Monthly Archives: March 2015

Movie: For Whom the Bell Tolls (1943)

Posted on by
Reply

Hemingway was an “active intellectual”; he noticed whenever something was happening anywhere on earth, was instinctively attracted to that place, and actually went there. He was sent to France as a correspondent for the North American Newspaper Alliance. For Whom the Bell Tolls is a novel by Hemingway published in 1940 that depicts the Spanish Civil War (the battle between the fascist army led by Franco’s military authorities and the guerrilla army that opposed them) that was happening in the 1930s; it is told through a fictional American character who assisted the anti-fascists. This movie is the 1943 film adaptation of this novel. Gary Cooper, a close friend of Hemingway’s, was entrusted to the role after starring in A Farewell to Arms (1932), and Ingrid Bergman performed María, the protagonist’s lover.

The monarchy was overturned in Spain in 1931, and a Republic based on a constitution was established; however, the government was unstable, and soon after the military coup d’état attempt in 1932, Spain fell into a state of chaos. The official Spanish Civil War was from 1936 to 1939; this movie depicts 1937. This was not a simple civil war; volunteer armies from the Soviet Union, Mexico, and other nations supported the Republicans, while the fascists led by military leaders such as General Franco got support from Japan, Germany, Italy, and Portugal. The powers were quite evenly matched, and it is said that at least 500,000 people died in battle. The movie depicts the interaction between the partisans/guerillas of the Republican faction, who are holed up in the mountains in the Segovia province near Madrid, and the protagonist—an American professor of Spanish and explosives specialist—who assists the guerrillas under the instructions of a Soviet Union commander. The bombers of the Italian army (an army Hemingway once supported) attacking the mountain in which the American protagonist is hiding demonstrates the change in Italy over the last 20 years.

Returning to discussing the movie, when this movie was being made, many top actresses in those days expressed interest in the role of María, but in the end, a ballerina who did not have much acting experience was chosen. When filming began, the director was unsatisfied with her acting ability. It is said that before being fired from the role as María, she quit and gave up the role; Ingrid Bergman, who Hemingway was hoping for, was hurriedly chosen from the auditions, and the scenes with María were reshot. Ingrid Bergman said something like the following on this situation:

“The reason the ballerina gave up the role of María voluntarily is that the role of María is demanding; she has to go up and down cliffs where the caves are, and the ballerina was afraid she would injure her legs during filming. After all, the legs are most important for a ballerina, much like how the face is most important for an actress, I think.”

With her casual comment, she aptly says how “looks” were the most important thing in Hollywood in those days. It’s no wonder that Hollywood movies in the 1950s or earlier were little more than elementary school plays performed by handsome men and beautiful women.

Today, of course, there are some actors such as Julia Roberts, Brad Pitt, or Tom Hanks who are primarily chosen for their popularity and, if they accept the role, will receive a performance fee of multi-million (!) dollars unconditionally. But nowadays, the criteria for selecting an actor often seem to be, “How well can they perform the role realistically?” In this sense, what are most important are the background of the actor and their acting ability to realistically express the character’s historical context, age, personality, and ethnicity. Also, since filmmaking is a team project, they must be a team player who gets along with everyone, healthy, punctual, and professional so as to not waste other people’s time. Since “time is money,” you can’t waste time.

Actresses of the same generation as Ingrid Bergman include Vivien Leigh, Olivia de Havilland, Joan Fontaine, Jennifer Jones, and Loretta Young, and these women came before Hollywood’s flowers, such as Grace Kelly, Audrey Hepburn, Marilyn Monroe, and Elizabeth Taylor. These actresses of Ingrid’s generation died young and had short-lived activity as actresses, but Ingrid Bergman continued working as an actress up until she died in the 1980s, and kept her reputation as a great actress until she died. Therefore, she was an actress with more than just a beautiful face.

