Days of Glory (2006) User Reviews (73)

And the award for Best Foreign Language Film goes to...

[Flagrant-Baronessa · 8/10 · 28 November 2006]

France 1943. Indigenous Moroccan soldiers – still wet behind the ears – are called in to the 17th infantry to defend their 'motherland' against the ongoing German occupation. Their goodness and patriotism are unmistakable and Saïd (Jamel Debbouze) remarks how "If I liberate a country, it's my country, even if I've never even been there." Here is a good-hearted contingent of North African soldiers who hope to catch some of the victory's glory, but whom are repeatedly shifted to the backseat because of their name, skin and accent.

There was no way I would miss a film that French president Chirac cites as the sole reason he immediately rectified the pension plan for indigenous veterans, offering them the promise of equality for the law for the first time. Indigènes is puffed full of political correctness with heavy-handed treatment of salient issues such as racism, inequality and intolerance. But we do not mind, because the film so rigorously establishes a brotherhood feeling with our triumvirate of central characters that we find ourselves completely engrossed in their struggle, rooting for them, laughing with them and often crying because of them.

In the front row for sympathy sits Saïd, Yassir, Messaoud and Abdelkader, all inhabited by capable unknown actors with great emotional transparency. Saïd is a kind of clumsy teddy bear who kisses his mom goodbye in Morocco and immediately botches his way through combat, even choking on the victorious scotch and fumbling with the token victor's cigar when the first battle has been won. These are heartbreakingly real people. Arguably even the hard-edged Sergeant elicits a warm response when he unflinchingly takes on the father-role for the contingent – he is rough, harsh, cynical but fair. The male ensemble won the Cannes award for 'Best Actor' earlier this year, which solidifies their collective likability and serve as a mark of the film's warm cast centre. If you want to nitpick, it needs to be said that some moments (such as key death scenes), although tragic, inexplicably lack the propelling poignancy to elicit tears. Why this is I do not know, but it ought to be attributed to the film and not the superb performances.

When the squad of wet puppies make their way across the motherland, they are faced with two disturbances: the internal conflicts that arise in the army when it becomes apparent that North African soldiers are not given the same treatment as native French (no tomatoes, no weekend leaves, no promotions and no glory) and the gruesome reality on the battlefield. The former is captured safely but compellingly through little rants, intense stares and cries of "Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité!" all in the token French political spirit. The latter, however, is Indigènes' true goldmine. No description will do the warfare sequences justice; they need to be seen. Think Call of Duty plugged into the silver screen, with epileptic zooming, fast-paced action, gory reality, humming rocket launchers and one massive sense of immediate danger. It nearly puts Steven Spielberg's warmovie fare to shame.

The cinematography channels one storyline from 'Babel', from the epic aerial shots of the craggy hills and desert-laden plains of Morocco to a juxtaposition of lush French soil. Even the French sheets are a great source of awe for the North African soldiers. Much like 'Babel', the film never shies away from blending equal amounts of Arabic and French into the dialogue, something that reinforces the realism.

Indigènes (2006) is an excellent film with strong performances and a strong, political core. Its flaws, however apparent, are generally marginal. The one thing that jumped out and grabbed me, striking me as below average, was the hammy and inexcusably hackneyed score. When Arabic soldiers are fighting for their lives and bleeding in the process, slapping on a dutiful ethnic score that sings and wails like it means business, the film is just preaching to the choir. If I hear an "epic, ethnic" score in a movie like this again, I will probably go out and kill someone – either the Arab who is singing, or the stupid Westerner who thinks mainstream audiences need everything spelled-out for them with this mandatory music inclusion.

Aside from this minor misstep, Indigènes is a worthy merit to France's resumé of films, one that will surely be a frontrunner for the Best Foreign Language Film Award at the Oscars next year. Nevermind that this is an excellent and real film, the competent political notions may just be enough to tip things over in its favour.

8 out of 10

A Nutshell Review: Days of Glory

[DICK STEEL · 8/10 · 11 October 2006]

So you've done a great piece of work, and are awaiting your just rewards. Somehow along the way, someone else, by colour, creed, or connections, get all the recognition that you're due credit for. You feel frustrated, but you think of your rice bowl, and decide to grit your teeth and bear it, calling it just another day, secretly longing for a time where you are empowered to do something about it.

In the liberation of France during WWII, North African men were recruited and enlisted in the French army in the fight against the Nazis. Why do they do it? One reason is to escape poverty, and the holding on to the glimmer of hope that they can be accepted, when the war is over, as equals based on their fight for the "motherland". These soldiers, mujahedeens, fought hard, often being in the frontline, but always overlooked when it comes to recognition of basic military welfare and promotions, not that these rewards will cost an arm or a leg, nor are the fighters so hard up for them. All they're asking for was fair treatment, but all they got was discrimination.

Yes, and that is the pain. WWII movies are aplenty, but Days of Glory offered a unique look at the battles by a group of men, for what they deem their motherland and will defend with their blood, and what more, for a land of people who do not see them as equals. Loving someone who does not love you back, sounds familiar? And it's not just love, but sworn allegiance to protect at all costs.

