Michael_Elliott
Carabiniers, Les (1963) * (out of 4) Um, okay. Jean-Luc Godard film about two farmers who are picked by the King to join the war. The two aren't that interested at first but soon become very interested when they're promised that they can rape, murder, steal from and torture anyone they please since "that's what war is all about". I've seen plenty of anti-war film but there's no doubt this is the worst of the bunch. I'm going to go out on a limb and say this film is directed well since there's no way in hell, not even Ed Wood, could have made a film like this without it being on purpose. I wasn't shocked to learn that this film was bashed and bombed when it was first released in France only to gain popularity four years later in America. With all the anti-Vietnam stuff going on there's no wonder they ate this film up. The whole message was just downright stupid and if it was meant as satire then it didn't come off too well. The only nice scene is one where one of the soldiers goes to the movies for the first time. I wouldn't even call this thing technically well made like the previous film I watched. Compared to Paths of Glory this sucker is on the level of an Ed Wood film.
lolita27
throughout his work in the early to mid-sixties, jean luc godard rode the nouvelle vague by employing and twisting the classic features of a specific film genre. examples of this are his sci-fi (alphaville), and his beloved gangster film (breathless).when examining les carabiniers, his take on the war movie, one must see godard's purpose in two parts; one, as an anti-war movie, and two, as an anti-war-movie movie.that is, in addition to the visual social commentary which displays the standard horrific shots of dismemberment and destruction, godard uses the structural components of his film as a whole to mock films along the lines of 'private ryan'.this means that he refuses to use the concept of war as something that will prove to provide the viewer with any degree of vicarious pleasure, whether that pleasure be derived from identification with a noble lead (which is surely why he has ulysses and michelangelo be such jackasses), beautiful glimmering visuals, (hence the low-caliber film stock), or enjoyable montage and pacing (akin to the conclusive lengthy postcard recounting).
to end this brief rebuff to those who compare this film to tomb raider, i will quote critic david steritt, who states that in les carabiniers, godard refuses to turn aggression into commodification.
rcraig62
Saw this film on TCM this past Friday and found it to be a weak effort attempting to be a powerful anti-war statement. Two uniformed French militia break into the home of this small family living in the French boonies and press the men into service with promises of untold wealth and plunder. They decide it sounds like a good deal and join the King's army. From there, we see them engage in the various pointless exploits of war until the King makes peace and their dreams of fortune turn to nothing. This film attempts to be a serious commentary on the nihilism of war but is executed without much depth. The two "list" scenes in the movie, (the riflemen detailing each item of plunder at the soldier's disposal and the French soldiers returning home with a suitcase full of snapshots of their travels), lasted, I would estimate, about a hundred years, and if you remove them from the film, the running time is about 9 minutes. Couple of good scenes (a titillating film being watched in small theatre and a pretty blonde revolutionary getting blown away by firing squad) but not enough to recommend this film. For better Godard, see Breathless or Le Petit Soldat. Leave this klunker in the discount rack. *1/2*
ftm68_99
That this movie got a 6.8 on the IMDB rating scale astounds me. That its audiences were expected to pay to see it and that it was thought worthy of being re-issued on dvd astounds me. Whatever points it was trying to make got lost in the what I found to be the ugliness of the film-making. Jean-Luc Godard, je vous accuse.
AD
