Avaliações de usuários

France 1943. Indigenous Moroccan soldiers – still wet behind the ears – are called in to the 17th infantry to defend their 'motherland' against the ongoing German occupation. Their goodness and patriotism are unmistakable and Saïd (Jamel Debbouze) remarks how "If I liberate a country, it's my country, even if I've never even been there." Here is a good-hearted contingent of North African soldiers who hope to catch some of the victory's glory, but whom are repeatedly shifted to the backseat because of their name, skin and accent.

There was no way I would miss a film that French president Chirac cites as the sole reason he immediately rectified the pension plan for indigenous veterans, offering them the promise of equality for the law for the first time. Indigènes is puffed full of political correctness with heavy-handed treatment of salient issues such as racism, inequality and intolerance. But we do not mind, because the film so rigorously establishes a brotherhood feeling with our triumvirate of central characters that we find ourselves completely engrossed in their struggle, rooting for them, laughing with them and often crying because of them.

In the front row for sympathy sits Saïd, Yassir, Messaoud and Abdelkader, all inhabited by capable unknown actors with great emotional transparency. Saïd is a kind of clumsy teddy bear who kisses his mom goodbye in Morocco and immediately botches his way through combat, even choking on the victorious scotch and fumbling with the token victor's cigar when the first battle has been won. These are heartbreakingly real people. Arguably even the hard-edged Sergeant elicits a warm response when he unflinchingly takes on the father-role for the contingent – he is rough, harsh, cynical but fair. The male ensemble won the Cannes award for 'Best Actor' earlier this year, which solidifies their collective likability and serve as a mark of the film's warm cast centre. If you want to nitpick, it needs to be said that some moments (such as key death scenes), although tragic, inexplicably lack the propelling poignancy to elicit tears. Why this is I do not know, but it ought to be attributed to the film and not the superb performances.

When the squad of wet puppies make their way across the motherland, they are faced with two disturbances: the internal conflicts that arise in the army when it becomes apparent that North African soldiers are not given the same treatment as native French (no tomatoes, no weekend leaves, no promotions and no glory) and the gruesome reality on the battlefield. The former is captured safely but compellingly through little rants, intense stares and cries of "Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité!" all in the token French political spirit. The latter, however, is Indigènes' true goldmine. No description will do the warfare sequences justice; they need to be seen. Think Call of Duty plugged into the silver screen, with epileptic zooming, fast-paced action, gory reality, humming rocket launchers and one massive sense of immediate danger. It nearly puts Steven Spielberg's warmovie fare to shame.

The cinematography channels one storyline from 'Babel', from the epic aerial shots of the craggy hills and desert-laden plains of Morocco to a juxtaposition of lush French soil. Even the French sheets are a great source of awe for the North African soldiers. Much like 'Babel', the film never shies away from blending equal amounts of Arabic and French into the dialogue, something that reinforces the realism.

Indigènes (2006) is an excellent film with strong performances and a strong, political core. Its flaws, however apparent, are generally marginal. The one thing that jumped out and grabbed me, striking me as below average, was the hammy and inexcusably hackneyed score. When Arabic soldiers are fighting for their lives and bleeding in the process, slapping on a dutiful ethnic score that sings and wails like it means business, the film is just preaching to the choir. If I hear an "epic, ethnic" score in a movie like this again, I will probably go out and kill someone – either the Arab who is singing, or the stupid Westerner who thinks mainstream audiences need everything spelled-out for them with this mandatory music inclusion.

Aside from this minor misstep, Indigènes is a worthy merit to France's resumé of films, one that will surely be a frontrunner for the Best Foreign Language Film Award at the Oscars next year. Nevermind that this is an excellent and real film, the competent political notions may just be enough to tip things over in its favour.

8 out of 10

I was happy to see this film. After all, practically every WWII film about the war in Europe focuses on the soldiers from the major combatants--Americans, Brits, Germans or the French. However, this one is about men from the French colony of Algeria--folks you seldom ever hear about and I am sure many people from my country had no idea these folks fought for the Allies. In fact, now that I think about it, the only film where I can remember North African troops was "Two Women" and the Moroccan soldiers who raped the two ladies in the film! So, fortunately, these brave men get their due in "Days of Glory".

