The Battle of Algiers (1966) User Reviews (328)

Excellent movie

[Sigmund · 8/10 · 11 August 1999]

I ask myself why we never see these kind of movies on TV, instead of airing again and again the same old lethal weapons, jurassic parks, and other similar stuff? This is real cinema, this is why it is considered a form of art!

With the metaphysical crudeness of black and white, the dramatical facts of the Algerian rebellion against the French are accounted. The movie has the realistic appearance of a chronicle. And there are tons of intellectual honesty, too. I mean that there are no white hats VS black hats. You can see terrorists troubled as they are about to leave a bomb in a cafe. Policemen who struggle to save an arabian child from being killed by outraged crowd. Most of all, I like the frank words of Colonel Mathieu about the "bad methods" he's using during interrogations... Watch the movie and you will know.

I can't be objective !

[mbouchagour · 9/10 · 29 June 2015]

As Algerian, I watched this movie 2 times a year for 20 years, this movie is a part of my story. It helped me to put imagines and sounds to stories I heard from my teachers, cousins, as my grand-parents and my parents still can't talk about that horrible war.

By now, as I'm growing old, I understand that this movie is not the 'Truth', it was 'war', and in a war even good people can do horrible things. And I know what I'm talking about as I was there, in Algeria, during the 'Dark Decennial', while we were fighting against our own people whom turned terrorists in the name of Islam.

So for those who will watch this film, please just remember not to judge any of the parties : Algerian /or/ French. It was a war and no war is nice, people die, and those who survive will suffer. Films/art are a form of exorcism for that pain we keep silently inside.

I like this movie, because I saw tears in the beautiful green eyes of my grand mother every time she watched it and it always gave her a good opportunity to cry for my grand father that she lost during the war. I saw my father crying for his father that he never knew, and saw him also being closer to his mom because.

For me, this movie will always be a 'Good movie to watch in Family'

Masterpiece with Historical Accuracy

[jazzest · 8/10 · 4 October 2003]

Capturing a historic incident/moment with extraordinary accuracy makes a film truly beautiful, painful, and masterful. With the tradition of Italian Neo Realism and French New Wave - i.e. shooting in location and casting nonprofessional actors, The Battle of Algiers harshly seals the ugly realities of both French Legion and Algerian Guerillas - i.e. indiscriminate bombs, tortures, and scapegoats. Ennio Morricone composed one of his early successful scores.

No winners

[Chris Knipp · 23 February 2004]

Perhaps no other cinematic depiction of revolt against colonial rule is so detailed, vivid, and specific as the 1965 Battle of Algiers (La battaglia di Algeri, just reissued in a new print and having limited distribution in the US). It's a vivid and very specific recreation of the insurrection against the French in Algiers in the late Fifties that shows how the French systematically eradicated that insurrection. It's also a story repeated with variations in dozens of parts of the globe now, as then. But as I'm not the first to note, it's neither a partisan tract nor a user manual. It was therefore foolish of the Pentagon to watch it recently as if tips on how to control Iraqi `resistance'/'terrorism' were to be found in it, and it has been equally foolish of the Black Panthers or other revolutionaries to watch it seeking tactical information for their struggles. Those tactics did not succeed; but neither did the effort to quell the independence movement: the French won the battle but lost the war. A process that might have proceeded peacefully in a matter of months, takes years to happen. The film documents the sad foolishness of solving conflicts with violence, the maximum loss and suffering on both sides and the protraction of the inevitable outcome.

The insurrection The Battle of Algiers describes was effectively quelled through the leadership of the bold, methodical French Colonel Mathieu, who as we see succeeds in eliminating the organizational structure of the resistance, `triangle' by `triangle', using torture to ferret out names and locations of the autonomous `terrorists'/'partisans,' then killing the `head' of the `worm' their structure represents so it can't `regenerate.' Once this happens, after a merciless French campaign following a general strike, the sympathizers in the majority Algerian population are totally demoralized; but two years later a vigorous national independence movement `suddenly,' `spontaneously,' springs forth, and not long afterward France has to grant Algerian independence. It's at this point, rather than at the moment of Mathieu's momentary triumph, that the film ends.

Gillo Pontecorvo undertook his masterpiece after prodding from the resistance leader, Saadi Yacef, but he made a film equally sympathetic toward and critical of both sides. We see as much of the French dissection of the situation and repression of it (by the police chief, then Colonel Mathieu) as we see of the `terrorists'/'partisans' planning and execution of their actions. We see Colonel Mathieu as an appealing macho hero with moments of noble fair play, a shades-wearing, cigarette puffing veteran who moves around with clarity, honesty, and panache; he himself has a `partisan' background. The `terrorist'/'rebel' leaders are serious, intensely committed men of various types, from the sophisticated intellectual to the young firebrand. There are no `heroes' here; or, alternately, if you like, they're all `heroes.'

