Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

Francene Odetta It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

ecmelton-186-105049 This movie was made by a Bosnian director and blames the Serbians for starting the war and acting as the aggressors. All of the military violence in the movie is carried out by the Serbians. Other than Ciki the Bosnian military is barely seen and none of their fighting or military actions are shown. When the UN appears later in the film, the primary UN peacekeeper explicitly blames the Serbians for starting the war, and since the UN is supposed to be neutral the film places the blame entirely with the Serbians. Ciki, the Bosnian soldier, is a much more likable character than Nano, which makes sense given the film's negative attitude toward the Serbian army. Nano is shown to be dim-witted or at the very least inexperienced as a soldier. He tries to shake Ciki's hand after they had tried to kill each other, and he tries to leave even after Ciki tells him to stay where he is at gunpoint. In contrast to Nano, who is trying to be a soldier and failing, Ciki is depicted as being more of an individual that just happens to be in the military at that moment. This is reflected in their physical appearance. Despite his overall incompetence, Nano's appearance is very militant. Everything on his uniform is buttoned up and tucked in, and his hair isn't just closely cropped it is entirely shaved off. In a movie that has an anti-war message, having a militant appearance isn't treated as a virtue. Ciki's appearance is much different. There is little indication that he is in the military at all, except for his shirt. He has longer hair, is unshaven, and he's wearing his uniform unbuttoned with a Rolling Stones t-shirt and Chucks. Nothing suggest that he is actually a soldier, and within the context of this movie that is very critical of the military, that makes him the better man. Nano's certainly not depicted as being a villain, but if either of the two in the trench is the "hero," it would be Ciki. Nano's limited likability is related to the fact that he's not a good representation of the Serbian army as a whole. Nano is trying to be a soldier, but his peers seem to dislike him and he has more humanity than them. He doesn't fit in with the group that is portrayed as the actual bad guys. This is illustrated when he refused to set booby traps using Bosnian bodies. This disconnect from the military makes him more endearing. The contrast between his appearance and his actual skill level demonstrates his lack of understanding about the reality of war. His uniform looks exactly the way it should according a training manual but he doesn't have any idea how to react in combat. Both characters are the protagonists but the Bosnian soldier is shown in a more flattering light for most of the movie. This contrast between the characters serves a purpose aside from making Bosnia look good; it gives them things to talk and argue about, contributing to the chemistry and banter they develop throughout the film.This movie doesn't glorify any aspect of the military or warfare. Nothing is shown to be justified or heroic. It's just violent, and the violence has no nobility to it. Early on it seemed like Ciki and Nano were going to find common ground and part with a mutual respect for each other, or if one them did die if would have some meaning, a sacrificial death, probably to save the other. Instead they just kill each other. Nobody gets saved. This would seem to be illustrating both the futility of the war and the futility of trying to create peace between the two sides. The movie also addresses the way the media covers war. They're depicted as being vultures descending on any tragedy they can find. They also end up unknowingly reporting a fake story that was manipulated by the UN to save face. This shows the media to be ineffective and that they can be easily tricked or manipulated. Likewise, the media is also shown manipulating the UN into taking action, so they do play an important role, it just isn't the role that's actual in their job description. The media in this movie has a lot of potential power because they offer a direct line from the event to the people, and even if they do a bad job, their presence is enough to keep people on their toes and make sure they don't make themselves or their organization look foolish in front of the world. This illustrates the ineffectiveness of the UN to act during a crisis. Despite the media's inaccurate reporting of the final story, the UN would have likely abandoned the people in the trench if it wasn't for the threat of bad press. The UN peacekeepers also don't make any attempts to remove guns from area around the trench even after they witnessed Ciki shoot Namo in the leg. This negligence seems to be just contrived way to allow Ciki to have a gun at the end. This is one of the only blaring problems with the movie, but because the UN is fairly worthless for the rest of the movie this fictionalized version could conceivably be that remiss. Overall it's easy to see why this movie won the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film. It plays with interesting ideas about the role of the individual, the media, and governments in war. It would unfair to call it just an anti-war movie or a pro-Bosnian movie. Those are certainly themes in it, and the movie has its prejudices, but they're not so heavy handed that a person couldn't make an argument for the other side. The movie doesn't tell you what to think. It provides a captivating narrative that raises questions for the audience to think about, and those question don't necessarily have easy answers.

SnoopyStyle A group of Bosnian reinforcements gets lost in the fog at night. They wake up and get mowed down by the Serbs. Čiki finds himself alone. The Serbs send out an old veteran and newbie Nino to check. They find a body and the grizzled veteran places a bouncing mine under it. Čiki kills the veteran and takes Nino hostage. The body turns out to be Cera who isn't actually dead. The three struggle as the UNPROFOR comes to evacuate whoever is stranded in no man's land. Marchand tries to call in somebody to defuse the mine but his commander Soft insists that they leave immediately. TV reporter Jane Livingstone (Katrin Cartlidge) hears the exchange on the radio and threatens to shine a light on the ineffective UN.I really like the UN and the black comedy they do. The language barrier is always funny. The ridiculous nature of their work is good for a laugh. I'm not as enamored with the Serb and Bosnian soldiers. It bothers me that they keep not killing each other. It doesn't make any sense that the Bosnian doesn't kill Nino right away. He should kill Nino and try to sneak out during the night. After that, it seems the situation never gets right. I think it would be better to not see how they got into their situation. The movie could start with UN arriving at the checkpoint. There also has to be a better way to make a standoff situation. I wonder if the UN find the two man both stepping on a mine. They can't kill each other because the mines would blow. It would allow them to argue with no holds barred. I don't buy that these guys would take prisoners.

Sandeep Gupta Lagaan lost to this movie at Oscars because it is more impactful, with authentic feel and literally the piece of international cinema involving characters across borders that even can't understand the language of each other but have to do their duties in the name of war and peace. The movie is a satire, making you laugh most of the times and making you feel sorry for the characters at the same moment. The chats between the three trapped soldier is skillfully written and narrated. The movement of the single gun between the two soldiers are the most smart parts of the movie. At the end, movie hits and disturbs you in the most unforgettable way.You will end this movie thinking, even the wars are just a big joke for us.

Karl Self This movie was up against "Amélie" in the 2002 Academy Awards and won. So I have to say this right up front: unduly. "No Man's Land" is a well-made movie about a very worthy subject. Amélie is a groundbreaking masterpiece.Now that that's off my chest and I can sleep soundly again, to the movie itself. No Man's Land starts off with a small platoon of Bosniak replacements getting lost in no man's land, and being consequently viciously cut down by the Serb foes when the sun rises. Only two of the platoon survive badly wounded. One of them is being discovered a a Serb patrol, taken for dead, and placed on a live mine (in order to assault Bosniaks trying to salvage the body). The other Bosniak manages to take one Serb hostage. So now we have three wounded, inexperienced soldiers in the middle of mine-riddled nowhere. The movie takes on a parabolic, abstract note because the soldiers are all wounded, but are surprisingly active and talkative. The first half of the movie deals with the three inept, wounded soldiers confronting each other, without having the guts to gun each other down.Then UNPROFOR gets wind of this conundrum and comes to the the rescue. This is when the movie takes on a satirical twist, and becomes more bearable than the realistically dire first half. But eventually there are no winners in this movie. The knights in white (the warring factions call them the smurfs due to their white uniforms and blue helmets) withdraw and leave a mess behind. We are stuck in Bosnia, a far sight away from cute Hollywood endings.Overall a painful but memorable movie.