No Man's Land (2001)

Directed by: Danis Tanovic
Starring: Branko Djuric

*****

If you've followed my top 25 films of the decade postings, then you'll know already that No Man's Land is a brilliant conceptual film that is executed to perfection. Interestingly enough, there's nothing all that nail biting about the film. Its engaging, interesting and important but it, very intentionally, never really made me nervous.

The film opens with a small group of Bosnian Soldiers wander lost through the fog. Typically, this would set up our protagonists but instead it simply gives us a character. Ciki (Branko Djuric) looks and acts like he's fed up with the war and while he jokes and gets along with his fellow soldiers, there isn't anything significant about him that gives an audience a real reason to like him. This, to me was the most impressive. The way the film created its characters to be neither the good guys or the bad guys... or likable or unlikable really made the ensuing conflict very real.

No Man's Land could have taken place anywhere, at anytime between any two people who disagree. That's what makes this story so brilliant. It will stand the test of time because its about dealing with differences. Its not necessarily about reconciling those differences... just about dealing with them. Ciki and Nino (the Serb) have no choice but to accept their situation. They must make something out of the fact that they are trapped in a trench together between the two front lines and another soldier is lying awake on a mine that will kill them all if he moves. They don't deal with this situation by becoming friends and realizing that the war is stupid and they should go AWOL and go on a fishing trip together. No, they bicker like children about who's fault the war is. Then they are civil with each other and agree to keep their guns on their shoulders. But then one takes a knife and tries to stab the other one. This to me, felt very real. This story doesn't try to make its audience feel something that isn't there. It tells it how it is.

There are aspects of the film that really make you want to puke but I'm convinced that its intentional. The media pounces on the situation in the trench with no regards about what could happen... as long as they get their story. I recognize the exaggeration by making the key reporter absolutely obnoxious and void of feelings but without that exaggeration, we wouldn't get a feel for how the world feels about the war going on. In the trench, the soldiers argue about who's fault the war is. Through the media and the UN's involvement, we realize that most people don't even care.

The film poses the question, what would two enemy soldiers trapped in a trench do? Its a much bigger movie however. I'd be interested to see a version of this film with different characters and settings. The concept is so smart that is, seemingly, without even trying presents so many more questions and issues worth discussing.