Mathieu appears before the press beside the captured `rebel'/'terrorist' leader - an unusual move in itself - and expresses his respect for the man's courage and conviction. The `rebel' leader in this scene is eloquent in defending `terrorist'/'rebellion' methods such as the use of baskets filled with explosives in public places. `Give us your bombs and we'll give you our baskets.' Mathieu for his part effectively explains to the journalists the necessity of torture to short circuit the `rebellion'/'terrorism'. After this explanation, the film, typically systematic at this point, begins showing a series of tortures of Algerians being carried out.

The first image we see in the film is the shattered face and body of the small, tortured Algerian man who's broken down and revealed where Ali `La Pointe,' the firebrand, the last remaining leader, is hiding. Then we see the `terrorist'/'terrorist' leader Ali and his closest supporters trapped like deer in their hideaway, their faces soft and beautiful. The splendid black and white photography works like William Klein's Fifties and Sixties images (he's one of the key visual commentators of that period stylistically) to powerfully capture the edgy soulfulness of the North African people and their gritty Casbah milieu. Much of the film's power comes from the way Pontecorvo was able to work, through Saadi Yacef, directly in the Casbah among the real people - as Fernando Meirelles worked in the favelas of Brazil recently with local boys to forge the astonishing City of God.

The voices, which are dubbed, as was the fixed Italian filmmaking style, work somewhat less effectively because of obvious disconnects between mouth and sound at times, but the French is so analytical and the Algerians' Arabic so exotic-sounding (even to a student of Arabic) that they work, and the insistent, exciting music composed by Pontecorvo himself in collaboration with Ennio Morricone is a powerful element in the film's relentless forward movement.

The fast rhythms of the editing are balanced by the stunning authenticity of the hundreds of Algerian extras who swarm across the screen: it's in the crowd scenes that The Battle of Algiers really sings. There are many superb sequences of street fighting, of people massing at checkpoints, of the French victims innocently assembled in public places; and like an exhilarating coda there is the scene of joyous victory as Algerians celebrate their independence in the last blurry moments. This is a film (again, like City of God) of almost intoxicating -- and nauseating -- violence, complexity, and fervor. Pontecorvo's accomplishment, though, is the way through showing the leaders analyzing and debating the action he freezes any impulse toward partisanship in its tracks. The evenhandedness of the coverage works a Brechtian `Alienation Effect' so you don't get caught up in rooting for one side or the other.

The sequence of three pretty Algerian women carrying out an operation is a particularly memorable one -- but only one among many. First they take off their burqas and cut their hair and doll themselves up French style and then they get past the checkpoint into the French quarter to leave handbags full of explosives in a bar, a dance club, and an airport lounge. Again close-ups of faces in the bar and the jive dancers with jaunty jabbing elbows in the club show a brilliant use of image and classic editing: first the innocent, vulnerable faces, then the explosions. Here our sympathies for the French victims are fully awakened. Another sequence of Algerians removing bodies from a building has all the power and sadness of Christ's Passion.

There's no point where as in a conventional thriller we feel excitement and sympathy for the perpetrator, because we see the cruelty of the perpetrator and the humanity of the victim every time. The Battle of Algiers is a final triumphant use of Italian cinematic neorealismo. The killing is observed neutrally, but with sadness, as part of a stupid game caused by ignorance and played out compulsively when a political settlement would have been infinitely better - a stupid game observed with astonishing zest.

Revived thirty-five years later in a new 35-mm. print, its grainy beauty pristinely vivid, The Battle of Algiers remains a superbly made machine that plays out the addictive game of `terrorism,' repression, torture, revolt, and full-fledged insurrection as effectively now as when it was first issued. Like any classic, it's of its time and of all time. There's a lesson here, but it's not for partisans or colonialists: it's for all people.

A savage war of peace.

[ryzzard · 10/10 · 21 February 2000]

An historian writing about the Algerian war against the French colonial authorities entitled his book "A Savage War of Peace". "The Battle of Algiers" provides many answers to that enigmatic title. It does not attempt to show us the entire war but centers on the city of Algiers. Even though you are told at the beginning that no documentary footage is used it is at times hard to believe as many of the images you see have a stark and often unsettling reality to them. Considering that this was a co production between Algeria and Italy the film is remarkable in that it does not turn itself a political tirade by taking sides. Instead the camera is a sort of neutral observer allowing us to witness events that spiraled from individual demonstrations to a full scale war of savage intensity. French officers who fought the Nazis a few years before degenerated into the mode of their former enemy while Algerians had no problems exploding bombs that would kill their own people. The camera shows no heros or villains but humanity in its darkest forms. This is a powerful film with superb direction and cinematography. It truly is one of a kind and once seen will never be forgotten.

It's hard to make a good movie, even harder 2 make a good movie wth historical authenticity bt the hardest of all is 2 make a good movie with non-professional actors who had..

[Fella_shibby · 10/10 · 3 August 2021]

..who had lived through the real battle.

Director Pontecorvo and cinematographer Marcello Gatti are true geniuses who amazingly filmed the movie in black and white and experimented with various techniques to give the film the look of newsreel and documentary film and that too making it an engrossing n enlightening experience.

Although the rebels lost the Battle of Algiers, they won the Algerian War n their freedom from the French colonial regime.

This movie showed the impact of colonialism on daily lives.

