NOTE IMDb
8,0/10
62 k
MA NOTE
Un réalisateur israélien interviewe ses anciens compagnons d'armes de l'invasion du Liban de 1982 pour retrouver des souvenirs de son service militaire durant ce conflit.Un réalisateur israélien interviewe ses anciens compagnons d'armes de l'invasion du Liban de 1982 pour retrouver des souvenirs de son service militaire durant ce conflit.Un réalisateur israélien interviewe ses anciens compagnons d'armes de l'invasion du Liban de 1982 pour retrouver des souvenirs de son service militaire durant ce conflit.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Nommé pour 1 Oscar
- 46 victoires et 63 nominations au total
Ari Folman
- Self
- (voix)
Zahava Solomon
- Self - Interviewee
- (voix)
- (as Prof. Zahava Solomon)
Avis à la une
Waltz with Bashir may not deliver everything you expect after seeing the trailers, but it is powerful. Director Ari Folman presents a personal view of historic events in which he took part as a young soldier, but which he cannot remember due to repression. A full-length documentary, filmed with animation over the recorded speech of actual participants in the 1982 Lebannon War, Waltz with Bashir is beautifully done and get its message across clearly.
It's a shame that some of the stronger artistic points in the movie were left undeveloped, such as the imaginary ghost of the soldier's ex-girlfriend following him around (as seen in the trailer). The way comedy and tragedy are interspersed in the latter parts of the film may also seem inappropriate to some viewers. The film presents a highly personal point of view for a documentary, justified partly by staying true to the factual material, and partly by its author having been there on the scene.
Overall, despite its shortcomings, this film makes a strong statement and is definitely worth seeing for its visuals and score.
It's a shame that some of the stronger artistic points in the movie were left undeveloped, such as the imaginary ghost of the soldier's ex-girlfriend following him around (as seen in the trailer). The way comedy and tragedy are interspersed in the latter parts of the film may also seem inappropriate to some viewers. The film presents a highly personal point of view for a documentary, justified partly by staying true to the factual material, and partly by its author having been there on the scene.
Overall, despite its shortcomings, this film makes a strong statement and is definitely worth seeing for its visuals and score.
Although I saw it last night I am still unsure of my reaction to "Waltz with Bashir". I'm still digesting the film, attempting to understand more about it, still wondering if I found it remarkable or disappointing, if I thought its moral sensibilities were sound or superficially apologetic. Perhaps the ultimate irony in the film is that its main themes are those of willful ignorance and of amnesia, or willing repression of memories by the Israeli soldiers on whom the film focuses, but, as pointed out by the great film critic Joumane Chahine (who loved the film) in Film Comment: "It's not that Folman minimizes Israel's complicity in the events, the IDF's logistical involvement has long been a matter of record... The film's more individual perspective justifies circumventing the matter. But the film's discreet arrogance is that, in contrast, it confronts head-on the brutality of the Lebanese Christian Phalanges who perpetrated the butchery. And while the Arabs' treatment of their Palestinian 'brethren' has hardly been exemplary, there is something particularly distasteful- somehow akin to watching a German film about Vichy France's treatment of Jews during World War II- about being lectured on this by the Israelis."
I did find this attitude highly ironic. The Israeli soldiers, the men he actually knew, are all, bar none (except for defence minister Ariel Sharon, who unquestionably was responsible at least in part for the proved massacre of anywhere between two to three and half thousand civilians of all ages and genders, and his presence also ties in with the theme of amnesia- after the massacre hundreds of thousands of Israelis took to the streets in protest of the IDF's involvement thanks to Sharon's decisions, but many years later they allowed him to become Prime Minister), sweet, good, morally perfect people. Yet the Christians are portrayed almost literally as dogs. Inhuman, brutal, violent, sick, and fetishistic with regard to their leader. The film makes a huge deal about the dead children and older men and women the soldiers saw in the camps, but Ari Folman doesn't even seem to think about the women, children, and seniors killed in air strikes and even ground initiatives by the IDF during the same war. Somehow, only what the Arab Christians did is truly horrifying. A little hypocrisy at play, or is it a matter of even more suppressed memories?
