dave s
Other than the opening shot and the brief final scene, Lebanon is set entirely within the confines of a tank. At the beginning of the Lebanon War in 1982, four young Israeli soldiers find themselves trapped in hostile territory, ultimately unable to find their way out and abandoned by ground troops. Featuring some impressive cinematography and lighting, solid direction (the close-ups are often devastating), an effective music score, realistic performances, and some great sound effects, Lebanon is a harrowing journey into the heart of darkness, a film that feels so real that you can almost smell the smoke, taste the grit and feel the sweat.
Rated 4.5/5 Stars •
Rated 4.5 out of 5 stars
03/30/23
Full Review
Audience Member
It is hard to belive "Lebanon" is only Samuel Maoz's sophomore picture, which is, to say the least, one of the most touching, sensitive, and thrillingly original war films ever made.
Rated 4/5 Stars •
Rated 4 out of 5 stars
02/27/23
Full Review
Audience Member
As far as war films go, this isn't up to modern day expectations. It's not as gripping or intense as I would hope and certainly can't hold a candle to Fury which is the obvious comparison. There's also a ridiculous anecdote that sounded like one of Jay's boats from the inbetweeners strangely thrown in. A film of great critical repute but I'm not buying it. One good ten minute scene towards the end aside, it just fails to draw the viewer in.
Rated 2/5 Stars •
Rated 2 out of 5 stars
01/28/23
Full Review
nefasto r
I really loved "Foxtrot", one of the best film I've seen last year and the main reason to watch this. That is also why I am pretty disappointed from it: I was expecting more. Instead the movie, although with powerful ingredients, never finds an emotional payoff.
Rated 2.5/5 Stars •
Rated 2.5 out of 5 stars
03/31/23
Full Review
Audience Member
Although gripping and seemingly authentic, the lack of discipline and cowardice of the tank's crew indicate that if this is a true portrayal it's no surprise the war lasted so long because of their unprofessional soldiering. I have to admit it was quite a feat having the entire film shot inside the tank, rather like an equivalent of Das Boot.
Rated 3/5 Stars •
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
01/24/23
Full Review
Audience Member
From Das Boot to downfall to Dunkirk, films about war go as far back as the beginning of cinema itself. The sheer number of productions chronicling the horrific, wartime experience is a testament to their significance in the film industry. While some depictions of war are pure, fantastical spectacle, others are committed to exposing the gruesome terrors of war. As such, the 2010 film Lebanon which recounts the emotional traumas of an Israeli tank crew in the 1982 war against Lebanon belongs to the latter category. Shot almost entirely from within the claustrophobic confines of the tank, the film is concerned with the barriers imposed on the young soldiers: physical barriers separating the crew from the warzone outside, political barriers that mandate their actions and imprisoning social barriers that force them to conform to certain expectations. The genius of Samuel Maoz's film lies in the way in which it deals with these barriers in unique and liberating ways while still depicting all the mind-numbing terror, confusion, psychological trauma, and moral dilemma that the young soldiers face.
Like most war films, it doesn't shy away from the graphic violence that characterizes these productions-earth-shattering explosions, ceaseless gunfire, mangled bodies littering the ground. What sets Lebanon apart is its three-dimensional characters who do not conform to the fearless, brutal, ruthless war hero archetypes. Where one would conventionally expect unflinching brutality from a gunman, Shmulik is unable to bring himself to shoot the cannon even after being warned by the commander in-charge, putting his entire team in danger; even when the stakes are high, he cannot seem to detach himself enough from his moral conscience in order to complete his task, sending the audience a powerful message about what it means to be human. Where one would expect the superior officer to be a leader of unquestionable authority, Assi is constantly being challenged by his team and is often seen as an equal rather than a superior figure. Instead of keeping his cool when they get two-timed by the phalanges after which they land up in the middle of an ambush, even he seems to lose hope and direction. Similarly, the driver and the loader are depicted as nervous, scared, and missing their families. There is nothing excessively valiant about these characters. The audience is taken by surprise as the tank driver, gunman, loader, and their superior officer are surprisingly human. When things go wrong, the soldiers react like normal people would: by getting angry, frustrated or crying. Unlike the standard characters in war movies, these soldiers don't feel compelled to act "macho" or "heroic". For instance, the driver Yigal, who is the only son of his widowed mother, expresses his concern for her and talks about how she must be rearranging his photo albums and thinking of him. Even when dealing with the war prisoner, they did not feel compelled to exert their power over him by taunting and torturing him. Instead, they treat him well and even go so far as to sympathize with him. Thus, the film Lebanon breaks down war stereotypes, drawing our attention to how these men are primarily human first and then soldiers, rather than the reverse. In this way, it manages to transcend social expectations that often translate into restricting boundaries, offering an alternative, perhaps more truthful depiction of the psychological trauma of going to war.
The film also plays with physical and political boundaries in interesting ways which is particularly evident in the scene where Shmulik is watching in terror as the army outside the tank shoots an entire family in front of a Lebanese mother. Unable to comprehend what she just witnessed, the woman stumbles around naked mourning for her young daughter in the debris. She catches sight of the tank and comes closer and closer to the mouth of the cannon where Shmulik is watching her and tearing up. In the cross-cutting between the shaken woman and the crying gunman, Samuel Maoz manages to capture something very indescribably human; it is almost as if the moment were alive, teeming with the emotions that it seeks to recreate. Thus, the film transcends physical barriers and political boundaries to convey its feelings: between the gunman on the inside of the tank and the woman outside in the warzone, between the audience in their seats and the action on-screen.
Through fleeting shots of gruesome violence, long dialogue and a raw concentration of emotion, the film attempts to unmask the sheer horror of warfare through the eyes of the tank crew. By juxtaposing disturbing, graphic violence with the moral consequences and heart-wrenching feelings that they evoke from the soldiers, the film simultaneously humanizes and dehumanizes the war experience leaving the audience emotionally exhausted. In particular, the film sheds light on the personal struggles that young soldiers go through in ways that allow them to m transcend their physical, social and political boundaries in an attempt to hold onto their sanity in the chaos of war.
Rated 4/5 Stars •
Rated 4 out of 5 stars
02/07/23
Full Review
Read all reviews
Continue with Google
>