The movie is well paced and straddled moments of action and quiet contemplation with aplomb. Credit must go to the ensemble cast of actors who play the warriors of North Africa, as they battle both the enemies on French soil, as well as enemies of men's heart. They grapple with trying to remain rational in their reason(s) to do what they're doing.

At times, watching this movie made me think about the recent flurry of mails to the press about foreign talent and the issue of citizenship, about NS obligations and whether PRs will flee at the first signs of trouble, or stand shoulder to shoulder with citizens (also, who are those who will flee?) in defending our land. What are the issues of contention, discrimination against, or general presumptions about foreigners here?

Those expecting all out battle scenes might be disappointed. In truth the movie's never about the glorification of gore, violence and war - most scenes aren't really blood splattering to draw in the crowds. Instead, if you'd prefer moments where you can think out loud about the issues presented, then this is for you. However, the final battle would please action fans, as it is well choreographed and executed, and you feel both the pain and victory from a bunch of tightly knit soldiers trying their very best to defend a small town, in a samurai- seven-ish sort of way, also reminiscent of Saving Private Ryan's somehow.

If you've missed this during the French Film Festival, don't fret. I believe this movie is also slated for general release. Keep a look out for it!

War and cultures

[tommyant · 8/10 · 6 February 2007]

The movie takes the viewer on a trip back to the second world war, showing how parts of the Arabic population fought with the French colonists for their freedom, against Nazi Germany trying to occupy Africa. As the movie evolves, other aspects than the fight for freedom and the brutality of war emerges. The viewer is reminded that the the social identity of the white bourgeoisie class and the stereotypes that follows not emerged with the current world of terrorism. Questions of power, humanity, religion, racism, love and honour follows the viewer through this exciting, emotional and realistic movie. Along with the plot and acting in this piece of work, the critical viewer should be satisfied.

A great topic--but a curiously uninvolving one as well.

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 3 January 2012]

I was happy to see this film. After all, practically every WWII film about the war in Europe focuses on the soldiers from the major combatants--Americans, Brits, Germans or the French. However, this one is about men from the French colony of Algeria--folks you seldom ever hear about and I am sure many people from my country had no idea these folks fought for the Allies. In fact, now that I think about it, the only film where I can remember North African troops was "Two Women" and the Moroccan soldiers who raped the two ladies in the film! So, fortunately, these brave men get their due in "Days of Glory".

"Days of Glory" focuses on four men in particular. These four volunteered to free their mother country in 1943. However, they soon saw that they weren't quite regular soldiers. Instead of receiving accolades or rank for their efforts, the men noticed that the white Christian French soldiers received these honors and the job of these Algerians was to shut up and die. Other examples of prejudice against these men were shown throughout the film as well as many incidents where they proved themselves in action.

While I am thrilled that the men in this film finally get their due, I only give the film a 7. This means the film is good and worth seeing, but it had room for improvement. My problem with the film is that despite being a heart-moving topic, the film, strangely, was a bit bland. Much of this is because you never really felt that you learned who these men were since the film felt quite episodic. I wanted to see more humanity and individual stories. Still, it's quite a good film despite this.

Generic War Film

[Theo Robertson · 6/10 · 15 January 2011]

There's two types of French film .

1 ) The sort that is beloved by Cahiers Du Cinema that often feature people standing about talking about existentialist themes and often don't find a market outside France

2 ) The sort that is despised by Cahiers Du Cinema that often feature action and plot and appeal to an international market

DAYS OF GLORY is certainly in the second camp . The problem is that it's a bit too international . The theme of colonial soldiers fighting for the mother country could have easily have featured British dominion troops fighting in the Boer war , of Indian troops fighting at El Alamein or even of black Americans fighting in the second world war . Some people on this page have criticised this movie as not being a Gallic version of GLORY and you can see their point . There's little in the way of an idiosyncratic voice

Worse still despite the subtitles you could easily be watching a war film that was made in Hollywood . Much of the plot could have easily been lifted from Sam Fuller's THE BIG RED ONE as the story jumps from North Africa , Italy and eventually France . It's also impossible not to notice that the final climatic battle owes a lot to the climax of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN . Perhaps that's why DAYS OF GLORY received high praise down to its familiar story that English speaking fans of war films have seen so many times before ?

It could have been much worse though . On a technical level it's a competent enough movie and it doesn't go overboard that the Goumier troops are some how slaves press-ganged in to joining the Free French forces but it does effectively ignore the sometimes horrendous reputation Goumier troops had in Axis territories where women are concerned . The 1960 Italian film TWO WOMEN goes in to this in detail and you can imagine that's why the protagonists service in Italy is skated over very slightly . One wonders if the producers might have been worried about an international audience being alienated by bringing up the subject in any length ? As it it stands DAYS OF GLORY is a good enough war film though very traditional

Hopeful Education

[za-andres · 7/10 · 14 March 2007]

For the first time this year the Weinstein Company has made something bearable --Hell, actually something good. The film is called Days of Glory (a title strangely reconfigured from Indigènes) and it chronicles a regiment in the war against Nazism, or, as the French call it, "liberty". But, the catch here is that these soldiers, they aren't French: They're Algerian and Morroquian. The film first suffers from superfluous paper-mâché clichés in order to demonstrate racial inequality, not as a subtle character study, but rather as an insolent whole which creates that annoying been-there, done-that feeling. Such a scene occurs when Abdelkader (Sami Bouajila) realizes that not all African troops are getting tomatoes, where as the French are. What does he do? He smashes them so "Nobody can have them". Director Rachid Bouchareb narrative is also first a bit fragmented, jumping from country to country as if they were stones. Eventually, it develops into an assured rhythm which corroborates with the film.