日本語→

Movie: Ashes and Diamonds — Popiół i diament (1958)

Posted on by
Reply

This movie is very difficult to understand. The original work was literature that praised the leader of the communist party, and it was approved by the Communist Party of Poland; but in the movie adaptation, director Andrzej Wajda made the communist party leader protagonist into a supporting role, and made a young guerilla planning an assassination—who had just a minor role in the original work—the protagonist in the movie. This protagonist is a freewheeling and unattached young man with weird-looking glasses. He falls in love with the girl at a bar—who is like a diamond in the ash—and they understand each other’s circumstances of their families being massacred by German soldiers; with this, he begins to transform—once he takes off his glasses—into a lonely handsome man resembling James Dean. I think the reason this movie is hard to understand is that the political situation at that time was complicated, and in order to pass censorship, the movie minimizes conversation and uses many metaphors.

images1There of course was severe censorship of movies by the Communist Party of Poland. Except for the protagonist in the original becoming a supporting role, the movie remains faithful to the original work that was approved by authorities, and the last scene with the young man dying in the landfill like worthless ash seems to warn, “Hahaha, that’s what happens when you rebel against the Communist Party.” However, it is said that those who were censoring felt something suspicious about this movie, and that they discussed with Moscow seriously about whether or not to approve this movie. In the end, since there wasn’t anything concrete that could be blamed, it passed censorship. However, because the movie received overwhelming praise in Western Europe when the producer put himself in danger by submitting it to the Venice Film Festival, the communist administration felt, “I don’t know what it is, but there must be anti-establishment thought inserted into this movie.” After this, director Wajda—who was already watched closely by the authorities—was completely blacklisted.

The circumstances of Poland during World War II are depicted in director Wajda’s Katyń. Even with the change in the political system, his attitude did not waver at all over the 50 year period between these movies, and he persevered through his hard times in Poland without choosing to flee his country. It is no wonder he is respected.

In this movie, a guerilla, who is targeting the life of a Communist Party politician, is a member of an anti-Germany partisan group. It may be hard to understand why these people who oppose Germany are attempting to assassinate a communist—who aligns with the Soviet Union that chased away Germany—without understanding the situation of those days.

In August 1939, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union entered the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression treaty, and a secret stipulation within that treaty was that Germany and the Soviet Union would divide Poland. That following September, they started invading Poland, with the German and Slovakian armies from the west on September 1, and the Soviet Army from east on the 17th. The Polish government escaped to London and formed the “Polish government-in-exile,” which guided partisans in Poland. For the Polish government-in-exile, the Soviet Union was the abominable country that had, with Germany, invaded Poland; but when forced to choose between the Nazis and the Soviet Union, the Polish government had to choose the Soviet Union as an ally because Great Britain had already allied to the Soviet Union. However, there was the Katyn incident, and Poland did not trust the Soviet Union.

The Soviet Union established a communist puppet government in Poland—separate from the Polish government-in-exile in London—that followed orders from the Soviet Union and opposed the partisans led by the government-in-exile that was supported by Great Britain. After all, World War II was a conflict between Britain, Germany, and the Soviet Union, and because of Poland’s geographical location, the true nature of the conflict became clear in Poland. Under the orders of the Polish government-in-exile, the partisans in Poland rose up against Germany several times, and the largest of these was the Warsaw Uprising in June of 1944. This uprising was actually proposed by the Soviet Union, but the Soviet Army cut off support to the revolting army at a critical time. In the end, it became a battle between the German army and the Polish resistance Home Army. Hitler, concluding that the Soviet Union Red Army had no intention at all to rescue Warsaw, ordered for the suppression of the resistance Home Army and complete destruction of Warsaw. The Polish resistance Home Army had overwhelming support from the citizens of Warsaw, and they put up a good fight, but in the end, the army failed with the uprising. Many in the Home Army died, but those who survived escaped via underground water tunnels. Warsaw was destroyed as a punitive attack by the German army; after this, participants in the uprising were considered terrorists, and about 220,000 partisans and citizens were executed. After the uprising settled, the Soviet Red Army finally resumed their attack and occupied the ruins of Warsaw in January 1945. Afterwards, the Soviet Red Army arrested partisan leaders, and oppressed partisans wishing for Poland’s independence.

Ashes and Diamonds depicts four days, over which Commissar Szczuka moves to a Polish town for his new job as the occupying commander after Germany surrendered in 1945, and partisan Maciek, who has no relatives, receives orders and plans Szcuka’s assassination. For Britain, America, and France of the Allies, Germany’s surrender was the first step toward happy days, but for Poland, it was an ominous sign for their uncertain future.

images2After the failure of the Warsaw Uprising, the partisans supported by Great Britain finally recognized the Soviet Union as their true enemy, and made the Soviet Union the target of their attacks. The few surviving anticommunist partisans hid in the forest and resisted the Soviet Union, but since it became clear that the Soviet Union would be the ruler of Poland, resistance was futile. Director Wajda modeled Maciek after James Dean, who became an international star with Rebel Without a Cause, and he asked Zbigniew Cybulski who played Maciek to study James Dean. In fact, after the success of this movie, Zbigniew Cybulski came to be called the “Polish James Dean.” James Dean and Zbigniew Cybulski were the same generation, and James Dean died in a traffic accident at the age of 24, while Zbigniew Cybulski died in an accident when he was 39. Keiichiro Akagi—said to be the Japanese James Dean—also died young in a traffic accident when he was 21 years old.

