Diên Biên Phú

I saw this movie in East Beirut some years back when I was reluctant to watch war movies. Donald Pleasance makes an English language appearance in a French Language film. And as always is riveting. However the film strikingly reminded me of certain world powers', their colonial aspirations and their consequent outcomes, related to Lebanon and Vietnam. The film unravels how they, the tail end of the Victorian era, French in this case, loose colonies, lost control, and what followed would turn out to be similar. It is interesting that even the coins of both countries were both called piasters, and both had slots in the middle, like much of the Asian coinage still does. The French tried to suppress the national uprising in favor of their own revenues, and later the Americans saw their opportunity, to target practice and sell goods, if to no one else their own GI's. Lyndon Johnson and his tribe started Southland Corp. aka(7-11)after all. Haliburton had a big hand in that conflict as well. This film is worth your while if you can find it. I haven't seen it on Blockbuster online or Netflix.

I liked the film and it has a strong message... the war scenes are very well done for the year 92... an excellent script and a guide of striking lines... but two and a half hours was too long... at some point the film became repetitive and boring. The political parts bored me a lot.... Overall well made and interesting. 6/10.

This movie needs some background knowledge of the colonial European history, mainly the french one, to be fully appreciated. The director, Schoendorffer, was an army cameraman sent to Dien Bien Phu, and one of the characters, Howard R. Simpson, was an US correspondent in Indochina and wrote an interesting book: "Dien Bien Phu: The Epic Battle America Forgot", worth to read.Schoendorffer was prisoner after the battle and sent to Vietminh concentration camps where he survived after another cameraman from the Red Army meet him.He is the narrator's voice.

What caught first my attention in this movie is that if you were serving in the army, it puts you right from the beginning in the atmosphere of a regular soldier spending time in maneuver and camp exercises.Guys on the field, some artillery, some air force, and some shouting in the background.Nothing spectacular, absolutely no epic, just like you're back in the military.At a certain point mortars fire is increasing, and shouting escalating, and that's the start of the battle.And you are in the mud, bleeding bodies and dead around you.It's just slightly over the level of raw documentary. So it's easy to feel close to the guys on the battlefield.Some Thai volunteers are shown, alongside Vietnamese, African troops, paratroopers, legionnaire, regular infantry, etc.Quite realistic photography and not like "in the movies". The Vietminh artillery made landing impossible, the place was isolated and only parachutist support is possible. Hills all around, it's often cloudy and Vietminh troops keep until the end hidden by their camouflage strategy.Nguyen Giap opted for an intense, moving and steady mortar bombing, backed by supplies and troops supported by China.Instead of a fierce battle were the tactics of the french general could had been superior.

But that's no the point of the movie. Because, scenes at the ground, depicting the evolution and worsening of the battle, are alternated with the situation as seen from Hanoï. In this part, there's a reconstitution of the colonial french time, the Vietnamese, the Europeans, the colorful variety of uniforms. A violinist comes to the city for a gala concert.Life keeps going on at the same pace, while in the meantime soldiers are being sacrificed in Dien Bien Phu.A symbolic way to show how the politics were already wanting to leave Indochina, but at the same time they wanted a nice exit, with military bravery and honors, a la legionnaire. The nice violinist lady has a relative who is captain and they meet with other soldiers at a bar where some talks give an insight on the situation and the meaning of the battle, which appears more and more like a strategical non-sense.

Soldiers are shown doing their job and there's nothing theatrical, just few quaint words about military duty's spirit and a somewhat "old school" sense of bravery.But in the 50's that was still very alive in the french military.So it stays in context. Talks between soldiers are fully understood to people familiar with french army mind and traditions.Otherwise it works like an insight.

The movie is somewhat biased as an ode to Indochina and its people itself, which is a point of view debatable.Ho Chi Minh was, despite being communist, an independents and French were foreign rulers.Yet, that point of view and the kind of relation of Vietnam to french culture is represented by the boss of the local paper in Hanoï.

All in all, an excellent movie, even if not accessible to a non-informed public.

I came to this movie after reading two detailed military history books about the battle. That proved essential because I don't think I would have learned very much about it from watching the film. For the positives: technically, the level of detail was excellent. With the exception of using M41 Walker Bulldog tanks instead of M24 Chaffee tanks, the equipment, weaponry, uniforms, badges etc. Were authentic. The timeline of the battle and specific incidents were perfect. So why did I come away feeling it was such a missed opportunity? Dien Bien Phu was famously referred to as France's "Verdun in the jungle". On the French side, French, Vietnamese, Algerian, African and other soldiers, able bodied and wounded, slept in water filled trenches by day and fought, often hand to hand in isolated actions, to protect them from dusk until dawn as the Vietminh launched repeated human wave attacks across ground that had been churned to mud through artillery fire. For both sides victory was a chance to gain advantage at the Geneva Peace Conference which had begun on 26 April and would only set the stage for the larger war that followed. Dien Bien Phu fell on 7 May and the Conference concluded on 21 July. That was the historical and political reality. Unbelievably in this film the Vietminh are invisible until the closing scenes of the French surrender, when they appear by the thousand. That any fighting is going on at all can only be inferred by the mass graves of French and allied soldiers, the overcrowded "field hospitals", the regular sound of incoming and outgoing artillery as soldiers sit in their trenches and talk, or listen to last radio messages that yet another position is being over run. For a war film showing the futility of ordering soldiers to risk their lives so their leaders can gain a political advantage I'd recommend Pork Chop Hill (1959). This could have so easily been so much more.

Well... I guess that I really did like this movie in one way.. and in antoher way I really disliked it.

Basically one MAJOR!!! thing is missing in it.. Vietnamse soldiers, Vietmihn to be exact.

We get a good look at them in the end once the french have given up but that is just about it.

You might argue that this aspect of the movie should be true that you are indeed fighting some sort of an "unseen" enemy, but that is simply not true in the case of Dien Bien Phu.

Let me elaborate some what on that point, several forages and attacks were made from the French in futile attempts to roll up and out the enemy (i.e. a lot of close combat and SEEN enemies).

Several human wave attacks were launched against the French (most unsuccesfull though).

Finally the Vietmihn managed to dislodge the French soldiers by basically trenching their way to them, foot by foot, yard by yard.

At some points of the battle is somewhat more resembled a WWI scenario more than jungle combat.

I feel that the movie gave us a fairly good view of the French parts.. but just where the hell did the Viets go?