Brilliance in Days of Glory neither comes from ideas nor direction, but rather, through the magisterial acting, prized at Cannes, and small war vignettes. They are gripping and moving, like all war movies should be. These war scenes are powerful, and that is what makes up Days of Glory, because in the end, Days of Glory is one of the few good but flawed war films worth a damn. It has power and it is evident that it uses it wisely and vigorously.

A War Film That Explifies Human Tragedy

[maczones · 10/10 · 27 June 2007]

This is a French film that "Explifies Human Tragedy". One, it shows the dark side of war and the reasons why good vs. bad is being defended and it also exemplifies clearly how those we consider the good guys, are actually in the same category as the enemy...Racists. It is a film that shows the unknown exploits of brave North African "French" WWII recruits fighting alongside French compatriots to expel the Germans from their homeland...France. We have all come accustomed to seeing so many movies of WWII, showing in detail why the Germans were so bad, yet we have never been exposed in great detail as this film as illustrated, the realities of a double standard that was practiced in those days by the victors of a repressive regime. This is a film that touches all of us and tells us what it means to be loyal and patriotic as well as exposing that thin veil that no matter where you come from, what color or creed you may be, Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is fought with that regard in mind. Unfortunately, as this film illustrates, those ideas are an exception to the need for victory and an exception to the rule of becoming a second class citizen again when those rules do not apply any longer. This film left me with such a deep understanding like no other WWII film I have seen in my 50+ years. It left me with deep respect to those men of little education but full of monumental pride and dignity. I highly recommend this film and personally think that it was one of the best films I have ever seen. The acting from mostly unknown actors is simply a miracle and the director certainly deserves more credit than he has received. How this film ever got released without the accolades it rightly deserves is certainly one of the greatest omissions in movie history.

white washed history comes alive

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 17 September 2015]

It's 1943 Algeria. Muslims are recruited to fight for France. They go to Morocco to train and then arrive in Italy in 1944 to fight with the Allies. Saïd Otmari is poor illiterate mountain goat herder. Messaoud Souni is well spoken and falls for a French woman. Sergeant Martinez is a hardened leader willing to send the green recruits into suicidal charges but he hides his personal Arab connections. The men face racism in many blatant ways and Abdelkader gives voice to getting more equality.

This is an interesting part of the war that has been white-washed. The movie does struggle with a simple message as the men themselves have infighting about the war and their cause. Some of them fight for the money while others bought into the slogans. There is some good action and a solid final battle.

1945 you say ?

[b00012409 · 8/10 · 29 September 2006]

I did not know what to expect from this movie starring guys like Djamel Debbouzze or Samy Naceri, more used to non sense jokes and wrong way taxi driving, but I must say I was astonished.

First pictures are beautiful, dialogs and pace slow but efficient.

Second the way the four main characters perform is great (although Naceri is maybe not quite as good as the three others). All moved by different motivations, they have a sole dream: to be a real part of it, a part of the French country they have been fighting for. And they make you believe it. Not only because they fit perfectly into their roles, but also because the suffering and the inequalities they undergo in the war fields of the movie still exist six decades after in their every day life.

"All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others". True it was in Provence or in Alsace, true it is in today's France.

To me this film is more than the French Private Ryan, it is a subtle way to ask: "how much more is it going to take before we can all be on the same boat ?" Go and see it.

Could Have (and Should Have) Been Much Better

[mehfre · 6/10 · 14 April 2020]

I had high hopes for this movie, but was rather disappointed. It did have its moments which made it so frustrating. Unfortunately, the script didn't follow through on these high points. Case in point: the main actor in real life has a disability with his right arm. This should not be a major drawback. For instance, Gary Burghoff of M.A.S.H. also has a disability with one hand, but both the movie and the TV series covered it so well with camera angles and prosthetics that you never know it. However, no attempt was made in this film to shoot around this issue. Instead, we have scenes in which the disability is awkwardly ignored such as when he doesn't salute an officer while everyone else is and when he tosses away the rifle he's been carrying to engage in combat with an ineffectual handgun. Clearly, this man wouldn't have been accepted into military service. The disability could have been written into the storyline (albeit rather implausibly, but it would have been better than what they did). Early in the movie, the character's disability is pointed out to military authorities and he shows that he is worthy to serve by demonstrating an uncanny accuracy throwing rocks with his left hand. It would have made sense, then, to have him fight by throwing grenades, but this is never done. Instead, they give him the previously mentioned virtually useless handgun. There are more of these disappointing near misses in this film which makes one frustrated with how good of a movie this could have been.

Muslim volunteer soldiers help to liberate France from the Germans.