The guy who played Ali is noteworthy, one of the rebel female has a sharp contour cheeks and the character lil Omar will always be remembered.

The torture of the rebel prisoners is the most poignant relevance to the recent ongoings worldwide.

The ironical aspect is that of the Colonel, who himself suffered torture by the Nazis in a concentration camp, now torturing common civilians to obtain information.

Best historical film ever?

[Epaminondas · 10/10 · 27 December 2004]

Battle of Algiers might well be the best historical film ever. It stands out as a splendid work of art, as an extremely accurate depiction of a specific time and place, as a political hymn to independence, and as a thought-provoking philosophical reflection on violence, and on the relationship between ends and means.

It depicts the crucial years 1956-1957 in the Algerian war of independence from French colonial rule: the leaders of the independentist FLN decide to make Algiers a battlefield through strikes and terrorism in order to shake colonialism and to unite Algerians. The French respond to this urban guerilla with a ruthless control of space, separating European and Arab (the 'casbah') parts of the city, and with a brutal hunt of the FLN leaders through the torture of lesser militants. The French paratroops under gen. Massu, col. Bigeard and cdt. Aussaresses (blended in the film into a synthetic and fictitious character, col. Mathieu) eventually 'win' the battle of Algiers, but they end up 'losing' Algeria, as their repression has only fueled nationalism. The film therefore ends with the vision of Algerian crowds demanding independence ('Istiqlâl') as they march through the streets of Algiers in 1960.

While this is an accurate enough analysis of such a complex war (even though interestingly de Gaulle is absent from the film as it intends to show how independence was conquered, not handed from above by French authorities) it is also a metaphor, as the film works on many different levels.

It is a masterpiece of editing and cinematography. The combined use of space and music is stunning: when the french paratroops take possession of the Casbah, literally filling up the frame, gaining control of the streets, rooftops, hallways, courtyards, their superbly choreographed movements are underlined by a haunting theme by Morricone & director Pontecorvo. In these sequences he rivals not only Rossellini but Eisenstein.

It is also strongly influenced by the New Wave in its manner of filming faces of protagonists. Some of the most beautiful moments in the film (as the beginning in Ali's hiding hole, or the scenes before the explosions in the bars) consist of protagonists' faces, victims, perpetrators, bystanders, shot in close up, in a beautiful black and white, without comment or voice-over: their common humanity is shown as well as the determination, the inner flame of those fighting for independence.

I would disagree with other reviewers saying the movie is is unbiased: the film was commissioned and encouraged by the new-born Algerian state, and Yacef Saadi, a leader in the war of independence appears in prominent role. While the violence of both sides is coolly examined, the film justifies that of the Algerians, if only by showing (in a slightly dishonest way) that it always responds to the violence of the French. This question of precedence (who started to be inhuman?), though in the end quite pointless, has long poisoned mutual understanding between French and Algerian memories of the war. Another bias, explained by the FLN financing and staging, is the almost complete absence in the film of the middle ground, those neither in the terrorist FLN or in the paratroops, desiring to live in peace. They have existed, in both sides, as the examples of writer Albert Camus and his friend Mouloud Ferraoun show. This is quite understandable as it might not fit in the epic text depicted in realistic manner by Pontecorvo. However, in the film, the Algerians that are not committed to war are shown to be gangsters and pimps: this is a minor flaw of the film and its only touch of propaganda.

All that said, the film is a stunning visual, historical and ethical masterpiece. Sadly and ironically, it capture a fiery desire for liberty at the very time (1965) a military coup by Boumediene overthrew Ben Bella in Algeria, repressing liberties for the decades to come. Most of all, it is one of the most potent depictions of and reflections on violence (in the twin and extreme forms of terrorism and torture) to be seen on screen.

The most powerful image of the film remains the vision of a FLN militant broken by torture and forced to confess the hiding place of his chief. His haunted look, exhausted stance, empty eyes, grotesquely dressed in a paratroops' uniform, stand as an indictment of colonialism.

A Brilliant War Film...

[Spuzzlightyear · 10/10 · 7 September 1999]

Just when I thought I was starting to hate every movie in sight, I had the amazing priveledge to watch "the Battle Of Algiers" which is this amazing account of the oppression of the Algierian people by the French in the 1950's.

When the movie starts, we see 4 people hiding from the French Army. Then all of a sudden, this amazingly haunting music starts, and we're told the story in flashback of how the Algierian people tried to revolt against the French Soldiers.

From what I understand, the movie uses no documentary footage, which is amazing as some of the scenes in the movie must have taken a great deal of effort to produce., There are some pretty amazing crowd scenes and the explosion scenes are just breathtaking.

Also, I guess some of the actual revolutionaries are in the film as well. They are pretty hard to point out as all of the acting here is amazing, very realistic.

So, looking for a war movie? Dammit, don't go for Private Ryan, go to Algiers.

The Hypocrisy of Occupation...

