If you believe like I do, that war is utterly futile, then you should view Breaker Morant. There is no better film that captures that essence. Even after 10 viewings, this film still captivates my complete attention.
And there are many reasons. Just to list a few: the plot is riveting, the actors are superbly cast in their disparate roles and the natural backdrop and scenery are simply stunning. Amidst all of that lies the core attraction of this film: courtroom drama. Even The Bard would have had much difficulty replicating such suspense, emotion and linguistic eloquence in a play. Speaking of suspense, during the military court-martial, each and every utterance from the main players had my full and complete attention.
Not many, if any one film of a similar genre has ever done that before.
If there is one weakness though, the film is Aussie biased; so much so, that I got the impression the directors/producers blamed Britain solely for the execution of two of their native sons. Yes, the 'Thin Red Line' was culpable for committing atrocities against the Boers (concentration camps in Northern Transvaal) but were the British the lone culprits?
Now, hold on a New York minute! It's true that Lord Kitchener sought a quick way to extricate himself (and the Brits) from this 'dirty' war. And it's implicit in the film that, Morant and at least one of his two lieutenants were expendable BUT it's also clear that two of the Aussie colonial volunteer soldiers did commit murder: the German pastor. And the soldiers were even unabashed about the events leading up to the heinous deed during the court martial. In the dock, they all admitted their 'hate' for the German pastor's partisan stand. Their words...
"He helped the Boer cause, solely. And we warned him about the consequences, many times."
And justice was served; the fact that it came by a British military court martial is moot. As soldiers, those Aussies knew the penalty. And the one (George) who was spared execution, probably knows now or should have known then, that he was only 'pardoned' because of his young age. Although, judging by the film's plot, his 'role' in the atrocities was deemed negligible even by the prosecution. The judges though didn't exactly state a compelling case for his innocence either.
Not convinced? Watch this film and 'judge' for yourself...
And there are many reasons. Just to list a few: the plot is riveting, the actors are superbly cast in their disparate roles and the natural backdrop and scenery are simply stunning. Amidst all of that lies the core attraction of this film: courtroom drama. Even The Bard would have had much difficulty replicating such suspense, emotion and linguistic eloquence in a play. Speaking of suspense, during the military court-martial, each and every utterance from the main players had my full and complete attention.
Not many, if any one film of a similar genre has ever done that before.
If there is one weakness though, the film is Aussie biased; so much so, that I got the impression the directors/producers blamed Britain solely for the execution of two of their native sons. Yes, the 'Thin Red Line' was culpable for committing atrocities against the Boers (concentration camps in Northern Transvaal) but were the British the lone culprits?
Now, hold on a New York minute! It's true that Lord Kitchener sought a quick way to extricate himself (and the Brits) from this 'dirty' war. And it's implicit in the film that, Morant and at least one of his two lieutenants were expendable BUT it's also clear that two of the Aussie colonial volunteer soldiers did commit murder: the German pastor. And the soldiers were even unabashed about the events leading up to the heinous deed during the court martial. In the dock, they all admitted their 'hate' for the German pastor's partisan stand. Their words...
"He helped the Boer cause, solely. And we warned him about the consequences, many times."
And justice was served; the fact that it came by a British military court martial is moot. As soldiers, those Aussies knew the penalty. And the one (George) who was spared execution, probably knows now or should have known then, that he was only 'pardoned' because of his young age. Although, judging by the film's plot, his 'role' in the atrocities was deemed negligible even by the prosecution. The judges though didn't exactly state a compelling case for his innocence either.
Not convinced? Watch this film and 'judge' for yourself...