"The Battle of Algiers" (Language - French/Arabic) (1966) - Movie Classics

When it comes to presenting the struggles went through by a nation for their Freedom against the colonizing country, there will be a tendency felt by the audience that the demarcation between the good and the bad. The Freedom seekers as good while the one denying and trying to imply the order and do the job the government assigns as bad. Giving out an unbiased and neutral report without the tendency of taking sides on the events which led to the freedom of Algeria is monumental work and “The Battle of Algiers” directed by Gillo Pontecorvo does that and instigate the viewers to have their thought on it.

The movie starts off with the paratroopers of French government obtaining information from an Algerian by interrogation to know the whereabouts of an important member of the rebel organization. The paratroopers seize a building and there they give a final warning sign to the hiding members of the rebel organization to surrender. From there, the movie shifts off to the past wherein they give the birth and growth of the FLN (National Liberation Front) which has led to the seizure of the building with the members in it. The story does not concentrate on speaking out the events through a character, but it takes the mode of single person shoot and documentary style to exactly provide the feel of both the parts of a city encountering violence in the most brutal way. The doubt of walking out of home and coming back alive becomes a question in both the part of the towns. The motion picture slowly builds up the momentum as the rebel group does. When there is sufficient ammunition with solid foundation to the story as that of the freedom revolt, the members of the audience witness the blood shed by the innocent lives on both sides to achieve the freedom at any cost.

The style of the movie making is magnificent in every term. Even though the movie is made in black and white in 1966, the clarity and quality of the images is picture perfect. It seems so far ahead of time wherein the current technically advanced movie industry there is a failure in bringing out the same clarity. The editing is slick and realistic. The utilization of the documentary, narration and cinematic sequences is employed in the improvisation of the story forms the niche of the movie as far as technical department. As per the performances of the actors/actresses go, Jean Martin as Colonel Mathieu stands out clearly and he made the character so easy. His convincing and realistic depiction of the current scenario of what really the battle is impressive. Brahim Hadjadj as Ali La Pointe as the tough and angry young man is brilliant as well. A special mention goes here for the dialogues tearing out from the native language in to the international language kindles the questions in viewers’ point of perception towards violence.

The focal point of the movie is the conversation which happens in between one of peer leaders of FLN and Ali La Pointe during the one week of unarmed strike of the Algerians. The discussion of the violence and how it benefits and destroys for the war of independence and the act of individuals bringing favourable results than a small set of rebels is pinching the realism during their conversation. The second punch line in the movie is the press conference with Colonel Mathieu where in he brutalizes the press with the truth.

Violence has never benefited anyone in long terms. As Colonel Mathieu says it as “vicious circle”, it goes hard and comes back even more brutal, excruciating the situation. Blood shed due to the acts of violence is one of the hurtful and never ending process which results only in more blood than the ultimate destiny of peace. A peace can never be attained by the act of violence and brutality. The peace and freedom what the Algerians try to accomplish through attacking and the same act of violence by the French to maintain their colony and attain normalcy in the society.

The movie puts the viewer as a spectator and never allowing them to mingle either with the Algerians or the French. The purpose of it is to think of what can be got out of it rather than pointing fingers. There is no doubt that the battle sparked the hunger of freedom in every individual but it also did spark the explosion timer of hatred in each other’s mind. Disabling the bomb of hatred can only be achieved through the act of forgiveness than violence. The history has always witnessed that violence has created only hatred and never have achieved the real concept of peace. The movie just does not unravels the time capsule of those truth in which the audience witness the agitation, hatred and the blood shed during the battle of Algiers but the realization of the people of Algeria, the concept of freedom. The freedom, which made them fight again as a country after losing the battle and resurrect to attain it.

“The Battle of Algiers” is more than a movie. It is the history and current scenario wherein how a human being needs to fight among them to get something which always is within them. The resultants of the movie are the undeniable fact of violence causing hatred but also the uselessness of acts of regret rather than solution. The creators of this movie want the audience to think and take a moment before any action of aggression because they have witnessed the consequences of it in, “The Battle of Algiers”.