[Xstal · 9/10 · 27 October 2020]

You will struggle to find a better argument to dissuade budding and existing occupiers of territory they have no legitimate claim to embarking on, or continuing with their despotic occupations of populations and their lands. The people of Algiers demonstrate as determined a will to overthrow their oppressors as their oppressors had demonstrated just over a decade previously in their fight to regain their freedom from tyranny. It is however, the gripping presentation of a reality into a thoroughly convincing and believable portrayal of that reality that grabs the audiences attention, giving it longevity, linking it to future conflicts, keeping it relevant. It leaves you questioning what you would have done under the same or similar circumstance, while juggling the difference in semantics between freedom fighter and terrorist and considering the situational similarities that currently exist in the world today.

learn from the history it conveys

[osteodude · 10/10 · 9 May 2005]

If one has not seen this film, one cannot begin to imagine Pontecorvo's extraordinary achievement. The acting is so natural and convincing that many viewers and even some critics assumed that the movie was a documentary. Only a master director could have taken this raw acting material and gotten such performances out of it. And despite his leftist viewpoint, Pontecorvo neither ridicules or demonizes the French, as does Michael Moore the Americans in his recent putative documentaries Bowling at Columbine and Farenheit 9-11 -– though I do a disservice to Pontecorvo to compare his work to that of Moore.

See this movie now that it has been released on DVD in the United States and learn from the history it so brilliantly conveys.

Photography yes, Character development no.

[drjgardner · 7/10 · 7 July 2019]

The film has some of the finest photography anywhere, making it look like a documentary instead of a film. But where it break down is in the character development.There is no one to whom we can feel much of a connection, partly because the film virtually follows no one and what we do get are mere sketches of people.

Powerful and Impressive Masterpiece

[claudio_carvalho · 10/10 · 31 May 2008]

In 1954, the National Liberation Front of Algiers shots many French policemen beginning a movement for the independence of their country; in return, the Chief of Police plants a bomb in the Arab quarter, killing many dwellers. The NLF sends three women with bombs to two bars and the Air France office in the European quarter, killing many people. The French government sends the military forces under the command of the abusive Colonel Mathieu (Jean Martin) that does not respect the human rights and uses torture to destroy the NLF command. In 1962, the Algerians finally achieve their aimed independence.

"La Battaglia di Algeri" is a powerful and impressive masterpiece about the fight that happened in Algiers in the period between 1954 and 1962 between the Algerian resistance and the French military forces. A couple of months ago I saw "Mon Colonel", another magnificent movie about this dark period of the mankind history. In both movies, we see no difference between the methods used by French in Algerian, or the Nazis in World War II, or the South American's dictatorships in the 60's, 70's and 80's, or by the American in Iraq, of the Chinese in Tibet. "Liberty, Fraternity, Equality for us, but torture and abuse of the human rights for the others" should be the correct sentence applicable to most nations. Therefore the writing of Machiavelli in "The Prince" about the behavior of the "princes" along history could be updated to the disrespect of human rights by powerful nations against weakest ones in the name of their best interests. This movie is impressive because it seems to be a documentary, with grainy cinematography and non-professional actors, in a perfect contemporary Neorealism. I am not familiar with the work of director Gillo Pontecorvo, but I really believe that this movie is his masterpiece. My vote is ten.

Title (Brazil): "A Batalha de Argel" ("The Battle of Algiers")

Scandalously relevant.

[FilmSnobby · 7/10 · 16 December 2004]

I disagree with the comments here stating that Gillo Pontecorvo's *The Battle of Algiers* is an even-handed account of the Algerian uprising in the Fifties. I had always thought, perhaps simple-mindedly, that the movie was clearly on the side of the denizens of the Kasbah. After all, the script was inspired by the life and activities of a FLN leader who also literally acts in an important role in the movie. Seeing the movie again -- via Criterion's absurdly lavish 3-disc (!) edition -- did nothing to alter my opinion, though it DID provoke some new perspective on why the movie may SEEM even-handed.

In two words? Jean Martin. He plays Colonel Mathieu, a former Resistance fighter and concentration camp veteran, now in the untenable position of winning a battle in a war doomed to failure for the French. Martin happens to be the only professional actor on the premises, and this probably explains his dangerous magnetism on screen and his ability to get us to immediately latch onto him for "identification". Everybody admires a good soldier, and Mathieu is exactly that. Cool, world-weary, competent, tactically brilliant, not above admiring his enemies, sophisticated. Everybody admires a good actor, also, and Martin gets all the good lines in *The Battle of Algiers*, which is really unfortunate, because we should be admiring the Algerians instead of this professional oppressor. This is the flaw in Pontecorvo's movie that, in my opinion, prevents it from being a true masterpiece. Col. Mathieu damn near unbalances the whole thing when he irrupts into the movie about a half-hour into it.

The problem is that there are no equally compelling Muslim figures in the film to balance off Mathieu. Jaffar, played by the above-mentioned real-life FLN leader Saadi Yacef, is an important character to the plot yet has no interiority. The young man playing the fiery "Ali La Pointe" LOOKS magnificent, but the script doesn't do much for him, other than to tell him to look angry. We don't get to know the three women who tart themselves up as French sophisticates in order to sneak past the checkpoints so that they can plant bombs in civilian areas. The teenage boys who shoot the gendarmes to death are just faces in the crowd. Pontecorvo's magisterial Neo-Realism manages to be both dry and diabolically partisan: after all, a nameless mass of people avoids having character flaws, and Pontecorvo and Yacef don't want to muddy the waters with unlikeable individuals. (But perhaps we don't want that either, as the Algerians' cause is eminently just.) If you want to be politically correct, you may congratulate Pontecorvo for refusing to present the Muslims in a traditionally melodramatic way, but this approach fails the test of great drama: development of character.

