Mary Poppins Returns
Log in with Facebook
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Already have an account? Log in here
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
No consensus yet.
Tomatometer Not Available...
No consensus yet.
All Critics (12)
| Top Critics (4)
| Fresh (9)
| Rotten (3)
| DVD (1)
Godard leaves us to wonder about our own gullibility, our own unquestioning patriotism and loyalty, our own capacity for violence in the name of political figures with whom we might imagine we share some kind of cosmic relationship.
This offhand exercise, made back in 1962 by one of the kings of the then New Wave, popped up early last night at the festival, for absolutely no discernible reason.
Godard has chosen a subject on which to exercise his style. The result is one of his most successful films, and, incidentally, one easier to understand and enjoy than his later work.
Jean-Luc Godard set out in 1963 to deliberately make a war film that would be neither dramatically involving nor formally compelling -- and he succeeded so brilliantly that the film was seen as a disaster.
The war-film to end war-films, the sick joke that actually sickens.
Jean-Luc Godard's conviction that action, and not idle thought, is the lifeblood of social progress is palpable.
Godard's astringent anti-war flipbook
Les Carabiniers refuses to make it easy on the audience, avoiding genre conventions at all costs, and daring us to consider that the real horror of war is the idea that anyone could find it rewarding, never mind exciting or adventurous.
The problem is not with Godard's politics, but with the purposeful ugliness of the film ... .
An ultraimpersonal exercise on the subject of war.
A grim farce on war in general. It's brutality, uselessness and irreasonable nature.
When two men are approached by the military to join the causes of war, they are promised great rewards and fame. Hence, they join the armed forces. What follows is a collection of scenes dealing with war in general and the way soldiers mindlessly follow their orders.
The brutality of "The Riflemen" is not of a graphic nature - except for a few stills of war victims - it is rather the grotesque way how the war is presented. The soldiers are portraited as dumb and silly men who "play" war, not caring about casualties and politics at all. The "conflict" in the movie is not specified, making this picture an allegory of war in general.
Throughout the move, letters from actual soldiers are quoted.
The movie is not for the lighthearted and it is certainly not "entertaining" in the classic sense of American cinema. But it is a forceful rant against war and how it is absolutely dull, pretentious and useless, which is - as well all know - nothing but the truth.
"Can we burn women ?"
"Can we go into a restaurant. And not pay?"
"Yes. That's war."
Gotta love Godard!
There are no approved quotes yet for this movie.