"Days of Glory" focuses on four men in particular. These four volunteered to free their mother country in 1943. However, they soon saw that they weren't quite regular soldiers. Instead of receiving accolades or rank for their efforts, the men noticed that the white Christian French soldiers received these honors and the job of these Algerians was to shut up and die. Other examples of prejudice against these men were shown throughout the film as well as many incidents where they proved themselves in action.

While I am thrilled that the men in this film finally get their due, I only give the film a 7. This means the film is good and worth seeing, but it had room for improvement. My problem with the film is that despite being a heart-moving topic, the film, strangely, was a bit bland. Much of this is because you never really felt that you learned who these men were since the film felt quite episodic. I wanted to see more humanity and individual stories. Still, it's quite a good film despite this.

So you've done a great piece of work, and are awaiting your just rewards. Somehow along the way, someone else, by colour, creed, or connections, get all the recognition that you're due credit for. You feel frustrated, but you think of your rice bowl, and decide to grit your teeth and bear it, calling it just another day, secretly longing for a time where you are empowered to do something about it.

In the liberation of France during WWII, North African men were recruited and enlisted in the French army in the fight against the Nazis. Why do they do it? One reason is to escape poverty, and the holding on to the glimmer of hope that they can be accepted, when the war is over, as equals based on their fight for the "motherland". These soldiers, mujahedeens, fought hard, often being in the frontline, but always overlooked when it comes to recognition of basic military welfare and promotions, not that these rewards will cost an arm or a leg, nor are the fighters so hard up for them. All they're asking for was fair treatment, but all they got was discrimination.

Yes, and that is the pain. WWII movies are aplenty, but Days of Glory offered a unique look at the battles by a group of men, for what they deem their motherland and will defend with their blood, and what more, for a land of people who do not see them as equals. Loving someone who does not love you back, sounds familiar? And it's not just love, but sworn allegiance to protect at all costs.

The movie is well paced and straddled moments of action and quiet contemplation with aplomb. Credit must go to the ensemble cast of actors who play the warriors of North Africa, as they battle both the enemies on French soil, as well as enemies of men's heart. They grapple with trying to remain rational in their reason(s) to do what they're doing.

At times, watching this movie made me think about the recent flurry of mails to the press about foreign talent and the issue of citizenship, about NS obligations and whether PRs will flee at the first signs of trouble, or stand shoulder to shoulder with citizens (also, who are those who will flee?) in defending our land. What are the issues of contention, discrimination against, or general presumptions about foreigners here?

Those expecting all out battle scenes might be disappointed. In truth the movie's never about the glorification of gore, violence and war - most scenes aren't really blood splattering to draw in the crowds. Instead, if you'd prefer moments where you can think out loud about the issues presented, then this is for you. However, the final battle would please action fans, as it is well choreographed and executed, and you feel both the pain and victory from a bunch of tightly knit soldiers trying their very best to defend a small town, in a samurai- seven-ish sort of way, also reminiscent of Saving Private Ryan's somehow.

If you've missed this during the French Film Festival, don't fret. I believe this movie is also slated for general release. Keep a look out for it!

There's two types of French film .

1 ) The sort that is beloved by Cahiers Du Cinema that often feature people standing about talking about existentialist themes and often don't find a market outside France

2 ) The sort that is despised by Cahiers Du Cinema that often feature action and plot and appeal to an international market

DAYS OF GLORY is certainly in the second camp . The problem is that it's a bit too international . The theme of colonial soldiers fighting for the mother country could have easily have featured British dominion troops fighting in the Boer war , of Indian troops fighting at El Alamein or even of black Americans fighting in the second world war . Some people on this page have criticised this movie as not being a Gallic version of GLORY and you can see their point . There's little in the way of an idiosyncratic voice

Worse still despite the subtitles you could easily be watching a war film that was made in Hollywood . Much of the plot could have easily been lifted from Sam Fuller's THE BIG RED ONE as the story jumps from North Africa , Italy and eventually France . It's also impossible not to notice that the final climatic battle owes a lot to the climax of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN . Perhaps that's why DAYS OF GLORY received high praise down to its familiar story that English speaking fans of war films have seen so many times before ?