[max-vernon · 10/10 · 12 October 2006]

Viewing this film in a French cinema left much of the audience in tears, including myself. Indigenes examines the contribution of Arab/African volunteers who fought for Free French forces in World War II. French Arab/Berber actors play the main characters. Much of the film is in Arabic with subtitles. The soldiers portrayed fought in the less well-known campaigns in Italy, the Rhone and Vosges-Alsace during 1943-1944.

Restoring French national honour and developing a post-war consciousness lie at the heart of this film. The importance of Free French forces in the Liberation of France after the military disaster of 1940 is an underlying theme. The action scenes are well-choreographed. During the large-scale assault in Italy the troops appear to be used as disposable meat to locate German positions which can then be pounded with French artillery. The last small-scale encounter in an Alsatian village is one of the best action scenes I have seen. The fear/courage equation which grips a man fighting for his life is shown very effectively.

But this is no simple war movie. War is merely the stage upon which more contemporary and pressing themes are examined –i.e. France's relationship to its 3½ million Muslim citizens and their relationship to La Patrie. Most scenes raise issues of identity. "What are we doing here?" is the sceptical question posed by one volunteer who has fought his way to a cold and wintry mountainous region leaving many dead comrades behind him.

The French officers and their Muslim volunteers both wish to believe in the national ideals of 'Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.' But doubts continue to arise. "When I was young, our families were killed by the French. Why?" asks one character. "Pacification," replies his friend. The film portrays an endemic 'institutional racism' within the French authorities of that time – poor promotion prospects for Muslims, unequal rations, sandals on bare feet in the winter snow rather than regular army boots. More tellingly, army censorship of love letters from an Arab soldier to his French girlfriend.

Sergeant Martinez provides the only sympathetic face. He is a pied-noir who comes from European Christian colonist stock in North Africa. He supports the promotion of some of his soldiers whilst discouraging one intelligent and literate soldier (Saud) from his ambitions for an army career. The Martinez character shows the complexity of this whole colonial class. They were deeply insecure in their own identity regarding both metropolitan Frenchmen and their Arab/Berber compatriots. Martinez favours and then physically assaults his Arab batman Said, enraged by Said's revelation that he knows that Martinez' mother was also Arab. Colonialism had schizophrenic effects on many of its children. Having wished Martinez dead, Said later dies trying to save the man with whom he has had a very on/off relationship. Racial and class divisions go deep and make human bonding difficult.

In contrast, the relationship between ordinary French citizens and their Muslim liberators is portrayed as warm and generous. One girl offers herself to Saud and they part company on the understanding that their relationship is permanent. He explains that such a relationship would be socially unacceptable in his homeland. Racial mixing was always frowned upon more in the colonies than in the mother country – fear of the colonisers themselves being colonised! The film ends with a visit to a war cemetery in Alsace and shows the graves of Muslim soldiers who 'mort pour la France.' We are informed that the French government froze the war pensions of these soldiers in the 1950's when the colonies became independent. This film helped to prod President Chirac into righting this wrong.

In its portrayal of officers in jeeps making patriotic speeches and Arab volunteers foot-slogging through difficult country, the film underlines a divide which continues to exist within French society. Official France offers well-meaning platitudes but continued to freeze war pensions. The French state perpetuates an anti-religious version of secularism which was born out of the great Schism of the French Revolution. The divisions of the 1790's continue to divide French society – Republican/Monarchist, Left/Right, Secular/Religious and now non-Muslim/Muslim. Descendants of those soldiers who lie dead in that Alsatian cemetery 'mort pour la France' are denied the hijab in state schools. The same anti-religious spirit which framed the Ferry educational laws of 1879 is alive and well and is still trying to forge a new secular French identity out of the ashes of the Revolution. The search continues for a new non-religious superglue which will bind all Frenchmen, heart, mind and soul.

Paradoxically, in the USA (the main target of Jihadist terrorism), American Muslims should have no problem in forging a new American identity for themselves in a pro-religious, all-inclusive version of secularism which grew out of American history. France's secularism is as exclusive and narrow as her 'enarquist politocracy' and poses problems for Muslim integration.

Indigenes highlights the simple fact that we all have multiple identities. On the one hand it can be seen as a sensible and worthy attempt to integrate Muslims into official French history. On the other hand it raises uncomfortable issues about integration and identity within contemporary France. Liberty, Equality, Fraternity are only words. How French people live together under them is a complex and compelling matter.

The film successfully raises this issue. It shows one thread of French history in World War 2. There are many other threads – Jews, German occupiers, collaborators, Resistance, slave labourers etc. Acknowledging the reality of these different histories and empathising with the characters involved is, in my opinion, the only real way forward in creating a present and future identity which we can all feel part of. History remains the most important subject to study. Fanaticism, ill-will and violence arise out of ignoring it. A deep and thorough study of our multiple histories can only unite humans and light our way forward. This film is a major contribution towards lighting that path.