All that said, I still found the film affecting, and its technical merits are unquestionably outstanding. The animation is gorgeous, the music even more special, and the film is a remarkable, rare exploration of how the guilt and pain these men feel to this day haunts them. It's not new subject matter, but the specifics of this film make it unique, that it focuses on the IDF's involvement in one of the most heinous massacres of the late twentieth century, and moreover that it focuses on involvement by young men who wouldn't have even been sure of what exactly was happening. The film's psychoanalytic approach (it is an 'animated documentary', but I suspect much of it was written, although I'm sure those interviewed were definitely quoted truthfully at many points, but what they say is a little too conveniently attached to the film's themes) is not always successful, and sometimes painfully obvious and tired ("You weren't thinking of these camps, but those camps" or "Unwillingly, you had stepped into the shoes of a Nazi"). Still, the imagery and music, as well as the genuine sincerity and honesty of the film (as well as its subjectivity) make it worthwhile viewing. It's extremely well-crafted and for the most part psychologically interesting, that much is for sure. It's also worth noting that the controversial ending worked for this viewer. Not cheap, not exploitative, but only a stark, brutal reminder of just how real it was.
I did find this attitude highly ironic. The Israeli soldiers, the men he actually knew, are all, bar none (except for defence minister Ariel Sharon, who unquestionably was responsible at least in part for the proved massacre of anywhere between two to three and half thousand civilians of all ages and genders, and his presence also ties in with the theme of amnesia- after the massacre hundreds of thousands of Israelis took to the streets in protest of the IDF's involvement thanks to Sharon's decisions, but many years later they allowed him to become Prime Minister), sweet, good, morally perfect people. Yet the Christians are portrayed almost literally as dogs. Inhuman, brutal, violent, sick, and fetishistic with regard to their leader. The film makes a huge deal about the dead children and older men and women the soldiers saw in the camps, but Ari Folman doesn't even seem to think about the women, children, and seniors killed in air strikes and even ground initiatives by the IDF during the same war. Somehow, only what the Arab Christians did is truly horrifying. A little hypocrisy at play, or is it a matter of even more suppressed memories?
All that said, I still found the film affecting, and its technical merits are unquestionably outstanding. The animation is gorgeous, the music even more special, and the film is a remarkable, rare exploration of how the guilt and pain these men feel to this day haunts them. It's not new subject matter, but the specifics of this film make it unique, that it focuses on the IDF's involvement in one of the most heinous massacres of the late twentieth century, and moreover that it focuses on involvement by young men who wouldn't have even been sure of what exactly was happening. The film's psychoanalytic approach (it is an 'animated documentary', but I suspect much of it was written, although I'm sure those interviewed were definitely quoted truthfully at many points, but what they say is a little too conveniently attached to the film's themes) is not always successful, and sometimes painfully obvious and tired ("You weren't thinking of these camps, but those camps" or "Unwillingly, you had stepped into the shoes of a Nazi"). Still, the imagery and music, as well as the genuine sincerity and honesty of the film (as well as its subjectivity) make it worthwhile viewing. It's extremely well-crafted and for the most part psychologically interesting, that much is for sure. It's also worth noting that the controversial ending worked for this viewer. Not cheap, not exploitative, but only a stark, brutal reminder of just how real it was.
Ari Folman first movie was a great promise, but more than a decade passed since then and with only one feature film, and several TV series on the record his career seems to be stagnating at best. Here he comes now with a film that is so sharp, surprising and different - one of the best Israeli films ever in any genre.
Choosing to do an animated feature about the beginning of the first Lebanon war in 1982 and the collective trauma and amnesia caused by this war to its heroes - young soldier torn down from their first world life to be thrown in the violent absurdity of war - and the whole Israeli society is both a daring and natural thing to do. Daring because this film is after all a documentary about the search to the lost memory of the director about his own presence in war, and the journey to recover it by means of interviews with his fellows in arms. The real life persons are recorded while giving the interviews while extremely accurate drawn images play the visual role (one of the persons interviewed is a famous journalist showing up often on TV). As realist as these scenes are, it is hard to imagine how difficult it would have been to bring on screen the fighting scenes, or to play the trauma of the young boys shown into a terrifying and nightmarish reality. So animation was the right and natural choice. Without using special or expensive effects, the dreams and nightmare scenes are both catching and terrifying, reflecting the traumatized souls of the dreamers (one won't forget easily the opening scene).