Having said all that, I also don't want to be misconstrued: *The Battle of Algiers* is a great and important film that is an almost mandatory viewing experience, given the shocking and scandalous similarities between what's going on in Arabia right now and the events of the Algerian uprising depicted in this film. It appears that officials at the Pentagon screened this movie for themselves a couple of years ago: one hopes that the scenes of torture in *The Battle of Algiers* didn't give them some kinky ideas for Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, though it's rather hard to imagine what other uses they could get out of the movie (besides, of course, the obvious lesson: don't mess with the Muslims). The scenes of torture, terrorism, and the loud clamoring for freedom will alternately raise blood pressures and stoke outrage, regardless of an individual's political bias. The cinematography by Marcello Gatti is a culmination of Neo-Realist and cinema-verite techniques, and the score by Ennio Morricone is groundbreaking.

Make an effort to see *The Battle of Algiers*; it will truly pay off. No film released in the Sixties has more relevance for us today than this one. 7 stars out of 10.

Battle of Algiers

[charleeni26 · 5/10 · 16 June 2009]

The Battle of Algiers is a war film based upon occurrences in the eight-year Algerian War against French colonial rule in North Africa. There were many scenes that were a little hard to watch because of all the people that were killed in the bombings while living their everyday lives. It was interesting to see how many men and women join together to seek revenge against another group. The director cleverly uses imagery to make the viewers see the insight of a terrorist mind. The attacks and battles are insane among one another, accusations towards the innocent. It was an interesting film to watch if you enjoy battle and war films. I personally don't do well in sitting still in these type of films but I did understand what the director portrays. I only recommend this film if you enjoy learning about history and wars.

Should be mandatory viewing for every American

[Tony43 · 30 January 2004]

"Battle of Algiers" is simply one of the greatest films every made. If film making can be about truth as well as fantasy, then a movie that includes a title card telling viewers that there is not one foot of documentary or newsreel footage in it must deserve viewing.

"Battle of Algiers" contains scenes that seem so real, you suspect that they couldn't have been staged. When three Algerian women come down from the Casbah to plant bombs in the French quarter of the city, you can almost cut the tension with a knife. When the bombs go off, you think they must have been real bombs. And when you see the devastation they leave in their wake, you cannot fail to be moved. The massive rebellion in the streets at the end of the film also seems so real, you sit wondering how many extras must have been injured filming those scenes.

"Battle of Algiers" combines brilliant photography, crisp direction, an intriguing plot and some very fine acting. Throw in a terrific music score, splendid editing, impressive special effects and the best example ever of docudrama style production and you have a masterpiece of film making.

But film making is not nearly as important as human life and no film in general release today says more about America's current involvement in the middle east and many other parts of the world than this picture about the French in Algeria, made more than three decades ago.

Every American should view this film, then think about our current occupation of Iraq.

the two hours go fast

[christopher-underwood · 8/10 · 29 August 2022]

Although most of Gillo Portecorvo's films are usually documentaries and in this fantastic one it is clearly reconstructed and with the grainy newsreel looks as if it is real. The two hours go fast and because the story is so well told that we watch the amazing streets and alleys and steps of the wretched white buildings and the Casbah. There is also the rather brutal French occupiers and their torture methods. The Italian style we know as neorealist and it works so well that we think that even of the thousands of people we can hardly imagine it was not really we have actual seen in the streets. It is all so terrible that we begin that maybe the bombings and shootings by the Muslims have our sympathies and we certain have the wonderful music of Morricone.

Much Like Today

[Hitchcoc · 10/10 · 16 March 2010]

As this film unfolds, we have a sense that things are happening before our very eyes. The movie is so documentary-like as to seem like a stationary camera has been set up in the midst of turmoil. The French imperialists are the reason all this is happening. Obviously, years of "rule" make the day to day existence hard to change. Do all the Algerians want an overthrow of French rule? Probably not. Maybe not even a majority. As the rebels blow up restaurants and airport waiting rooms, the police are torturing the rebels. It becomes a cesspool of the lowest form of human degradation. And yet, what else can be the answer when a single entity has such a foothold and ultimate military power. As is usually the case, attrition does the job. With our current situation in the Mideast and Afghanistan, will we find ourselves reproducing what happened to the Russians? Unfortunately, there are no easy answers because the fight is against oppression. The kicker is that there is so much human and economic expense involved in these situations that often it takes centuries. We need to ask ourselves what is gained and one cannot put a price on the human soul. This is a masterpiece of movie-making should be seen by any who think revolutions are clean and the enemy is easy to define.