We're all equal, but some more than others

[mmunier · 22 May 2013]

Born in France in 1942, I've heard and feel a lot about "foreigners" Jews, Arabs and Negroes. And yes I have been influenced by what I've heard and seen. I'm not sure if this influence is still present in me but I believe I'm aware of its possibility and think this is important. I found Indigenes (in English Day of Glory) to be quite thought provoking and at times it had the effect of someone twisting a knife in my body. And perhaps more acutely as I feel a little affected with current and frequent events that sees increasing unrest from extreme Islam activity. However the film reminds us that Christian activities were also source of worry and pain. As for discrimination,I have also been aware of a similar situation with the black US soldiers of the same era. Recently a matriculation tag was found on a French beach and miraculously returned to its Black owner who told the story as it was. That is blatant discrimination! "Indigenes" highlights the same situation. The film touches very private interaction amongst "foreign" and French soldiers, but also their different ideology amongst themselves as some wanted to be French others wanted their own identity. Yes at time it is quite arrowing, but this is war, however the arrowing is also provided by such discrimination and in this regard make sure you don't miss the notation at the very end of the film,unthinkable yet real!

Worthy memorial to forgotten North African soldiers of WW II

[Turfseer · 6/10 · 23 October 2010]

'Days of Glory' is similar to Spike Lee's 'Miracle at St. Anna' as both films deal with the subject of a minority group's contribution to the war effort in World War II. In Lee's film, the focus is on African-Americans and in 'Days of Glory', Arabic-speaking North Africans. The value of both films are that they chronicle the little-known history of discrimination against these minority group soldiers despite all their sacrifices made during wartime.

Toward the beginning of the film, the North African soldiers win a small victory when a Captain rescinds the decision not to serve them tomatoes as part of the their daily rations on a transport ship. But more egregious examples of discrimination which are not reversed are shown such as allowing native 'white' Frenchmen leave while the North Africans get none. Similarly, the whites are always promoted to a higher rank and the Africans always remain in the same subordinate positions. Further resentment is bred when the news media sends pictures and newsreels back home of the white soldiers, giving the false impression that they were the ones doing most of the fighting when in actuality it was the North Africans who were responsible for the bulk of the hand-to-hand combat. The ultimate indignity is referenced at the end of the picture when we learn that all pensions of the North African soldiers were frozen following independence of the French colonies. It's my understanding that this injustice has not been redressed, even to this day.

'Glory' focuses on four soldiers at the beginning of their conscription in North Africa, their initial foray into Italy in 1944 and finally, combat operations against the Germans in France proper. We meet Said, an impoverished Algerian goat farmer who signs up despite the protestations of his mother who fears she'll lose him in combat. The actor who plays Said, Jamel Debbouze, actually has one arm in real life, and must keep the missing appendage in his pocket throughout the film in order to maintain the illusion that he's not handicapped. It turns out that Debbouze is actually one of the film's producers who contributed a bit of money to the film's production, so it appears they could not avoid using him.

The trick in a movie like this is to avoid hagiography by showing each soldier with an inner life and enough conflict between them to keep things interesting. Perhaps the least successful is the character of Messaoud who falls in love with a French woman and is thwarted by the military censors when the letters he sends to her are never received. The other thing we learn about Messaoud is that he joins the majority of the other soldiers in the unit, taunting Said after Staff Sergeant Martinez makes him his orderly. Said puts a knife to Messaoud's throat as he can no longer endure the taunts which imply that he's Martinez's 'girl'. Messaoud eventually goes AWOL due to the aforementioned discriminatory leave policy in an attempt to see his French lover. He's restored after the brass realize they cannot dispense with his skills as a marksman.

Corporal Abdelkader proves to be the film's protagonist. He becomes a corporal after taking an exam (equivalent to a lieutenant in the US Army) and becomes the voice for the rights of the native African minority soldiers. Abdelkader faces Sgt. Martinez down on the ship, winning the right to have the tomatoes served to the men. Later, he's put in the brig after getting into a fight with Martinez over the Army leave policy (instead of the soldiers getting leave, they're forced to watch a French ballet performance inside a tent). Despite Abdelkader's militancy, he's also loyal to France and proves to be courageous in battle. So it's quite sad to see how he's not recognized at war's end and ends up a defeated, lonely man living in a small flat in France, far from his homeland.

There's also Yassir, a Moroccan of Berber extraction (one of the Moroccan 'Gourmier' soldiers) who joins in the soldiering for the money. There's a good scene where another soldier prevents him from bashing in the mouth of a dead German soldier and extracting his gold fillings. Later, Yassir is devastated when his brother is killed in combat.

Perhaps the best character in the film is Sgt. Martinez, the 'Pied Noir' (a French national whose ancestors probably were of Spanish extraction who had settled in Algeria). Martinez considers himself thoroughly French and does not want to be associated with the Arab culture. When Said discovers a picture of his Arabic mother and asks him about it, Martinez beats him up and warns him not to tell anyone upon pain of death. Martinez gives 'Days of Glory' its flavor as he is almost brutal in the way he treats his troops but at the same time, sticks up for them when dealing with the higher-ups.

'Days of Glory' emulates many American pictures in its war scenes. There are some gripping battle scenes and the carnage and horror of war is ably depicted (one unforgettable iconic image shows the soldiers eating a meal with a dead horse in a ditch right in front of them). The battle scene at the end of the picture however, where the unit faces off against a much larger group of Germans in a small town, doesn't really ring true. The Germans march into town, taking no cover, and are picked off too easily by the North Africans.