It could have been much worse though . On a technical level it's a competent enough movie and it doesn't go overboard that the Goumier troops are some how slaves press-ganged in to joining the Free French forces but it does effectively ignore the sometimes horrendous reputation Goumier troops had in Axis territories where women are concerned . The 1960 Italian film TWO WOMEN goes in to this in detail and you can imagine that's why the protagonists service in Italy is skated over very slightly . One wonders if the producers might have been worried about an international audience being alienated by bringing up the subject in any length ? As it it stands DAYS OF GLORY is a good enough war film though very traditional

For the first time this year the Weinstein Company has made something bearable --Hell, actually something good. The film is called Days of Glory (a title strangely reconfigured from Indigènes) and it chronicles a regiment in the war against Nazism, or, as the French call it, "liberty". But, the catch here is that these soldiers, they aren't French: They're Algerian and Morroquian. The film first suffers from superfluous paper-mâché clichés in order to demonstrate racial inequality, not as a subtle character study, but rather as an insolent whole which creates that annoying been-there, done-that feeling. Such a scene occurs when Abdelkader (Sami Bouajila) realizes that not all African troops are getting tomatoes, where as the French are. What does he do? He smashes them so "Nobody can have them". Director Rachid Bouchareb narrative is also first a bit fragmented, jumping from country to country as if they were stones. Eventually, it develops into an assured rhythm which corroborates with the film.

Brilliance in Days of Glory neither comes from ideas nor direction, but rather, through the magisterial acting, prized at Cannes, and small war vignettes. They are gripping and moving, like all war movies should be. These war scenes are powerful, and that is what makes up Days of Glory, because in the end, Days of Glory is one of the few good but flawed war films worth a damn. It has power and it is evident that it uses it wisely and vigorously.

It's 1943 Algeria. Muslims are recruited to fight for France. They go to Morocco to train and then arrive in Italy in 1944 to fight with the Allies. Saïd Otmari is poor illiterate mountain goat herder. Messaoud Souni is well spoken and falls for a French woman. Sergeant Martinez is a hardened leader willing to send the green recruits into suicidal charges but he hides his personal Arab connections. The men face racism in many blatant ways and Abdelkader gives voice to getting more equality.

This is an interesting part of the war that has been white-washed. The movie does struggle with a simple message as the men themselves have infighting about the war and their cause. Some of them fight for the money while others bought into the slogans. There is some good action and a solid final battle.

This is a French film that "Explifies Human Tragedy". One, it shows the dark side of war and the reasons why good vs. bad is being defended and it also exemplifies clearly how those we consider the good guys, are actually in the same category as the enemy...Racists. It is a film that shows the unknown exploits of brave North African "French" WWII recruits fighting alongside French compatriots to expel the Germans from their homeland...France. We have all come accustomed to seeing so many movies of WWII, showing in detail why the Germans were so bad, yet we have never been exposed in great detail as this film as illustrated, the realities of a double standard that was practiced in those days by the victors of a repressive regime. This is a film that touches all of us and tells us what it means to be loyal and patriotic as well as exposing that thin veil that no matter where you come from, what color or creed you may be, Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is fought with that regard in mind. Unfortunately, as this film illustrates, those ideas are an exception to the need for victory and an exception to the rule of becoming a second class citizen again when those rules do not apply any longer. This film left me with such a deep understanding like no other WWII film I have seen in my 50+ years. It left me with deep respect to those men of little education but full of monumental pride and dignity. I highly recommend this film and personally think that it was one of the best films I have ever seen. The acting from mostly unknown actors is simply a miracle and the director certainly deserves more credit than he has received. How this film ever got released without the accolades it rightly deserves is certainly one of the greatest omissions in movie history.

I did not know what to expect from this movie starring guys like Djamel Debbouzze or Samy Naceri, more used to non sense jokes and wrong way taxi driving, but I must say I was astonished.

First pictures are beautiful, dialogs and pace slow but efficient.