Powerful , award-winning flick depicting the uprising against French Colonial rule

[ma-cortes · 8/10 · 3 August 2023]

An impressive and historical film in semi-documentary style . Set when the Front de Libération Nationale (FLN) is leading the resistance in Algeria against their French rulers , the FLN that the colonial authorities believe, or want to believe, comprise only a small minority of the Muslim Algerian population in wanting Algerian independence. Subsequently , specifically violent incidents taking place in the battle in Algiers -between 1954 and the final time of independence in 1962- are introduced . The final scene happens some time later in 1960. There is a riot going on with soldiers shooting into the crowds. Finally , the Évian Accords were a set of peace treaties signed on 18 March 1962 in Évian-les-Bains, France, by France and the Provisional Government of the Algerian Republic, the government-in-exile of FLN, which sought Algeria's independence from France . The Accords ended the 1954-1962 Algerian War with a formal cease-fire proclaimed for 19 March and formalized the status of Algeria as an independent nation and the idea of cooperative exchanges between the two countries . The movie ends with the captain narrating that on July 2, 1962 a new nation of Algeria was born . The French Colonel...who was forced even to torture ! . One of the many women...who stopped at nothing to win! The Algerian Street Boy...who became a rebel hero!. The Revolt that Stirred the World!

This seminal semi-documentary style film was well directed by Gillo Pontecorvo , who also participated in the script and the music (in this last aspect, advised by the great maestro Ennio Morricone) . The main characters were represented by Brahim Hadjadj , Yacef Saâdi and Jean Martin who was the only professional actor . The Battle of Algiers was inspired by the 1962 book Souvenirs de la Bataille d'Alger, an FLN military commander's account of the campaign, by Saadi Yacef . Yacef wrote the book while he was held as a prisoner of the French , and it served to boost morale for the FLN and other militants . After independence, the French released Yacef , who became a leader in the new government. The Algerian government backed adapting Yacef's memoir as a film . Salash Baazi , an FLN leader who had been exiled by the French, approached Italian director Gillo Pontecorvo and screenwriter Franco Solinas with the project . To meet the demands of film, The Battle of Algiers uses composite characters and changes the names of certain persons . For example , Colonel Mathieu is a composite of several French counterinsurgency officers , especially Jacques Massu . Saadi Yacef has said that Mathieu was based more on Marcel Bigeard , although the character is also reminiscent of Roger Trinquier . Accused of portraying Mathieu as too elegant and noble, screenwriter Franco Solinas denied that this was his intention . He said in an interview that the Colonel is "elegant and cultured, because Western civilization is neither inelegant nor uncultured". For The Battle of Algiers , Pontecorvo and cinematographer Marcello Gatti filmed in black and white and experimented with various techniques to give the film the look of newsreel and documentary film . The effect was so convincing that American releases carried a notice that "not one foot" of newsreel was used.

Pontecorvo's use of fictional realism enables the movie "to operate along a double-bind as it consciously addresses different audiences" . The film makes special use of television in order to link western audiences with images they are constantly faced with that are asserted to express the "truth". The film seems to be filmed through the point of view of a western reporter, as telephoto lenses and hand-held cameras are used, whilst "depicting the struggle from a 'safe' distance with French soldiers placed between the crowds and camera" .

La battaglia di Algeri (1966) is an excellent film which makes most political films seem intellectual by comparison in its use o of non-professional actors , realistic violence , gritty cinematography and a boldly propagandistic sense of social outrage . The motion picture was competently directed by Gillo Pontecorvo . Although Gillo made fewer than 20 films , he is regarded as one of Italy's greatest directors . He moved to France in 1938 to escape Italy's fascist racial laws . He eventually returned to Italy and led a Resistance brigade during WWII. After the war, he studied chemistry and worked as a journalist before becoming a film director; he started out making documentaries . His first feature film was ¨The Wide Blue Road¨. Pontecorvo was born into a Jewish family , as he directed ¨Kapo¨ that was one of the first films about the theme of Jewish holocaust and one of the more realistic in its recreation . Gillo subsequently directed this successful ¨Battle of Algiers¨ and ¨Queimada¨ with Marlon Brando and his final feature movie : ¨Ogro¨ , later on , he made Documentaries and Shorts . This ¨The Battle of Algiers¨ won the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival and was nominated for three Academy Awards (in non-consecutive years, a unique achievement) : Best Foreign Language Film in 1967, and Best Screenplay (Gillo Pontecorvo and Franco Solinas) and Best Director (Gillo Pontecorvo) in 1969.

Insurrection in the Casbah.

[jlspenc-84630 · 10/10 · 7 May 2023]

When Gillo Pontocorvo passed away in 2006, obituaries worldwide eulogized him as the man "who directed THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS", and did so for a very good reason. Fifty-seven years later it still remains the most incendiary political film of all time. Legend has it that prior to America's invasion of Iraq in 2003, THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS was privately screened at the Pentagon, supposedly as an instruction on how not to win over the hearts and minds of the people they're occupying. If that was their purpose, it certainly didn't work, because we all know how that debacle worked out.