'Days of Glory' is a worthy addition to the pantheon of World War II films. The characters are not all fleshed out but we do learn a great deal of the history of the discrimination endured by these heroic soldiers. Unlike the bloated 'Miracle of St. Anna', 'Glory' features economical editing coupled with a soundtrack highlighted by some haunting Middle Eastern songs.

Significant historical story but poorly executed movie

[Aristides-2 · 5/10 · 24 April 2011]

Somewhat anomalous and powerful WWII story about racial hypocrisy between native born Frenchmen and men born in North African colonies; where is the Liberty, Equality, Fraternity?

I was going to use the word 'amateurish' to describe the filmmaker but I have seen excellent movies made by amateurs, many of them done by people in film school. No, a better word is 'untalented'. The battle sequences are dramatically not cohesive, illogical and when it comes to the next-to-final battle scene it degenerates into a 40's class b WWII John Wayne film; the German soldiers apparently committing virtual mass suicide, walking into firefights with not much sense of covertness, much like the ending battle in 'Saving Private Ryan'. At times too the subtitles were non-sequiturs not seeming to be connected to what the characters were actually speaking about. Then there was the production design/art direction howler when a large Nazi eagle sign was removed from the facade of a liberated village's building. It looked like something a high school theatrical production crew would construct. See 'Days of Glory' for the rarely told historical story of cultural despicability that occurred during WWII but don't anticipate anything close to seeing a 'great film'.

Cinema can be real - life

[cliffhanley_ · 9 April 2007]

It's tempting to think that the English-speaking title of this film was chosen to appeal to the US market, although it can be read either as heavy with irony, or as high tragedy. The French title refers to the protagonists of the epic, the 'Indigenes', which is, apparently, a colloquial word for 'natives'. It gives nothing away to reveal that this is about the recruiting of thousands of Africans, Berbers and Arabs to fight for their colonial ruler against Germany, only to be treated as serfs during battle and actively forgotten afterwards, as it was only after seeing this film that President Chirac relented and finally allowed equal pension rights to the foreigners. And this, after all pensions had been frozen in 1959 as their respective countries ceased to be colonies, then reinstated, but only on paper. Many key scenes: the mutiny when blacks and Muslims are refused tomatoes in the ship canteen, the refusal to Africans of leave taken by white French troops, the company ordered to assemble in a town hall for the kind of entertainment that used to be mercilessly ridiculed in The Beano. The curtain draws back, two excessively snooty ballet dancers (tights and tutu) mime long-drawn-out anxiety, and the audience at first baffled then insulted, drift out. Central to the story are four men, little Said, who wants to get away from his mother; Yassir, an older and sardonic guy, who claims he's only in it for the money, but he is really looking out for his little brother Larbi; Messaoud, who is a born rebel; and the sergeant, Martinez, a really complex character who wishes desperately to be known as a white man but eventually has to stand up with his own people . Another important little scene is when Yassir reminisces about the French killing his country folk in the past, suggesting that it would be called 'pacification'. Messaoud falls in love with a French girl, but when she sends him a letter with photo, his reply, also with photo, is quietly buried by the censor for whom the spectacle of 'our women' being taken by 'them' is untenable; and her attempts to find out what happened to her lover are politely frustrated. In all, it's a complex and finely-crafted story, and everyone has hidden depths that are revealed through the action. The ensemble shared 'best actor' award at Cannes. The photography, (by Patrick Blossier) mostly with a hint of sepia, often in black-and-white, is, although quite beautiful, also quite convincing as a kind of reality whether it's mud, bullets and blood or a rejoicing liberated village, and added to that, and of course the direction, the use of sound in the battle scenes must make them the most convincing yet. Bouchareb says he had seen a lot of movies about the Second World War but never seeing any Muslim soldiers, and knowing some of his ancestors had died in the battlefields of World War 1 and his uncle fought in Indochina, he researched the subject and discovered it wasn't only a few soldiers from Africa and North Africa, but that most of the Free French army was made up of men from the colonies - from Algeria, Morocco, Senegal, Tunisia, Mali, Madagascar and Indochina."I realised then that this was an important subject for cinema." CLIFF HANLEY

Good performances for a rehash movie

[cinemart · 7/10 · 8 September 2006]

Take one part GLORY (Edward Zwick, USA, 1989), two parts SAVING PRIVATE RYAN (Steven Spielberg, USA, 1998), a pinch of A SOLDIER'S STORY (Norman Jewison, USA, 1984), stir in a dash of French bitters and pour into a Colonial carafe. Say a prayer to Allah and take a sip. You're enjoying a drunk Rachid Buchareb calls INDIGENES.

Exploring the exploitation of French colonials in Algeria and Morocco during World War II, INDIGENES takes its title from the politically correct term for Africa's indigenous peoples. To the less enlightened, these men--though they be brave of heart--are dark of skin and know more commonly by the derisive term "wog." Denied promotion, leave, honor, and tomatoes, these men still strive to defend their wicked step-Motherland against the Germans.