Second the way the four main characters perform is great (although Naceri is maybe not quite as good as the three others). All moved by different motivations, they have a sole dream: to be a real part of it, a part of the French country they have been fighting for. And they make you believe it. Not only because they fit perfectly into their roles, but also because the suffering and the inequalities they undergo in the war fields of the movie still exist six decades after in their every day life.

"All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others". True it was in Provence or in Alsace, true it is in today's France.

To me this film is more than the French Private Ryan, it is a subtle way to ask: "how much more is it going to take before we can all be on the same boat ?" Go and see it.

Born in France in 1942, I've heard and feel a lot about "foreigners" Jews, Arabs and Negroes. And yes I have been influenced by what I've heard and seen. I'm not sure if this influence is still present in me but I believe I'm aware of its possibility and think this is important. I found Indigenes (in English Day of Glory) to be quite thought provoking and at times it had the effect of someone twisting a knife in my body. And perhaps more acutely as I feel a little affected with current and frequent events that sees increasing unrest from extreme Islam activity. However the film reminds us that Christian activities were also source of worry and pain. As for discrimination,I have also been aware of a similar situation with the black US soldiers of the same era. Recently a matriculation tag was found on a French beach and miraculously returned to its Black owner who told the story as it was. That is blatant discrimination! "Indigenes" highlights the same situation. The film touches very private interaction amongst "foreign" and French soldiers, but also their different ideology amongst themselves as some wanted to be French others wanted their own identity. Yes at time it is quite arrowing, but this is war, however the arrowing is also provided by such discrimination and in this regard make sure you don't miss the notation at the very end of the film,unthinkable yet real!

The movie takes the viewer on a trip back to the second world war, showing how parts of the Arabic population fought with the French colonists for their freedom, against Nazi Germany trying to occupy Africa. As the movie evolves, other aspects than the fight for freedom and the brutality of war emerges. The viewer is reminded that the the social identity of the white bourgeoisie class and the stereotypes that follows not emerged with the current world of terrorism. Questions of power, humanity, religion, racism, love and honour follows the viewer through this exciting, emotional and realistic movie. Along with the plot and acting in this piece of work, the critical viewer should be satisfied.

Take one part GLORY (Edward Zwick, USA, 1989), two parts SAVING PRIVATE RYAN (Steven Spielberg, USA, 1998), a pinch of A SOLDIER'S STORY (Norman Jewison, USA, 1984), stir in a dash of French bitters and pour into a Colonial carafe. Say a prayer to Allah and take a sip. You're enjoying a drunk Rachid Buchareb calls INDIGENES.

Exploring the exploitation of French colonials in Algeria and Morocco during World War II, INDIGENES takes its title from the politically correct term for Africa's indigenous peoples. To the less enlightened, these men--though they be brave of heart--are dark of skin and know more commonly by the derisive term "wog." Denied promotion, leave, honor, and tomatoes, these men still strive to defend their wicked step-Motherland against the Germans.

We follow a group of four "wogs" during campaigns in Italy and France. Abdelkader (Sami Bouajila) is an idealist Corporal who gained his rank through study rather than battle. Yassir (Samy Naceri) hopes to earn money to help his beloved brother get married. Messaoud (Roschdy Zem), the sharpshooter, falls for one of the women in a town he helps to liberate. And, Said (Jamel Debbouze) is a bumpkin with a heart of gold who learns the harsh realities of life.

These men are lead by Sgt. Martinez (Bernard Blancan) who bumps his head on the glass ceiling that his white colonial masters have put in place. However, he's in a much better spot than his men as he's a Christian and a Moroccan while his men are Algerian Muslims. These men are the first to die in battles and the last to be shown appreciation. Meanwhile, the French stand offsides during battles and force their rancid culture on their African "children" otherwise.

The performances are top notch and our main characters are some of the most dynamic and multifaceted that I've seen on screen in a while. A lack of screen direction during the battle scenes is disconcerting but, to the dismay of some war film aficionados, these scenes are infrequent. The blatant SAVING PRIVATE RYAN ending is a bit much but it does help bring closure to the film.

1943. With the Germans driven out of North Africa, men in French colonies in North Africa are being recruited to the Free French forces. We follow a group of these men, from training, to their first combat in Italy to the landing in and contribution to the liberation of France. Yet, despite their significant contribution to the French war effort, they are treated as second class citizens.

