocking contrast further reflects the injustice of the French government and the calming heart when their dreams were shattered. Broken despair.
But what is gratifying is that after French President Jacques Chirac and his wife saw the film, they were deeply touched, so on September 27, 2006, at Chirac's suggestion, the colonial soldiers should be treated return it to them. (That is, the same treatment and pensions as French soldiers).
It also created the halo and success of the glorious years in the political stance.
But that's also why I think it's a sly movie.
In fact, according to history, Algeria and many colonies are not that great. I won't go into details. In short, people can't be so stupid, and human nature is not divided by ethnicity. What are the soldiers fighting for? And is this how the French treat them? In fact, it is just to take out the most touching part, the part that is connected with reality, and shoot it out. It is just a bridge in history, with no antecedents, no consequences, and no distractions. But he makes you believe that the glory days are true and objective, and even the documents at the beginning of the film give people the feeling of a documentary. I have to say that the first impression of Bouchareb's film is very objective, without overly exaggerated performances, and it makes people feel that he is speaking with facts rather than inciting the audience. But in fact, there is no objectivity in film.
The director secretly worked hard on these political issues, and
finally, he got the honor he expected.
All in all, I don't think it's a good-looking movie, and its expression is very popular, and it is even accused of being too popular, superficial, and imitating Hollywood. The story isn't really that new. But in the end, it got such a halo and evaluation. I have to praise the director's wisdom for grasping people's psychology so well, and the historical real materials used in the story and the director's effort in finding these details are also worth seeing. of.
View more about Days of Glory reviews