We follow a group of four "wogs" during campaigns in Italy and France. Abdelkader (Sami Bouajila) is an idealist Corporal who gained his rank through study rather than battle. Yassir (Samy Naceri) hopes to earn money to help his beloved brother get married. Messaoud (Roschdy Zem), the sharpshooter, falls for one of the women in a town he helps to liberate. And, Said (Jamel Debbouze) is a bumpkin with a heart of gold who learns the harsh realities of life.

These men are lead by Sgt. Martinez (Bernard Blancan) who bumps his head on the glass ceiling that his white colonial masters have put in place. However, he's in a much better spot than his men as he's a Christian and a Moroccan while his men are Algerian Muslims. These men are the first to die in battles and the last to be shown appreciation. Meanwhile, the French stand offsides during battles and force their rancid culture on their African "children" otherwise.

The performances are top notch and our main characters are some of the most dynamic and multifaceted that I've seen on screen in a while. A lack of screen direction during the battle scenes is disconcerting but, to the dismay of some war film aficionados, these scenes are infrequent. The blatant SAVING PRIVATE RYAN ending is a bit much but it does help bring closure to the film.

Well-meaning but a bit flat and clumsy

[grantss · 6/10 · 29 August 2021]

1943. With the Germans driven out of North Africa, men in French colonies in North Africa are being recruited to the Free French forces. We follow a group of these men, from training, to their first combat in Italy to the landing in and contribution to the liberation of France. Yet, despite their significant contribution to the French war effort, they are treated as second class citizens.

Reasonably interesting and original, showing WW2 from the perspective of French colonial troops. Some good action sequences and themes.

The main theme examined is inequality, as the colonial troops get blatantly disadvantaged compared to the French troops. While there are some good scenes to highlight this and make the point that they should be treated the same, the plot involving this is quite predictable and doesn't go anywhere new.

Not entirely engaging either, making for a flat feeling to proceedings.

The military aspect also gets weaker as the film goes on, with the tactics and plot of the last few scenes being quite nonsensical and implausible. I know why that plot development was there but the point is very clumsily made.

Overall, interesting and entertaining enough but the subject deserved a better-told story.

Fighting For Whom?

[rmax304823 · 6/10 · 29 August 2012]

The story of a handful of Berber tribesmen from Algeria who enlist in the French Army during World War II and slog their way through North Africa, Italy, France, and Alsace in order to rid the world of Nazi occupiers. There are several effective scenes of combat and the ending somewhat resembles that of "Saving Private Ryan". Man, they are a rag tag bunch too. They always look dirty, their uniforms tatty and irregular, and they always need a shave. Their equipment looks like it was bought in a dollar store. The men wear helmets that are variously British, American, and French.

There is also a subtext. The North African troops, including their French leaders, are looked down upon by the native French troops. And, on top of that, the Berbers face prejudice because they are swarthy, sometimes illiterate, and speak French with an accent, their native language being Arabic.

I'm not sure there's very much new in the story. We follow half a dozen men as they suffer deaths, failed loves, and internal conflicts. The strongest performance -- possibly because it's one of the most carefully written -- is that of Bernard Blancan as the French sergeant who heads the platoon. He looks like one of the villainous chumps one might find in a Laurel and Hardy short but his character is complex. He treats the Berber recruits with disdain and does everything possible to hide the fact that his mother was an Arab.

The photography and location shooting are mostly pretty gloomy and there's little in the way of light-hearted humor. Everyone seems rather sad even the two pretty young French ladies, of whom we should have seen more. There's a touching scene in which a girl in Marseilles takes one of the men up to her room. She strips. He hesitates, his shirt half off. She asks what's wrong and he tells her that where he comes from men like him are not allowed to be with French girls.

I understand the Algerian's nationalism but I'm not sure that what it led to after the war was such a marvelous improvement. However, it's all over now.

great film

[ldnmailroom · 9/10 · 13 October 2006]

indigenes is a WW2 epic - but it isn't just about the spectacle and destruction of war but about the human aspect of warfare.

Bouchareb has made a film that works on three different levels. On the one hand this is a films about comradeship, about men learning to work together as a team to overcome physical and mental hardship, and about survival. On the other it's about the forgotten soldiers of the second world war. France whitewashed the algerian army's support after Algeria declared independence from France, and it has become something of a scandal in recent years, one that the french government has now rectified on the back on this film.

On a much deeper level, and this is the reason I think the film is so important, it's about the arab world and the western world uniting against a common evil. And I think that, given the chaos and the paranoia that we live in now regarding the East and the Arab world, Indigenes' message is a powerful polemic that west and east can live and work together and that we have in the past been a unified force, and can still be - despite recent events.

Powerful message

[Denno1972 · 7/10 · 11 May 2021]

This is a well made decent war film, but actually it's more than that. We know troops are throwaway, treated with contempt by their masters and sometimes the people they are fighting for. However, soldiers fighting for colonies, for their oppressors, as shown here are treated with contempt and the revelation at the end gives this a contemporary relevance i wasnt expecting.

very poignant movie about different cultures

[painting_monalisa · 9/10 · 9 November 2006]

This is the tale of a very intrepid group of diverse African peoples that were recruited to help defend and free France during WW2. It was very inspiring that these men could go to such lengths to help France when not being treated as equals to the French, even though they were to consider France their homeland. This was based on true events that happened. It was filmed to deal with the war experience of the men as individuals as opposed to just a fighting war movie that makes people seem anonymous. There were gruesome parts but true to any movie of war. It portrayed these men as heroic and very human. Unappreciated by the French even years later when pensions were withheld. It was very touching without being sentimental.