日本語→

Movie: The Chorus — Les Choristes (2004)

Posted on by
Reply

World-renowned conductor Pierre Morhange hurriedly returns to his homeland France when he learns that his mother passed away during a New York performance. After his mother’s funeral service, he is visited by a man named Pépinot. The movie goes back 50 years after it is revealed that Pépinot went to the same school as Pierre, and they were taught by their teacher Clément Mathieu.

In 1949, after World War II, Clément Mathieu becomes the dormitory dean at a boarding school called Fond de l’Étang (Bottom of the Pond), where war orphans and problem children are sent. Under the direction of the principal to use severe corporal punishment to discipline the children, harsh punishment is repeatedly administered for those children that resist the teachers, and children are not encouraged to cultivate their future goals and dreams. Mathieu was a musician, bonds with the children through choir, and is able to teach the children discipline as well as the joy of music. Pierre is seen as a problem child, but Mathieu notices that the boy has a miraculous “singing voice of an angel” and tries to develop his talent.

The principal has no love for the students at all, and he is a man who aimed for fame and awards by managing an orphanage. When it is discovered that a large quantity of money is missing from the safe at the school, the worst juvenile delinquent Mondain is thought to have stolen it; after an interrogation that is near torture, Mondain does not admit to the crime, so is expelled from the school. Later, Mondain sets the boarding school on fire for the sake of revenge, but nobody dies because Mathieu happened to have taken all the students on a school trip during that time. However, the principal dismisses Mathieu, saying it is a violation of school regulations to take students any place off the premises, and doesn’t allow him to say goodbye to the students.

Because of this, Mathieu leaves the boarding school alone, and the students had no way of knowing what happened to him after this. At the end of the movie, it is revealed why Pépinot knows about Mathieu’s life after he left. The ending scene is very poignant.

Some may think that juvenile delinquents cannot be easily rehabilitated with the power of music, but the children in this movie are not evil boys with twisted minds. The children in this boarding school are mostly orphans who lost their parents in the war, or children of mothers who have to work all day long after their husband died in the war. The children here may have stolen bread from a shop in order to survive, but fundamentally, these children are just lonely and aren’t taught any direction in life. They conduct mischief, but it is because, as a result of having no parents, they aren’t taught what terrible outcomes one’s thoughtless mischief could bring. After mischief, they receive cruel corporal punishment from the principal; they gradually close their hearts and their behavior becomes worse and worse. Mondain did not steal the large amount of money from the safe. The boy who did steal the money just wanted to buy a toy blimp, but he just puts this money into his secret stash and does not use any of it.

In addition, when the boys met Mathieu, they were of the age before their voices have changed. It was within that short miraculous period of still having boy soprano voices like angels that the boys were taught the delight of singing. Since the boys were still young, they were searching for paternal affection and their rebelling was not very serious, so they responded well to Mathieu’s affection.

When Pierre’s talent was discovered, he continued on to a music academy with a prestigious scholarship, and became a world-famous conductor. He had forgotten about Mathieu and the boarding school of the remote past, but when Pépinot shows him a class photograph, he recollects fondly. When we look at Pierre’s life, we realize how important it is to meet a good teacher, especially in those younger days when growing up. Mathieu did not give Pierre preferential treatment in the relatively short time that he worked with Pierre. However, if Pierre had not met Mathieu, Pierre would not have become a world-famous musician, and in a worse case, he could’ve ended up in prison. It is rare to meet your elementary teacher again after becoming an adult. When you are busy raising children or pursuing a career, you may completely forget your elementary teacher, but when your parents die and you start to realize that life is not infinite, it would not be uncommon for you to think about a teacher from long ago, and, while you may have forgotten their name, you may fondly remember their face and their kindness.

