Welcome to Sarajevo

I'm just writing this review to point one thing out, the true story of Michael Nicholson (whom this movie is based off) involves him adopting and rescuing a Serbian girl named Natasha, not a Bosnian (Muslim) girl named Emira. Plenty of Serbian's themselves died in the siege of Sarajevo as we made up over 1/3 of the cities population. I'm not sure what the motive was behind switching the girl's ethnicity but I can only suspect that it was motivated by Hollywood's desire to uncomplicate a complicated mess as well as pander to public consensus that Serbs were the aggressors and the 'bad' guys while Bosniaks (Muslims) were the victims, 'good' guys.

As far as the artistic merits of the movie herself, I liked how she interwove real footage with fiction, blurring the distinction. I also found it refreshing that such a marginal topic was brought to the big studios even though no one really watched. In the end though, the movie was okay, maybe even good but not great. The acting was fairly flat and the character development was mostly two dimensional. When the movie finishes, you forget about it.

I rented this film, having mistaken it for another, but I saw it and turned out to be quite satisfied with my foul up. Everyday since 1992 I always heard a brief narrative on the news about the troubles in Bosnia and was never quite clear what was going on until I saw this film. What made it interesting was the focus on the group of reporters, who were much more vivid and sympathetic when they first appeared. Very good performances, the soundtrack was good, but I must warn you about the cover: Marisa Tomei seems like the main star according to the box; she almost has a cameo.

Good movie. I recommend it.

Although this movie makes a nice film about the heart-wrenching situation in Bosnia-Hercegovina, it should not be taken for it's portrayal of a current event. The movie seems to have been made as a historical film (a la "The Killing Fields")but instead failed due to its one sided portrayal of the situation. The film ignores the truth of a country that has gone wrong, but instead blames a certain group who terrorizes another. Both sides lost by participating in a war which this film often overlooks. It was OK in the sense of entertainment value but no awards who overlooked this film made a mistake either. If you want to watch a quality film on the situation, watch "Pretty Village, Pretty Flame" (Lepo Selo Lepo Gore); it fulfills what "Welcome to Sarajevo" lacks.

This is one very strange movie for me. On the one hand, it is undeniably bad. The movie tries to tell two types of stories, first it wants bo be a movie about war journalists, like Olliver Stone's Salvador. Then, it becomes a rescue movie when the main journalist tries to evacuate a nine year old girl from the war zone.

One problem is that these two stories don't hang well together at all. The journalist is totally uncharismatic. Then, there are cameos (don't let the cover fool you) of Woody Harrelson and Marisa Tomei. Very charming actors, but they don't get enough screen time.

What I think happened is that the director became overraught by the fact that they were _actually_ filming in Sarajevo itself, wanted to put too many things in, and in the end forgot what his job was - namely, to tell a story.

What I would have done, was focus much more on the little girl, her perspective of the war, which is much more interesting than watching some jaded journalists being jaded. Also, in the end, the war in Bosnia was about the people of Bosnia, not some parachuted in gonzos. It is in fact demeaning in itself that the people who suffered the most, are delegated to playing extras in some kind of movie that can't make up it's mind what story it wants to tell. At the same time, after focusing on the girl, I would have focused more on the Woody Harrelson character. He has a lot more going for him than the scrawny, balding lead, who's character, by the way, also isn't developed (why does he have a family back home?;What does his wife think of him flying off to the latest war zone?;Why does she accept that he does this dangerous job and in the process shacks up with Kerry Fox and Emily Lloyd?; Questions, questions...). The movie falls into the trap of, instead of telling a coherent, progressive story, wanting to mention every atrocity visited on the city of Sarajevo.

However, what it has going for it, are those rare moments. At times, the movie is effective in illustrating _how_ those people came to be dead, especially with the middle aged woman who was shot dead during the wedding party/procession. The images of the concentration camps are of course harrowing, and the scenes of the market place that was mortared are gruesome. There is an effective blending of news footage and movie, to the point where at _some_ point (not immediately) you don't know what is real and what is fiction. Ok. However, this does not make for a movie. Movies have to have characters you can root for - they don't _have_ to be Western journalists. I would have rooted for the little girl. Or her mom. Or the translator. You don't have to have American actors for it to play well in America (think of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon). What has to be there is a good story, told well. And it unfortunately doesn't have the latter.

I saw the movie about 2-3 years ago and I was very impressed and touched. I couldn't help crying all the time. Because it was so realistic... As a Russian I faced myself the pain of the war in Chechnya, for example... I mean the feeling is close to me and I can quite understand it. All the pain which seems so indescribable is "summarized" in the movie. However, what I didn't like was a certain lack of objectiveness. I mean the political moment. In this movie the Serbs are presented as the bad guys, and the Muslims - as the victims. But the true is the opposite. Or at least, both sides were victims of this horrible conflict.