The foundation for THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS lays with a nonfiction account of the Algerian War for Independence written by Saadi Yacef, a former resistance fighter who was released from prison in 1962 following France's relinquishment of their North African colony. Almost immediately, Algeria's self-rule government was interested in immortalizing their struggle onto celluloid. Because they had no homegrown filmmaking talent to speak of, they approached Pontocorvo in Italy to see if he wanted to direct.

During the Second World War, Pontocorvo was a Marxist member of Italy's Communist party who fought against Mussolini's Fascists. When the war was over, he drifted towards filmmaking, impressed with the neo-realist movement burgeoning in his country. The Algerian government felt that his anti-colonial beliefs, coupled with his flair for docudramas, made him a logical choice to direct THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS.

Pontocorvo's screenwriter worked closely with Yacef, who was enjoying a taste of celebrity outside of Algeria due to his involvement with the movie. In addition to the script, Yacef also served as a co-producer and even took on an acting role (as Jafar). Taking a page from Vittorio DeSica's BICYCLE THIEVES, Pontocorvo chose to avoid using professional actors in favor of people with no acting experience at all. That included Brahim Haggiag, who played the lead role of Ali LaPointe.

Movie watching experience has taught me that, for legal reasons, the names of real-life people whose lives are depicted are given pseudonyms. Or the protagonist is a composite character of more than one person. Therefore, I was quite surprised to learn that Ali LaPointe was, in fact, a real person. The first scene in THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS is in a room where French paratroopers have tortured a prisoner into revealing Ali's hideout. They descend into an apartment where the fugitive is hiding inside a secret room behind a false wall.

Unlike the other Allies, France never found peace in the years after the Second World War. Locked into a bitter conflict with the Viet Minh, by 1954 they were on the verge of losing Vietnam (or Indochina), which had been a colonial outpost of theirs for over a century. And now, just across the Mediterranean, the French were being challenged in Algeria by the rebels' National Liberation Front (or FLN), who were seeking the same results as the Viet Minh. What followed was a bloody eight year struggle between France and the FLN over who was going to rule Algeria.

After the opening credits, THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS flashes back three years to 1954, where Ali LaPointe is a parolee whose juvenile delinquency has graduated into adult criminal activity. The Algerian capital city is awash with French nationals and expats who bask in humiliating the natives, and when Ali is mercilessly taunted by a young student, he responds by bloodying his tormentor's nose.

After serving a five month sentence for assault, Ali is approached by a boy acting as a liaison for the outlawed FLN. He's instructed to be at a specific location where an Arab woman will supply him with a revolver to shoot a patrolling French policeman. Doing as he's ordered, Ali pulls the trigger, only to discover the chamber is empty. This was a test by the FLN to test his loyalty and rule out his being an informer.

Passing the test, Ali is recruited by Jafar, a guerilla lieutenant, to help organize revolt. But before they can take on the colonials, they must first clean house among Algiers' Arab population by eliminating any potential traitors among the locals. The usual suspects include drug addicts, prostitutes, pimps, and other purveyors of vice whose conduct runs contrary to Islamic code.

By June of 1956, the insurgents are ready to strike. In one day alone, several French police officers are gunned down in separate incidents. The prefect responds to the armed insurrection by setting off a bomb in the Casbah neighborhood, killing many innocent people including children. The authorities have now crossed the Rubicon by targeting civilians, so now it's all out war! The FLN retaliated by planting explosives in cafés, nightclubs, and other public venues frequented by Europeans.

Realizing that that the gloves are now off, Paris is well aware that their police are outnumbered by an outraged populace that wants the occupiers out of Algeria. The paratroopers are sent in to quell the rebellion and restore order to Algiers....even if it means creating new enemies. With the noose slowly tightening around their operations, the insurgents risk losing the battle of Algiers. But since international opinion is squarely against France, Algeria is in a good position to win the war.

Pontocorvo shot THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS in a grainy, harsh tone of black & white to create a newsreel effect. Of all the excellent moments in the movie, I thought his most arresting was when three Arab women set aside their traditional Muslim clothing, then apply lipstick and mascara, brush their hair, and don casual dress attire, all to make them appear more European. Carrying explosive devices inside their handbags, the ladies are easily able to pass through the various checkpoints and nonchalantly plant the bombs at the designated public places. The percussive tempo (by composer Ennio Morricone) which accompanies the gals create a sense of tension and dread that will come to tragic fruition.

THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS earned universal acclaim upon its release, winning the Golden Bear at the Venice Film Festival. Unsurprisingly, the only nation not to sing its praises was France, who were not ready to have their wounds reopened so soon after granting independence. Particular irritated were far-right groups with ties to the OAS and other paramilitary types. Jean-Marie LePen remains a fierce critic of THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS, which only reinforces the conviction that Pontocorvo's depiction was 100% correct.

Paradoxically provocative and neutral, the impact of THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS continues to be far-reaching. The Black Panthers, the I. R. A., and P. L. O. All allegedly copied some of the guerilla tactics portrayed in the picture. Among Pontocorvo's peers in the director's chair, Stanley Kubrick, Werner Herzog, Costa Gavros, and Ken Loach were huge admirers. Contemporary filmmakers Spike Lee, Oliver Stone, and Steven Soderbergh appear on DVD supplements to explain how much THE BATTLE OF ALGIERS influenced their various particular styles. If any potential foreign occupiers had any common sense, they'd watch this movie before embarking on some stupid Napoleonic folly.🔚

We aren't madmen or sadists, gentlemen. We are soldiers and our only duty is to win.

