Mjeteconer
Just perfect...
Senteur
As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.
Fatma Suarez
The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful
Emil Bakkum
Land and Freedom is a film of Ken Loach about the Spanish Civil war. It is certainly a war film, with lots of battle scenes, but nevertheless quite distinct from the stereotype battlefield spectacle. This is partly due to the director Loach, who has neither the urge nor the financial means to produce a large-scale report on battle-fields. However the main reason is the civil war itself, since the republic (the good guys) was defended by a peoples army, and not a professional one. In fact we witness the experiences of a militia, consisting of normal grown-up citizens, not the juvenile cannon fodder, that is crowding the average WW2 or Vietnam movie. When in Land and Freedom the militia attacks the trenches of the fascist troops, it is not a furious storm but a wearisome advancement, evidently by people whose physical conditions could have been better. The firing with their rifles seems unaimed and chaotic. At first I thought this was a display of bad acting, but in fact it is just the opposite. For the militia was composed of volunteers with little or no military training or background. Loach says in an interview, that the film is a critique on the stance of the republicans during the war. The resistance started as a collaboration between anarchist, Bolshevist and social-democrat groups, but soon the ideological differences started to cause growing frictions. Not surprisingly the Bolshevists were once again hoping to replicate the October revolution and seize power during the conflict. On the other hand the anarchists and syndicalists rejected any form of organization, and fully relied on the innate peoples will. Loach made this debate into the essential thread of the film. The story is like this: it is 1936. The British Communist Party recruits volunteers for international reserves of the republican army. David, who is a member of the BCP and out of work, travels to Spain and joins a militia of the POUM (apparently a Trotzkyist-anarchist fraction in the Spanish government). The militia consists of Spaniards (including two women), Frenchmen, Britons, an American, a German etc. They stay together for more than a year, and are remarkably spared the grief of casualties. At that time, and even during WWII, warfare did not yet have the professional intensity of the battlefields in Irak or Afghanistan. They are just killing time in their trenches. Even when a village is stormed, that is occupied by fascist troops, the enemy is already on the run. The number of fallen comrades in this action equals just one, and there is plenty of time for grief and a decent burial. Subsequently the militia joins the villagers in a debate about socialization of the agricultural land! Really, that are the syndicalists for you, they seem almost like Taliban. In the mean time, the government in Madrid realizes that this kind of defense will not win the war. (it could have ended in a long-lasting partisan guerrilla, but apparently in his later years Franco was able to mobilize sufficient social support). They try to put anarchist fractions like the POUM on a sidetrack, and eventually the anarchist militia are disarmed. Of course during this operation the Bolshevists resort to the well-known Stalinist methods of terror, including tortures. David has developed a (physical) liking for the anarchist Blanca, and tears apart his booklet of membership of the BCP (with stamps indicating your monthly payments, those good old days). Typical of the spirit in the militia is one of the final scenes, where they once more storm a fascist trench. Here the fighting gets tough, and the militia leader calls his superior by phone in order to complain about the uncomfortable conditions. Several militia members want a debate in order to consider a withdrawal. Later, when a superior officer actually orders the militia leader to withdraw, the leader wants to start a debate (in the middle of a fight, over the phone!) about the inconsistency of the orders! I find this scene particularly brilliant, reflecting the films subtlety and sarcasm. By the way, although modern warfare delegates much more responsibilities to the troops in the fields, obedience still remains a paramount requirement. Eventually Blanca is shot dead, and David returns home as a disillusioned man. What a mess! Nevertheless, the film confirms that the fascist troops are still the Hoesseins, and the republicans are still the Blairs. People interested in the Spanish Civil war should also see the documentary "The Spanish Earth" of director Joris Ivens and the excellent war film (if you fancy them) "Fünf Patronenhülsen" of director Frank Beyer (which includes the heart-rending Busch song "Die Jarama Front"!).
spratton
The striking perspective in Ken Loach's films seems to be that the characters are just like us --- they are struggling to get clear and articulate their thoughts as they go along --- they haven't learned a smooth script. Ian Hart as Liverpudlian "Dave Carr" is marvellous; it could be you or me, on the ground right then and there, having to say something very important, and trying to convey it across another language. The reality of war and revolution, in which everyone has slightly different ideas, as opposed to being an absurdly 'unified' body, is starkly presented.I could have done without the sexism and swear words, though I've no doubt they were there too, especially among insecure men in macho roles.The "household debate" in the evicted landowner's house, is a marvel. I haven't read up the screenplay, but any viewer would swear that fifteen people were shoved (gently!) into that room and told to "debate it", with no guidance and no script --- but of course that's what all Loach films look like.Powerful; and the almost wordless granddaughter in Liverpool, appearing at the start and the end of the film --- Suzanne Maddock, is absolutely convincing: on the surface uninformed, but at the very end (I did tag the spoiler), her brief salute at the graveside bowled me over ---- powerful unexpected stuff.
membrillon
Just a great film, it gives a glance of how horrifying and absurd a civil war can be, any war is it, but a civil one is absolutely worst, neighbors, friends and relatives fighting each other not only with bullets but also with words, secrets, confidences and more. Loach shows how big he can be as director, he give us a very complete film, quite historic, funny, but above all, a story of just people trying to live a normal life in abnormal circumstances. The film shows a very good casting playing great characters, Ian Hart and Rosana Pastor (as Blanca) are both in their best works. If you like to see good war films, not only spectacular high budgeted epic sagas (I like them too), Land and freedom is a must see film.
Erick-12
Anarchists have remained almost invisible in mass media films. Worse, when they have appeared, it is generally some bourgeois stereotype of anarchists as violent or some socialist stereotype of anarchists as infantile. Here they are shown more accurately as organized and committed to the nitty-gritty basics of the revolution of everyday life.British director Ken Loach made a film that finally attempts an anarchist's view of anarchists in Spain during the civil war against the fascists. The victors write history, so as losers of that war, their history has for too long remained untold. But this 1995 film, "Land & Freedom" shows what they were fighting for and what they were fighting against. One of the best aspects here is that the film also shows how the communists aggressively destroyed the anarchists more than their supposed common enemy. This I take as a lesson for today's left:The melancholy hopelessness of our own 21st century is a consequence of that tragic defeat by the fascists -- largely because the Left fragmented and was brutally dominated by Leninist dictators. Historical progress is now merely spinning its wheels in futility, recycling every old thing again as a farce. The only solution is land and freedom.P.S. Another sympathetic film based on these events is "For Whom the Bell Tolls" (1943) based on the Hemingway novel, starring Gary Cooper and Ingrid Bergman. This one is less politically aware however, so it focuses more on the romance. See info at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0035896/combined