This movie overtook the historical hit Amélie, and it became the number one biggest hit in the history of French movies; it is said that 1 in 7 French people have watched this movie. Jacques Perrin—an international star (and handsome actor) from France—produced this movie, while his nephew Christophe Barratier directed it, and Perrin’s third son, Maxence Perrin, performed as the lovely child Pépinot. Jacques Perrin played the elderly Pierre. Jacques Perrin produced and acted in the timeless masterpiece Z, and received an Academy Award for this. Although it is difficult to succeed as an actor, Jacques Perrin has both succeeded as an actor and produced movies like Z and The Chorus that will remain in history. He must have been born under an exceptionally lucky star.

日本語→

Movie: No Man’s Land –Ničija zemlja (2001)

Posted on by
Reply

No man’s land is the area between enemy forces facing each other in a stalemate during a war, and as a general rule, no one enters no man’s land. This movie is set sometime in the Bosnian War between 1992 and 1995. It depicts half a day that includes two Bosnian soldiers that wander into the no man’s land between the trenches of the battling Serbian and Bosnian armies and are shot by the Serbian army; a Serbian soldier who is wounded in no man’s land while investigating; French sergeant Marchand of the UN forces who goes in to rescue these now three seriously wounded soldiers; a German soldier of the UN forces with a specialty in bombs who goes in to help the sergeant; and a female British reporter named Livingstone trying to get a scoop.

A novice Serbian soldier Nino along with another old soldier are given a dangerous mission by a superior officer to look into what looks like an invasion of the no man’s land by Bosnian soldiers, while the superior officer stays in a safe place. The old soldier thinks that the Bosnian soldier Cera who fell down in no man’s land is dead, and attaches a land mine under his body. The land mine is set to explode if a comrade of the Bosnian solder lifts his body. However, the old soldier is killed by another Bosnian soldier Čiki, who had been injured and hiding secretly, and Nino becomes injured. A struggle between the three people stuck in the trench—Cera who couldn’t move because of the land mine, and Čiki and Nino who are injured—inevitably ensues.

Čiki and Nino are enemies in the war, but they speak the same language, lived in the same town when there was peace, and have a mutual acquaintance. Their faces light up spontaneously when they talk about the woman they know in common. The two are trying to defeat each other and somehow escape from the trench, but when the other is in trouble, they unexpectedly show gentle sympathy towards each other.

This movie does not depict the background of the Bosnian War, but, by depicting concrete and typical individuals, this movie attempts to depict the essence of war—not only the Bosnian War—in an abstract way. At first in the trench, Čiki thinks the Serbian side started the war while Nino thinks the Bosnian side did, and they blame each other, but gradually they both start having doubts about their reasons for fighting each other, who started the war, and why they have to obey orders. Sergeant Marchand believes that the mission of a neutral UN officer is to, instead of doing nothing, help injured soldiers as much as possible, but his superior officer, who gives him orders from a distant and safe place, is indifferent and doesn’t wish to get involved in the situation. The reporter Livingstone believes it is her mission as a reporter to tell the world what is happening on the battlefield, and at the same time, is feverish in her ambition to get a scoop on the current situation that nobody else has; thus, she approaches the trench at the risk of danger. Her TV station coworkers in Great Britain receiving her footage ask of her, “Give us more juicy coverage”; when they watch the footage of the real life-and-death struggle between Čiki and Nino in the trench, though, they are stunned. When the footage of Livingstone and her crew reaches a global audience, the UN forces have to do damage control. In the end, the victims of politics are the soldiers on the front. Sergeant Marchand gazes sadly at his superior when the officer lies and leaves.

This movie depicts the different standpoints of Čiki, Nino, Cera, Sergeant Marchand, and the reporter Livingstone from the same distance so that the audience can feel sympathy for everyone. The question isn’t which side—Bosnia or Serbia—is the bad guy. One after another, moments of understanding appear—first between the soldiers of opposing armies, then between the neutral UN forces and journalist—and then disappear. This movie makes the audience pray, “I wish everyone stops fighting and can return home safely!!!” Against the audience’s prayer, the movie’s conclusion is too cruel and sad. However, the reality of the Bosnian War does not permit a simple happy ending. A simple happy ending would not honor the soldiers who were involved or died in the war. By watching this sad ending, the audience will certainly wish more deeply for peace. Such is the power of this movie.

日本語→

Movie: Kolya (1996)

Posted on by
Reply

This movie depicts the emotional bond between an aging Czech musician and a Russian boy living in then-Czechoslovakia in 1988. The time depicted is the turbulent period leading up to the Velvet Revolution, which was the relatively peaceful overthrow of the Communist Party government and one of the events marking the end of the Cold War.