Reasonably interesting and original, showing WW2 from the perspective of French colonial troops. Some good action sequences and themes.

The main theme examined is inequality, as the colonial troops get blatantly disadvantaged compared to the French troops. While there are some good scenes to highlight this and make the point that they should be treated the same, the plot involving this is quite predictable and doesn't go anywhere new.

Not entirely engaging either, making for a flat feeling to proceedings.

The military aspect also gets weaker as the film goes on, with the tactics and plot of the last few scenes being quite nonsensical and implausible. I know why that plot development was there but the point is very clumsily made.

Overall, interesting and entertaining enough but the subject deserved a better-told story.

"Days of Glory" is an Action - Drama movie in which we watch a group of North African men enlist to French army in order to help France in the war against Nazi Germany during World War II.

I liked this movie because it presented very well a story of WWII that I was not aware of, it was interesting and contained plenty of action scenes that were combined with drama. The interpretations of Jamel Debbouze who played as Saïd Otmari, Samy Naceri who played as Yassir, Sami Bouajila who played as Abdelkader, Roschdy Zem who played as Messaoud Souni and Bernard Blancan who played as Sergent Roger Martinez were very good and their combination worked very well and created a bond between them that was obvious through the whole duration of the movie. Lastly, I believe that everyone needs to watch "Days of Glory" because it worth's your time so, I suggest you to do so.

indigenes is a WW2 epic - but it isn't just about the spectacle and destruction of war but about the human aspect of warfare.

Bouchareb has made a film that works on three different levels. On the one hand this is a films about comradeship, about men learning to work together as a team to overcome physical and mental hardship, and about survival. On the other it's about the forgotten soldiers of the second world war. France whitewashed the algerian army's support after Algeria declared independence from France, and it has become something of a scandal in recent years, one that the french government has now rectified on the back on this film.

On a much deeper level, and this is the reason I think the film is so important, it's about the arab world and the western world uniting against a common evil. And I think that, given the chaos and the paranoia that we live in now regarding the East and the Arab world, Indigenes' message is a powerful polemic that west and east can live and work together and that we have in the past been a unified force, and can still be - despite recent events.

This is a well made decent war film, but actually it's more than that. We know troops are throwaway, treated with contempt by their masters and sometimes the people they are fighting for. However, soldiers fighting for colonies, for their oppressors, as shown here are treated with contempt and the revelation at the end gives this a contemporary relevance i wasnt expecting.

This is the tale of a very intrepid group of diverse African peoples that were recruited to help defend and free France during WW2. It was very inspiring that these men could go to such lengths to help France when not being treated as equals to the French, even though they were to consider France their homeland. This was based on true events that happened. It was filmed to deal with the war experience of the men as individuals as opposed to just a fighting war movie that makes people seem anonymous. There were gruesome parts but true to any movie of war. It portrayed these men as heroic and very human. Unappreciated by the French even years later when pensions were withheld. It was very touching without being sentimental.

Many Arabian and black people fought the Nazis in the French army. But you haven't heard much about it. It's part of racism of course. And hypocrisy from the "official France".

The history is somewhat told here. You meet Arabian soldiers, who are systematically mistreated in many ways, not getting proper equipment or leaves. They fight in a heroic way, and that's perhaps a weakness in this movie.

They are men with different characters, but the director seems to have been a little too eager to give them their right place in history, making them such great warriors. This is a movie which is shallow and not shallow at all at the same time.

I looked forward to this french WW2 film with great anticipation but it did not live up to my expectations and it certainly did not live up to the standard of a great war movie. Telling the story of the conscription of men from the North African French colonies, we follow the story of four men who become French soldiers all for very different reasons but all believing in what France their motherland offers in promise once freedom is achieved. Shot beautifully, delivering some wonderful performances, the story-telling touches on some potentially cinematic sub-plots and moments but never delivers as it slowly but surely converges into an almost french Saving Private Ryan with potential heart and soul of an undiscovered part of french/ww2/north African history being sacrificed to the lack of depth in its story-telling/screenplay and faith in its potential audience who would have loved to have taken a more exploratory journey with the filmmakers.