[lastliberal · 9/10 · 14 March 2010]

This film received Oscar nominations in 1967 and 1969. First time I have ever seen that.

It was nominated in 1967 for Best Foreign Language Film, losing to A Man and a Woman; and was nominated again in 1969, when Gillo Pontecorvo was nominated for Best Director, and he was nominated along with Franco Solinas for Screenplay.

It shows up on many Top Ten lists as it illustrates the timeless march of men fighting for their basic human rights and freedom. It could be a film about the West Bank or Afghanistan, or any other locale where men struggle to be free. It just happened here to occur in Algeria. This is a timeless film about freedom and the horrors of war.

One of the interesting aspects of this film is how real it looks and feels. This is done without using stock footage. It was filmed that way, and presents a picture of war that is hard to stomach. It will make all other so-called "war movies" seem like cartoons.

Jean Martin as Col. Mathieu was outstanding, especially when he was defending the use of Bush-Cheney tactics to defeat the Algerians.

One has to realize watching this film that the Algerians didn't like being occupied by the French any more than the French like being occupied by the Nazis or Iraq likes being occupied by America.

Great and important movie

[SnoopyStyle · 9/10 · 21 February 2014]

It's from 1954 onwards in Algeria and there's revolution in the air. This docudrama takes on history from both sides. Col. Mathieu leads the french forces. They are using all methods to try to stop this french colony from the hands of the revolutionaries. On the other side, Ali is an illiterate hustler always in trouble with the cops. He is recruited into the revolutionaries after spending 5 months in prison.

This is most notable for how realistic this movie is. Taking the era into account, this is taking realism to the next level. It is so real that everybody should be reminded that this is all fictional. This was shot in the real locations, but all of it was staged. It is unflinching in its depiction. That is its greatest asset.

I don't understand war

[yutofilm · 7/10 · 14 June 2011]

As a Japanese student I am not old enough to remember my country's own experience with war and after watching this movie I am glad that I know little of war. It is different than many of the American war movies that seem to glorify battles. This movie does not make a statement about whether war is good or not, it just shows the sadness of war.

Based on the historical Battle of Algiers it shows the real cost of war and the price of freedom. In using the boy who helps Ali by reading for him the director shows how his generation is literally needed to help the cause, but the metaphor is about how the movement needs the younger generation to succeed. The director does not really concentrate on the ultimate outcome of the war, just the horror of the battle and that it pretty unique for a war film.

This film is still relevant because so many countries around the world are involved in their own fight for freedom. It is not saying war is good, just that it is tough and the way that they are fought is very sad.

astonishing...

[pecci · 10/10 · 6 September 1998]

Just a few words for 'La battaglia di Algeri'. Watch it! It's astonishing, fast, dramatic, crude, real, touching, historically accurate. To everybody who wants to know more about Algerian civil war: buy it, find it..!

Significant historically, though its cinematic effects are not especially strong

[steiner-sam · 7/10 · 21 November 2022]

It's an interpretation of the battle in 1956-1957 between members of the Front de libération nationale (FLN) and French troops in the early years of the Algerian War of 1954-1962. It primarily follows one of the FLN leaders and the French Colonel who led the paratroopers brought in to crush a general strike and to "behead" the FLN leadership.

Colonel Philippe Mathieu (Jean Martin) leads the paratroops against the FLN leaders in Algiers, who include El-Hadi Jaffar (Saadi Yacef) and Ali La Pointe (Brahim Haggiag). The tactics of both sides are shown realistically but not excessively graphically. These include bombings and assassinations by the FLN and violence against demonstrators by the French paratroopers. Captured second-tier FLN fighters receive "enhanced interrogation" that is more hinted at than shown, and some suffer death by suicide. Threats to blow up the houses in which the FLN is hiding are made and carried out.

Although fictional, some have described the film as a documentary on urban guerrilla warfare. Its style, black-and-white photography, and great use of cast extras underscore this sense. The film's final minutes describe how the larger Algerian War played out.

This film is significant historically, though its cinematic effects are not especially strong by modern standards. The acting is OK but somewhat flat, given the documentary style.

Terrorism

[nanana-batman · 5/10 · 15 December 2011]

I'll be the first one to knock this film off its pedestal. Though, it may be under the context of which I was watching this film that made me unable to connect with it. 1966 neo-realistic film that had a very specific feel to it. Something I could appreciate was that no actual documentary footage was used in this film, but some scenes sure felt very real in a way that put the viewer right in the middle of the action. Based on the Algerian revolution of 1962. But the grit and grim of this film never brought me to sympathize for the rebel Algerians. I never managed to be won over by the "others". At least not whilst bombing innocent civilians. I felt no remorse for any of the fugitives and therefore couldn't find myself enjoying this film.