Once a top cellist, Louka is now poor and makes a living with various part-time jobs. In exchange for money, he reluctantly has a sham marriage with a Russian woman in order for her to get a Czech passport, but this woman leaves behind her five-year-old son, Kolya, with his aunt and flees to West Germany. However, the aunt suddenly dies, and Louka is left to care for Kolya. At first, they feel awkward with each other, but gradually affection grows between the two. However, since Louka’s older brother also fled to the West, the secret police suspect Louka of helping the Russian woman flee the country with a fake marriage, and they start an investigation; also, a female social worker appears and is going to send Kolya to an orphanage in Russia… The story continues on, and ends with Czechoslovakia succeeding with the Velvet Revolution and overthrowing the rule of the Soviet Union.

Since the little boy who plays Kolya is too cute, and the story is filled with light humor and wit, one would think this movie is a heart-warming story of love between the little boy and the cellist, but I think this movie wants to depict the resentment of Czechs towards the rule of the Soviet Union, the day-to-day life of the people living under Soviet rule, and the emotional responses of people during turbulent times. The impression I get is that sweet Kolya is used to make the movie charming, but Kolya is just a cute child to an adult, and the depiction of the boy’s emotions is shallow. Also, Louka is depicted as an irresponsible man who chases after women. Is he just pretending to be an irresponsible womanizer in order to avoid attention after losing his former top social status, or is this his true personality? I can’t tell because Louka’s depiction is not deep enough. Perhaps the reason for depicting Louka this way is that the movie wants to draw a dramatic contrast between him at first being irresponsible and at the end being loving. However, the love that develops between the sweet-looking child and the cartoon-like adult is not very persuading. If this is a story of love, I must say it is a story made without the understanding of love.

Information provided by the radio and newspaper about the times is inserted throughout this movie, so the audience is able to understand what is happening in the outside world. Conversations between the people are frequently about how annoying Soviet Union soldiers are. In the end, this movie made after the victory of the Velvet Revolution seems to have the intention of documenting, “what life was like for people under the tyrannical rule of the Soviet Union,” and that, “Czechs hated the Nazis. But the Soviet Union that came afterwards was as bad.” First Secretary Alexander Dubček played a central role in the “Prague Spring” reformation movement in 1968, but the Warsaw Treaty Organization led by the Soviet Union later crushed it with a military intervention; Czechoslovakia became a secret police nation like East Germany, and people lived holding their breath, in fear of being informed on.

However, things have certainly changed. Hungary at last decided to open the national border with Austria in 1989. Since it was feasible for people of East Germany to make their way to Hungary, many East Germans started trying to enter Hungary; from there, they could cross the national border to Austria, then from there, move to West Germany. Also, just like Kolya’s mother in this movie, people from Russia moved to Czech territories—where entry was allowed—and planned to use a Czech passport to flee further to West Germany. Even if East Germany citizens didn’t have a Hungarian passport, countless East Germans went to Hungary in hopes of somehow crossing the national border to Austria.

In August of 1989, the Hungarian Democratic Forum held the Pan-European Picnic in Sopron, the Hungarian town nearest to Austria. Rumors saying that those who participated in this meeting could cross over the national border spread, and a great number of East Germany citizens gathered in this town; one after another, they started to cross the national border, but Hungarian authorities didn’t stop them. This news spread within East Germany, and even more citizens of East Germany gathered at the Hungary and Czechoslovakia borders in order to cross over to Austria and West Germany, respectively. Stimulated by this news, citizens in East Germany demanded more and more for freedom, and the Berlin Wall at last came down on November 10, 1989. On November 17, the Velvet Revolution broke out in Czechoslovakia, and the Communist Party administration collapsed. The Soviet Union did not intervene anymore. The humiliation of the Prague Spring was not repeated.

Zdeněk Svěrák, who played Louka in this movie, also wrote the script, while his son Jan Svěrák directed the movie. Jan Svěrák was only 30 years old when he picked up the megaphone for this movie, and he was a 23-year-old student when the Velvet Revolution happened. This movie seems to be loaded with Zdeněk’s desire to convey to the young generation, including his son, what life was like under the Soviet Union system, and the hope he has as a father for his son’s future. Zdeněk Svěrák was 32 years old when he experienced the Prague Spring.

