Film Analysis: The Battle Of Algiers

The Battle of Algiers depicts the ending stages of the Algerian war for independence during the end of the 1950’s. The movie begins with torture and manipulation of a member of National Liberation Front (FLN) to force him to give up the location of Ali La Pointe. The last remaining leader of the insurgency. As the movie begins you first notice the horrific burn mark on the inmate's chest. As the movie is shot in black and white it's impossible to miss the mark of torture against the startlingly white skin of his chest. Amidst the shocking use of violence by a trained military against a prisoner the sympathies of the viewer is invoked towards the FLN member. As the scene progresses the broken inmate guides his captors and colonisers to the

Thief, drug-peddler and career criminal. His character is unique as the movie both begins and ends with plot centering around him. With as many point of views that the movie it does a great job of still demonstrating that this is his story as it is told from his point of view in a flashback that begins in the very first minutes of the movie. Cinematically it's a brilliant move, historically however it means that the opinions and themes of the movie is shaped by a very narrow perspective. Pride colors his lines and the actions under taken by him and the FLN. The open wedding with Fahtima and her new husband serves a bright and cheerful event that could have taken place in any other genre of movie. But reality sets in The forced living standards in the Muslims Ghettos. The impunity by which French Europeans can hurl incendiary insults to Arab’s. Even the preferential treatment of European Algerians at the checkpoints. To the point that the FLN exploits that racism by having some of their female operatives. The confusion of Colonel Mathieu on why the public continues to side with the FLN despite the high collateral damage of their attacks and even their own willingness to kill members of their own community is poignant and relevant even in today's political world. The inability to see their administration continuously treats segments of their population as second class citizens under scores why the pacifying goals of the paratroopers were doomed to failure. The

Where the aggressors are trying to achieve the goal of challenging the status quo by any means necessary. Conversely the French are faced with the problems or not only defending their national interests by defeating the FLN but are faced with the task of defeating future sieges by breaking and destroying the FLN totally. As a war film it is surprisingly honest with the motivations and consequences of actions actions undertaken by all parties. Compared to modern western war films the goals of the characters are not polarized as “Good Vs Evil’. One said is not trying to destroy the other while the rebels valiantly fight for survival. The camera close up of the baby in the Cafe seconds before the FLN destroy it with a bomb show the cost of revolution and social reform. Whether it is a response to to the torture and oppression of the French is irrelevant as is debating the moral justifications of the Paratroopers employing tactics such as, Shocking, waterboarding, and burning their prisoners. The only relevant problem is the premise that Colonel Mathieu himself laid out “The FLN want us to leave Algeria and we want to stay.’ As a result the question becomes not what methods are acceptable but what methods are they willing to use to achieve their goals. However in the end that to is demonstrated to be a narrow minded and flawed approach as both sides increase their usage of violence both are ultimately