Best movie ever!

A Disappointing Continuation

Yo, there's no way for me to review this film without saying, take your *insert ethnicity + "ass" here* to see this film,like now. You have to see it in order to know what you're really messing with.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

A great film despite the caveat that a film rarely interprets a historical event with accuracy. (And the liberties with reality this film takes are too important to be glossed over.) But the question has resonated since ancient days. Agamemnon sacrifices his daughter for the sake of naval warfare; only after Troy is defeated, is he challenged on that decision. And in the Nuremburg War Tribunals, the response--"I was following orders"--was not acceptable. And the cop on the beat shooting a 13 year old teenager walking around with a toy replica of an AK47, defends himself as acting in the best interest and safety of the community. It is a very human expectation to ask and answer whether responses were suitable to the exigencies of the moment. (And if somebody needs to ask the question, then chances are, the response was NOT appropriate and in need of challenge to say nothing of criminal prosecution.) I recommend the movie but clearly, Harry Morant is not the saint or the good guy portrayed. The movie did portray him and the events fairly accurately. The truth of the matter, he had POWs shot out of an act of vengeance; he shot in cold blood the Lutheran Minister who witnessed this atrocity. (Depicted in the movie.) So the sanctity of Breaker Morant is left much in doubt. In other words, his court martial and execution were a just punishment.But as a movie establishing a thematic question--no matter how shaky in reality--it is worth seeing. Just keep that important caveat in mind.

First of all let me get all the mandatory praising out of the way. This film has several brilliant performances,it's writing is witty and intelligent. I own it and I can't count how many times I've watched it, but I never tire of it. Now for weightier matters.This movie definitely addresses the issue of ethics and morality in wartime. it's shows that soldiering is a dangerous profession in so many ways. One will often have more than one foe. There is the armed foe that one has been sent to fight and then there is one's superiors and peers. Warfare is the business of nations, which means there are often many things on the table besides defeating ones enemy. Politicians have a way of changing their objectives and not informing the soldiers of the changes. Previously condoned behavior can suddenly become "inconvenient" and the soldier find him or herself the scapegoat.What I get from this superb movie is that sacrificing one's own beliefs and ,doing what you know to be wrong, because one's superiors say it's all right, is a dangerous thing indeed. It isn't worth it. Warfare is a grim activity. Killing and survival often are and holding on to one's ethics are often the only thing one may have. As I said earlier, danger for a soldier doesn't always come from the enemy, sometimes it comes from ones own. Never sacrifice your morals for politicians,they aren't worth it.

Based on a real life incident of Australian soldiers charged with murder -- for political reasons- - during the Boer war. Echoes of Kubrick's "Paths of Glory", but the morality here is more gray. These men have indeed done awful things, but only as part of a war full of awful things. Thus, while your heart is with the protagonists, there are moments you question them almost as much as the Kangaroo court they face. The acting is excellent throughout, and what was originally a play has been opened up just enough so as not to feel it, without feeling forced. Some of the moral complexities could have been explored with more depth, and there is a slightly disturbing suggestion of making "I was just following orders€™" a viable defense for war atrocities, but I'd much rather question an intelligent, challenging picture"s point of view, then not be challenged at all.

'Breaker' Morant is one of the finest movies I've seen in a while. Set at the beginning of the 20th century, it takes the viewer to the war between the British Empire and the Bower population in South Africa, a war that was mostly about land possession.The Bower War wasn't a conventional war. It wasn't fought between gentleman officers with rules of conduct. It was a guerrilla, hit-and-run war where the British enemies were farmers. This type of war was so unusual the British had to create a special corps to fight in it: the Bushveldt Carbineers, men who fought behind enemy lines and sometimes used unusual methods to deal with the enemy.In this movie, three soldiers are court-martialed for killing prisoners. However the court's intention is not to serve justice. In fact the three soldiers are scapegoats: for being charged with killing a German missionary, the authorities hope that with a conviction they'll appease the German government, which is favorable to the Bowers. Furthermore, by serving justice, the British want to make a good impression at a future peace conference. In other words, the soldiers are nothing means to political ends.The court is a farce and the authorities expect a quick conviction. They've rigged everything: witnesses in favor of the defendants have been sent to India, and an amateur lawyer is found to defend them. What they didn't expect is that the lawyer would give such a fine defense and slowly he dismantles the impartiality of the court to reveal the farce underneath it.The cast is very strong. There are many faces here that anyone can recognize from small roles in forgettable movies: Brian Brown (Cocktail), Jack Thompson (Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil) – and more famous faces like Edward Woodward (The Wicker Man). And they're all impressive. I especially loved Thompson's performance as the defense lawyer, a man who initially appears silly but quickly reveals to have a sharp mind capable of dissecting all the lies and contradictions in the prosecution's arguments. Woodward was also unforgettable as Harry 'Breaker' Morant, a poet turned soldier who slowly loses his mankind during war, especially after his friend is brutally executed by the Bowers. More than anyone in the movie, he understands the new type of war being fought and changes his tactics accordingly.And then there's the screenplay, the amazing screenplay, one of the most intelligent and witty screenplays I've ever seen in a movie. Just about every line is perfect in the movie's context, the pacing is exciting, and the non-linear storytelling for once makes the movie more interesting. Each line helps give each character complexity, while also remaining very funny. This is a funny, entertaining movie, in a sort of gallows humor way. But it's also rife with interesting points about the nature of war, the politics of war and the sacrifices in the construction of an empire.Although war is practically absent from this movie, 'Breaker' Morant, in the guise of a courtroom drama, manages to speak more about war than many movies combined.