Shooting Dogs

This film is worthy of all the plaudits that one can offer. it is not a film from a large Hollywood studio and thus will not merit for any Hollywood inspired praise. Nevertheless John Hurt performance is without doubt Oscar worthy . The film is factual without being inspired by the normal heartstrings of sanitised music which usually accompanies movies such as this. It is even superior to Hotel Rwanda which again was wonderful but takes the issue even further particularly as it applies to the so called civilised UN nations. If ever there was a need for a real UN this film exemplifies it. Camera work is excellent and acting right through the cast is credible and believable without having to employ any token players from the extensive list of TV actors and the like.The Belgian Officer is so real and his frustration there for all to see.

In summary a film that everyone should see and form an opinion.There is no hard pressed "hit you in the face" moralising, but one would have to be non human not to appreciate the essence of this story. 10/10

In April, 1994, the airplane of the Hutu President of Rwanda crashes and the Hutu militias slaughter the Tutsi population. In the Ecole Technique Officielle, the Catholic priest Christopher (John Hurt) and the idealistic English teacher Joe Connor (Hugh Dancy) lodge two thousand and five hundred Rwandans survivors in the school under the protection of the UN Belgian force and under siege of the Hutu militia. When the Tutsi refugees are abandoned by the UN, they are murdered by the extremist militia.

After the magnificent 1994 "Hotel Rwanda", the world has the chance to see another testimony of the genocide in Rwanda, where eight hundred thousand (800,000) people was killed between April and July of 1994 under the total absence of protection or intervention of the United Nation. This powerful and touching true story was filmed in the real locations with the support of the survivors of the massacre. John Hurt is fantastic in the role of a suffered Catholic priest that dedicated his life to the people of this poor country, and Hugh Dancy is also amazing with an excellent interpretation. There are magnificent lines, but I personally was moved when Joe asks Christopher how much pain can a human being take, when he sees the mother being killed by machete strikes with her baby son by one killer of the militia. The questions about God's role the children ask Father Christopher are also great. The feelings of Rachel about the differences between the situation in Bosnia and in Rwanda are very sincere and the sacrifice of Christopher is something very beautiful in this film. The last question to the UN representative "- How many acts of genocide does it take to make a genocide?" in the procedures, regulations, viewpoint of whatever from UN closes this sad but recommended movie with golden key. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): "Tiros em Ruanda" ("Shots in Rwanda")

There has been an ongoing argument over which is better, "Shooting Dogs" or "Hotel Rwanda." I don't know if there is an answer, but for the record, I've found that being 24 years old, this film appeals to me more than "Hotel Rwanda" did. I think this is largely because it focuses on the "save the world" mentality of youth, when things are not really that easy to explain or resolve. It also offers some light moments and comic relief that ease the burden of such an unpleasant true story. However, friends of mine who are over 40 years old, and who perhaps relate more to the businessman/father/husband character of Don Cheadle in "Hotel," disagree.

Despite all that, the people I know who work in Africa and even parts of Rwanda have said "Shooting Dogs" is a much truer portrayal of the way things really were at that time and that many Rwanadan natives don't share such a pleasant view of the Don Cheadle real-life man.

I think if it moves you to be a better person and stop genocide somewhere in the world, it shouldn't really matter which film is "better." For me, "Shooting Dogs" will never leave my heart or my mind.

In 1994 800,000 people were killed in Rwanda. During this time a school comes under siege. How far would you go to help save lives? The atrocities in Rwanda went somewhat unnoticed as the world watched and winced before changing their TV channels. The UN blundered while describing the events as "acts of genocide" as opposed to the genocide it so clearly was. John Hurt and Hugh Dancy star in this powerful and touching story of hope, fear and humanity.

Set in the Ecole Technique Officielle (ETO), a high school in Kigali, John Hurt plays Christopher a priest who has seen his share of tribulations and clings to what hope he has left while Joe (Hugh Dancy) is embroiled in the horrors that unravel at the school as the hope he had begins to slide.

Michael Caton- Jones is a director who has previously delved deeply into relationships in 'This Boy's Life' and 'City by the Sea'. In Shooting Dogs his exposition of humanity is excellently portrayed in what essentially has the make up of a Hollywood horror story. As the Hutu's seize power, Tutsi's and their supporters gradually come under fire as the school is besieged and machetes dictate who lives and dies.

Despite the characters being fictionalized the events took place and what we are presented with is a powerful and truly disturbing picture as no punches are pulled and the true terrors exposed. This acts both as a wake-up call and homage to those who died and those who survived the atrocities.

Father Christopher, played by John Hurt, is the lynch pin in this nightmarish scenario. Having been weathered by a life of strain his last strands of hope are fading as the chaos descends upon his school. As usual Hurt's performances stretch beyond impeccable to a level of authenticity one could only expect from someone who was actually there. As with Joe, whose childlike naivety is broken down gradually until he becomes a shadow of his former self, contrasting Christopher. The director uses a young Tutsi girl, Maria (Claire Hope-Ashley), to introduce and somewhat narrate the proceedings as an unsteady UN-laced serenity is transformed into a time of fear and suffering. (The title comes from the fact the UN were killing dogs that fed on decomposing bodies but could never fire shots against those wielding machetes.) This is a flawless film in its delivery and character portrayal. The cast and crew were made up of survivors and those linked closely to the events so the film has already had the authenticity in its bones. Hotel Rwanda approached the subject matter from a different angle- a story about heroism. This film shares the same theme but it is the basic approach that sharpens the emotions and the human elements that set it apart from other films of this nature.

From the playful opening scenes to the carnage that ensues, the audience cannot help but be enthralled and engrossed by man's potential for good and totally disgusted by his potential for evil.

It is rare to see a film that has as great an impact as Shooting Dogs. The shocking story of the massacres in Rwanda is told in a setting that is both personal and global.

Great acting, a fine script and good pace... a level of craftsmanship worthy of the magnitude of the subject of this film.

On rare occasions, a story is so shattering it needs only to be toned down for audiences to take it all in. This true story needed to be told, and for us to hear it. Hopefully, after seeing this movie, you will not be as pessimistic about the future of Central Africa as I've become.

The closing credits are well worth sticking around for.