Could Have Made A Great Documentary

[Eumenides_0 · 7/10 · 21 March 2010]

Rachid Bouchareb and Olivier Lorelle's movie uncovers a missing story from WWII in telling the story of the North African French soldiers who suffered discrimination while fighting for a country that not only colonized theirs but that they had been taught to regard as their true homeland.

The movie follows four natives - Morrocan and Algerian soldiers - and a pied-noir, a French sergeant living in Algeria, and is mostly an indictment against France for the way it abused its own patriot soldiers. Each character exists mostly to highlight a particular type of discrimination: there's the intelligent, outspoken native who deserves to become a sergeant and yet is always ignored in favor of Frenchmen or pied-noirs. There's the young native who becomes the sergeant's aide-de-camp in a patronising relationship (oblivious to the sergeant, of course, who thinks he's a pretty fair man). There's the native in love with a French woman and all the problems that come from that. And so on...

Since most characters exist to make points, they're never real characters. Perhaps with the exception of Sargeant Martinez, who hides his Arab roots and has a love-hate relationship with his men that makes him hard to define; and Corporal Abdelkader, a man who keeps deluding himself that one day France will recognise his efforts and valor.

There's an aura of sadness throughout the movie as for the viewer it's obvious that neither of these characters will come to any good. Every scene of this movie is calculated to draw sympathy for the way these honest, patriotic men are treated by France. And since this movie is mostly a pamphlet, it's successful. But then again, a documentary would have been even more.

There are doubts whether it's successful as art, though.

Liberty, Equality and Fraternity

[claudio_carvalho · 8/10 · 15 October 2007]

In World War II, the Muslims from French colonies enlist to fight for their motherland France. In the 7th battalion commanded by the tough Sergeant Roger Martinez (Bernard Blancan), the soldier Abdelkader (Sami Bouajila) has leadership with the troop and seeks promotion and recognition from the command; Said Otmari (Jamel Debbouze) is a servile and illiterate private, happy in serving his sergeant; Messaoud Souni (Roschdy Zem) is the sniper of the group and has fallen in a corresponded love with the French Irène (Aurélie Eltvedt); and Yassir (Samy Naceri) is fighting together with his brother to raise some money. Along the campaign in Italy, France and Alsace, they realize that French soldiers are promoted, have better food and have leaves to visit their families, while the Arab soldiers are shamefully discriminated and treated like 2nd ranking soldiers.

"Indigènes" is an excellent movie of war, disclosing an unusual theme: the discrimination of the soldiers from the French colonies in World War II. The anti-Semitism is presented in most of the films about WWII; racism and segregation with the American soldiers has been explored in a couple of movies; but the treatment spent to the Arab soldiers in World War II by France command is the first time that I see in a movie. The screenplay, the direction, the performances, the pace and the cinematography are great and gives a magnificent homage to these forgotten and discriminated heroes. The lack of payment of pension plan to the survivors and families by the French government is another example of the level of intolerance and lack of respect in the world of the present days. In the end, it is a great deception that the beautiful message "Liberty, Equality and Fraternity" is not applicable to the soldiers from the exploited colonies. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Dias de Glória" ("Days of Glory")

Amazing...

[Thanos_Alfie · 7/10 · 30 January 2022]

"Days of Glory" is an Action - Drama movie in which we watch a group of North African men enlist to French army in order to help France in the war against Nazi Germany during World War II.

I liked this movie because it presented very well a story of WWII that I was not aware of, it was interesting and contained plenty of action scenes that were combined with drama. The interpretations of Jamel Debbouze who played as Saïd Otmari, Samy Naceri who played as Yassir, Sami Bouajila who played as Abdelkader, Roschdy Zem who played as Messaoud Souni and Bernard Blancan who played as Sergent Roger Martinez were very good and their combination worked very well and created a bond between them that was obvious through the whole duration of the movie. Lastly, I believe that everyone needs to watch "Days of Glory" because it worth's your time so, I suggest you to do so.

it should have been more.

[socrates_note · 5/10 · 25 June 2006]

I looked forward to this french WW2 film with great anticipation but it did not live up to my expectations and it certainly did not live up to the standard of a great war movie. Telling the story of the conscription of men from the North African French colonies, we follow the story of four men who become French soldiers all for very different reasons but all believing in what France their motherland offers in promise once freedom is achieved. Shot beautifully, delivering some wonderful performances, the story-telling touches on some potentially cinematic sub-plots and moments but never delivers as it slowly but surely converges into an almost french Saving Private Ryan with potential heart and soul of an undiscovered part of french/ww2/north African history being sacrificed to the lack of depth in its story-telling/screenplay and faith in its potential audience who would have loved to have taken a more exploratory journey with the filmmakers.