If we know Alex Garland for his contributions to science fiction and fantasy, like his work as a screenwriter on 28 Days Later or 28 Years Later, or the direction of Ex Machina, we know that the man has an approach to realism that makes him a renowned author. You only have to see his recent Civil War to understand that he knows how to put himself at the heart of the situation and tell us true or almost true stories.
So, it's not surprising to see him tackle the war film head-on, he who had only just sketched the genre in his previous film. For Warfare, he worked on the script and behind the camera in collaboration with Ray Mendoza, a true actor in the events. An almost documentary-like approach that can be disconcerting, but which also marks his singularity. Two ways of seeing things, each of which is a good reason to take a look.
The (true) story of Warfare
In November 2006, in Iraq, a unit of American Navy Seals took up position in the city of Ramadi to support a Marine operation. Occupying an inhabited house, they quickly suspected that a group of jihadists were preparing to attack the building. If things went wrong, they knew they would have a hard time getting out alive...
A film worth seeing that won't please everyone
As we said earlier, Warfare is the result of a collaboration between Garland and Mendoza. The experience of one as director and screenwriter allows them to put the other's memories into images, for a result that doesn't entirely resemble the filmmaker's baby, nor completely a documentary. A disconcerting hybrid at first glance since it is not the setting in context or the construction of the characters that stifles it.
On the contrary, after a quick atmospheric shot, we are plunged into the heart of the subject, into this house that we will have to occupy and from which we will then have to escape. A film almost behind closed doors, between the two floors of the building. In theory, the project may suggest a retelling of Black Hawk Down, but only in theory.
Because here, nothing we see will come from outside the heads of the soldiers who lived through the events. We are completely immersed in the situation with these men, facing an almost invisible threat. From this feeling of oppression arises the tension and the great unknown of knowing how it will all end. A feeling reinforced by action filmed in real time and where every minute can save lives or cause deaths.
It is also interesting to observe the way Garland and Mendoza use the military tools at their disposal to give us a view of the exterior of the makeshift shelter. To show without showing, thanks to shots taken from drone cameras or the multiple elements that reach us from communication frequencies. The information is there and only accentuates the wind of panic blowing down the spines of the isolated soldiers. We hear the panic and we see the repercussions on the faces of those concerned.
A concern for realism that permeates the entire film and gives us sequences that we are not used to seeing in other films of the genre. No, not every shot hits the mark, yes, you have to think about recovering every piece of equipment or weapon left behind or on the ground, and instructions rain down before each action. Even the blood flows with this taste of reality and leaves wounds that are far from being pretty to see, and we suffer along with them. Warfare manages to be spectacular by being anti-spectacular. And this is where we find a certain connection between this feature film and Garland's Civil War.
Yet, it's easy to think that the film will leave more than one person in the lurch, as it defies expectations so much. The documentary approach prevents sensationalism, and minutes can pass long before something shakes the boat. In the same way that there were disappointments at the lack of “War” in Civil War, the lack of “War” in Warfare, even though the war is there, could put off action fans.
Warfare is a disconcerting film that respects the codes of genre while avoiding all the fictional aspects of a story. It is as fascinating as it is boring. It is a unique experience that can pass for a major cinematic work as well as a great advertisement for the American army and its supportive men. Because yes, no other point of view, no discussion on the interest of the American presence, nothing political here; just uniforms that support each other to the tips of their boots. A film of its time that does not leave you indifferent. And that is already a good reason to give it a chance.
0 Comments