CLASSIC or ANTIQUE? No Man’s Land (1931)

          “Niemandsland” (No Man’s Land) is a German WWI movie.  It is also entitled "Hell on Earth".  It came out around the same time as “All Quiet on the Western Front”, but is much less familiar to war movie lovers.  Like most WWI movies, it is firmly anti-war.  The movie leads with a title card that proclaims:  “This is a story of conflict! Not of victory or defeat.  Not of armies and generals.  This film portrays the lives, loves, and hates of five men and their families.  Their experiences transcend war.  Their plea for understanding is a call to all embittered humanity?”

            The movie begins by introducing us to five soldiers who are identified as The Englishman, The Frenchman, The Russian Jew, The Vaudevillian, and The German.  There is a cool montage that jumps from country to country.  One thing the nations all have in common is the enthusiasm of the public for the war.  Suddenly we are at the front in a dugout in no man’s land.  The German and The Englishman rescue a wounded soldier who is shell-shocked to the point where he can not talk.  They are joined by The Frenchman and The Vaudevillian who mutters “we’re here because we’re here because here.”  At first their attempt to go back to their own lines is discouraged by machine gun fire, but soon they settle in because the war sucks.  This gives them time for exposition.  Meanwhile on the home front, the ladies are suffering.

            Obviously, the movie is meant to be an allegory.  The theme is the soldiers of WWI are all humans thrust into fighting each other.  If they could just get to know each other, the war would end.  This is a bit simplistic and not exactly ground-breaking.  The film is heavy-handed and predictable. The plot is like that of a play. There is a lot of talking, but little of it is confrontational.   The movie is very micro.  Almost all the action takes place in a basement.  The home front scenes add little to the narrative unfortunately.  Surprisingly, there is little character development beyond the names of the characters. In fact, as in the case of the black vaudevillian, they are stereotyped. He’s the comical one.  The acting is broad and none of the cast stands out. 

            “No Man’s Land” is a must see for any war movie lover determined to watch every significant WWI movie.  Everyone else can skip it.  It is definitely an antique.  Although a talkie, it plays like a silent movie.  It does not compare favorably with contemporaries like “All Quiet…”.  For instance, the one scene where Paul stabs the Frenchman in the shell crater and then ruminates on man’s inhumanity towards man, is more effective than the entire plot of “Niemandsland”.  But perhaps I am being too harsh.  The movie was a sincere attempt to avoid another world war and should be lauded for that although it is easy to snort at the execution.

 GRADE  =  C    

SHOULD I READ IT? "No Man's Land"

    

     “No Man’s Land” is a Bosnian war movie set in the Bosnian War. Most Americans are not familiar with this terrible war that broke out after the break-up of Yugoslavia. The confict, which raged from 1992-1995, is complicated. Basically, it was a war between the Bosnian Muslims of the newly created Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Bosnian Serbs who were supported by the country of Serbia which had desires for territory in Bosnia. Anyway, before your head starts spinning – you do not need to understand the conflict to enjoy the movie. The story is a universal one of enemies thrust together and forced to coexist. It could have taken place in any war (in movies anyway).

     The movie opens with a squad of Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) getting caught in a fog and wandering close to Serbian lines. They are wiped out in a sudden and graphic rain of violence. One (Ciki) survives, but he is stuck in a trench in no man’s land. The Serbs send out two men to check on the situation. The Bosniak hides in a dugout and kills one of them and wounds the other (Nino). They argue over who is to blame for the war. It is a war that featured ethnic cleansing, mass rapes, and even genocide. Of course, it’s the other side that is evil.

     To make matters more interesting, a companion of Ciki suddenly awakens from the dead. The problem is that Nino’s partner had placed a Bouncing Betty mine under his body earlier as a booby trap and now he cannot move without disastrous results. Ciki and Nino make an uneasy truce. They manage to signal both lines and the U.N. peacekeeping force (called “smurfs” because of their blue helmets) is called in. Before Lt. Marchand and his comrade can rescue the men, they are given an order by the U.N. commander to withdraw immediately. Nino is going to go with Marchand, but Ciki shoots him in the leg to keep him in the trench as insurance against a Serbian attack.

     At this point, the international press in the form of an intrepid female reporter (Jane Livingston) sniffs out the story. She intimidates the U.N. commander into allowing Marchand to go back with her in tow (and the rest of the press – so much for her exclusive!). In a nice and necessary touch, a news report chronicles the war up to this point (an important tutorial for the ignorant American audience). Fearing adverse press coverage, the U.N. now decides to save the men including sending in a bomb disposal expert. They arrive just in time to save Ciki from being knifed by Nino.

      The bomb guy is appropriately sweating and in a tense scene (with no music), he discovers that the bomb cannot be defused. I won’t give away the rest.

     “No Man’s Land” is highly acclaimed. It won the Best Foreign Film Oscar in an upset over the popular “Amelie”. It won a total of 42 international awards. The set (the trench) is realistic. The situation is believable, if a bit contrived. It is full of surprises. In a normal movie, the bomb would be defused. The rapprochement between Ciki and Nino would bear fruit.

      Did you guess the movie is anti-war? It is also instructive of how horrible most civil wars are. It takes some legitimate swipes at the press, stressing its desire for sensational stories. The indictment of the U.N. high command is a bit cliché. We’ve seen corrupt, Machiavellian officers in plenty of movies.

      “No Man’s Land” is a bit overrated (possibly out of sympathy for the Bosnians), but still well worth the viewing. Watch it for the interesting dilemma it revolves around and watch it so you won’t feel so guilty about sleeping through a war that killed at least 200,000 people and featured many atrocities.