Yet, the message of the film is far beyond the personal message. When dreams (or better said nightmares) dissipate the deep-buried reality gets back - the massacres in the Palestinian camps become real on screen, and this is the only place where Folman uses fragments of filmed material rather than animation. The nightmare became reality and its a grim one. Without ever leaving the personal and emotional plans, the political statement about a war with no winners is made loud and clear without the need of being explicit.
Choosing to do an animated feature about the beginning of the first Lebanon war in 1982 and the collective trauma and amnesia caused by this war to its heroes - young soldier torn down from their first world life to be thrown in the violent absurdity of war - and the whole Israeli society is both a daring and natural thing to do. Daring because this film is after all a documentary about the search to the lost memory of the director about his own presence in war, and the journey to recover it by means of interviews with his fellows in arms. The real life persons are recorded while giving the interviews while extremely accurate drawn images play the visual role (one of the persons interviewed is a famous journalist showing up often on TV). As realist as these scenes are, it is hard to imagine how difficult it would have been to bring on screen the fighting scenes, or to play the trauma of the young boys shown into a terrifying and nightmarish reality. So animation was the right and natural choice. Without using special or expensive effects, the dreams and nightmare scenes are both catching and terrifying, reflecting the traumatized souls of the dreamers (one won't forget easily the opening scene).
Yet, the message of the film is far beyond the personal message. When dreams (or better said nightmares) dissipate the deep-buried reality gets back - the massacres in the Palestinian camps become real on screen, and this is the only place where Folman uses fragments of filmed material rather than animation. The nightmare became reality and its a grim one. Without ever leaving the personal and emotional plans, the political statement about a war with no winners is made loud and clear without the need of being explicit.
10keren-2
I just came back from watching the movie. I found it interesting and unique. The animation in the film is magnificent and enables the director to really "go wild" with his ideas, without having to be "chained" to what reality filming can give him. The main Character, is on a journey, trying to collect as many memories as he can of the time when he was a young soldier, at war. This journey is so well done, touching, interesting. The man, Ari, slowly revels his past, and we follow him, to an amazing trip down memory lane. Memories that were hidden for too long. An amazing movie that makes you think about life, people, and the complexity of war.
Waltz With Bashir is amongst the finest animation films I've seen. It is a very disturbing comment on war and its consequences both on countries and on people of both sides. No doubt this approach has been taken by numerous other film makers; however what sets Waltz With Bashir apart is that it takes a documentary approach and compares Israel's activities in Lebanon with atrocities in the past wars.
Other than documenting events, the film also consists of surreal dream sequences and real life incidents. Thus the film emerges as a unique combination of the real and the unreal. The hand drawn animation also makes it a delight to watch. The colour gave it the right atmosphere of claustrophobia in open spaces and the background score is fabulous.
It is certainly not, as the Director of NZ Film Festival announced before the screening, a 'feel-good film'. It should appeal to people who have an interest in animation, documentaries, war and current affairs. 10 out of 10.
Other than documenting events, the film also consists of surreal dream sequences and real life incidents. Thus the film emerges as a unique combination of the real and the unreal. The hand drawn animation also makes it a delight to watch. The colour gave it the right atmosphere of claustrophobia in open spaces and the background score is fabulous.
It is certainly not, as the Director of NZ Film Festival announced before the screening, a 'feel-good film'. It should appeal to people who have an interest in animation, documentaries, war and current affairs. 10 out of 10.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe first animated film to be nominated for Best Foreign Language Film Oscar.
- GaffesThe narrator refers to the transport helicopter as a "Hercules helicopter", which is a confusion of the C-130 Hercules cargo plane with the CH-53 Stallion helicopter, the latter being the true transportation device.
- Citations
Anonymous soldier: What to do? What to do? Why don't you tell us what to do?
Ari Folman: Shoot!
Anonymous soldier: On who?
Ari Folman: How should I know on who? Just shoot!
Anonymous soldier: Isn't it better to pray?
Ari Folman: Pray and shoot!
- ConnexionsFeatured in 2009 Golden Globe Awards (2009)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Waltz with Bashir
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 1 500 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 2 283 849 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 50 021 $US
- 28 déc. 2008
- Montant brut mondial
- 11 179 372 $US
- Durée1 heure 30 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Valse avec Bachir (2008) officially released in India in English?
Répondre