日本語→

Movie: Beaufort (2007)

Posted on by
Reply

We all know of a country named Israel, and we are also aware of what the Nazis led by Hitler did to Jews in World War II, but it is a little hard for Japanese people to understand the complexity of what kind of country Israel is today, what is happening in Israel, and what kind of relationship Israel has with their neighbors—the Palestinian National Authority, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. Therefore, when Japanese people watch this movie, it is difficult to understand what young Israeli soldiers are doing in Beaufort castle in south Lebanon. Although the Israeli soldiers do not attack anyone in this movie, missiles soar incessantly from somewhere and young soldiers die one after another.

The movie is set in 2000, but this movie is difficult to understand unless you look at the background leading up to it. Since the outbreak of the Arab-Israeli War, Jordan actively accepted the Palestinian refugees driven from Israel; but after the Six-Day War, they changed their direction and expelled Palestinian refugees from Jordan in order to maintain a more neutral alignment. These Palestinian immigrants moved to Lebanon and brought about great chaos in Lebanese politics which had been under a delicate balance between Christians and Muslims; after this, Syria became more influential over Lebanon.

In 1982, with one border secured with the peace agreement between Egypt and Israel that was mediated by the Carter administration, Israel suddenly invaded a chaotic Lebanon and besieged Lebanon’s capital, Beirut. The true intentions were to remove Syria and other Arab influence from Lebanon, convert Lebanon into a pro-Israel nation, and keep Bashir Gemayel—a charismatic, pro-Israel, anti-Syria, young Lebanese leader—in power in Lebanon’s government. Bashir was elected as president in the August 1982 elections, but was assassinated in the following September. Lebanon plunged deeper into civil war as a result of this. Beaufort is a historic castle that was built by the Crusaders in the 12th century and Israel took control of this castle during this fierce battle.

In response to the invasion of the Israel army, a military association called Hezbollah was formed in Lebanon. It was a radical Shia Islamic organization and its main objectives were to found an Iranian-style Islamic Republic in Lebanon and remove non-Islamic influence in that area. It took an anti-Western stance and supported the Israeli extermination; it is said that Iran and Syria supported this. On the other hand, Sunni nations such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt criticized the actions of Hezbollah. Since the 1980s, Hezbollah has attacked facilities associated with the West and Israel that were both within and outside of Lebanon including the suicide bombing on the American Marine Corps barracks in Beirut in 1983, the suicide bombing of the American Embassy in Beirut in 1984, and attacking the Israel Embassy in Argentina in 1992. In the movie, the Hezbollah attacks the Israel army in Beaufort with missiles from a distance.

During the Cold War, America supported Israel and adopted the strategy to make Israel the center of anti-Soviet Union politics within the Arab region, but since 1990, the world situation changed and Iraq became a threat to America. In return for Syria dispatching troops for the Gulf War, America allowed Syria to settle the civil war in Lebanon in Syria’s favor. Thus, Israel’s invasion of Lebanon did not result in what Israel envisioned and, under criticism from the whole world, they proceeded to withdraw from Lebanon. In 2000, Beaufort functioned as the only base and lookout point for Israel in Lebanon, but the Israeli government finally decided to withdraw troops from there.

This movie focuses on the Israeli soldiers who were sent here just after being drafted as teenagers and didn’t understand the international dynamics; since Israel has decided to withdraw, a counterattack is not allowed, but even though the soldiers request to leave the fortress, the reply from headquarters is to just wait. Squad members die one after another while there is no superior officer to depend on. This movie depicts soldiers who have a pessimistic feeling about how their lives are being risked to protect the fortress that will soon be abandoned, are dissatisfied with the inexperienced leadership of the commanding officer who is also young, dream of returning to Israel and being reunited with their lovers, and, through it all, have mutual friendships and encourage each other.

The undercurrent flowing through this movie is the question of, “What was the huge sacrifice of the attack of 1982 for?” With the world believing that the chaos in Lebanon was entirely because of Israel, Israel’s international standing worsened. No country wants to look back on their own past of violent acts that were criticized by other countries as historical mistakes. Hitler from Germany, Franco from Spain, the Dirty War in Argentina, and the Pacific War in Japan are a few examples. Even though these were historic disgraces, they happened and each country chose what they thought was the best option at that time. The Lebanon Civil War may have been a great mistake for Israel whose top priority has been to establish their home country. However, after watching this movie, I honestly hope that the people of Israel who have been struggling to maintain their nation under a complicated balance of power adopt the very best political measures in the future by learning from history.

日本語→