Fort Saganne

Breathtaking images. The vanity of French presence in the Sahara at the beginning of te 20th century well depicted. Sublime crew of actors, every one of them. I was amazed not to have known of this masterpiece long ago.

Based on a real person, grandfather of writer Louis Gardel.

Superb music from the London Symphonic Orchestra.

Sets and costumes are perfect, and there is not a single bad actor. However, the it is not a moving film and it scandalously supports slaughtery of colonized rebels, just as golden era Hollywood celebrates the butchery of untamed Indians. Honestly, I expected more from a film from the 80's than this absence of self criticism: there are the bad colonizers (racists, cowards and aristocratic) and there are the good colonizers (handsome liberators with honour and humble origin, and good relationship with reasonable natives, who respectfully provide French peace to Africa, only killing rebels who did not understand French civilization, with a heroic sountrack to highlight that imperialistic heroism). Seriously?! If there is any criticism, it is similar to that of USA Vietnam War movies: how the government did not care about the suffering of its heroes in battlefront. Besides the military issue, the movie also has is personal issue: let me call characters by actors' names: Depadieu's affair with Deneuve ans his love story with Marceau are very undevelopped and unexplained too. Depardieu's brother has an even less connected story, as a three-hour film needed more plots to be added.

The problem with this film is that nothing is left for the viewer to assume, deduce, or imagine. Everything which one might need to know in order to understand the full narrative is shown, in detail - and the audience doesn't need that: as a result the film lasts .... what? two and a half hours? .... at least half an hour of which is certainly dead matter. There are some very impressive incidents, but the impact is muffled. I can't help feeling too, that, given that Corneau seems to want to make the most of his setting and given what that setting is, even the photography represents a wasted opportunity. It's dramatic, but it could have stood you still. Imagination needed!

I've seen this film back in 84 in Geneva. I didn't find it neither played nor talked about ever since and always regretted much that the film is obviously not known at all. I was deeply impressed by the passionate story with large, beautiful images, wonderfully photographed. The length was ok because it was a novel. Depardieu in a role that shows a rare side of him.

We follow Charles Saganne story that belongs to farmer class and whose family tries to rise. Sent to the army to help their finance, he finally arrives in Sahara and discovers the desert, honnor, battles and love. It is a bit of a French "Lawrence of Arabia", with maybe the desert as a stronger character as it plays a huge part in the development of Saganne. The film goes on, alternating from Sahara to France, following its history.

Depardieu is key in this movie to make us believe in that man, used to do what he is said, and whose experience in the desert and then with a woman changes him.

However, the movie is a bit too long and lacks some stamina to be as powerful as it could have been.