![]() The scene where the British soldiers were seen dying of heatstroke on the plains before even reaching Sebastopol was done well, especially when the scene cut straight to London, where it was reported in the newspapers, untruthfully, that Sebastopol had already fallen. In addition, there were many great scenes, such as the one where Lord Raglan rides straight through a peaceful anti-war demonstration on his horse, destroying banners and calling the demonstrators traitors. However, as I have said, the film does have a point to make, and this point is evident to all at the end of the film, no matter how many scenes were a little too cryptic. Too often Tony Richardson's 'ideas' simply confuse the audience. It is one of those films that you really have to pay attention to and concentrate on the whole way through and this isn't just because The Charge of the Light Brigade is a thinking-man's film, it is because the meaning of many of the scenes is hidden, shrouded behind quite a bit of self-indulgent (or imaginative) imagery. Too many dreamy sequences were used which just distract the audience the script was at times just downright boring and too often, in the director's eagerness to achieve an arty effect, the powerful meaning of an entire scene was lost. However, the directing techniques to bring this powerfully stark message to life were not up to the task. As such, the pointlessness of war, and the destructive capability of blind ignorance based on an arrogance derived solely from power was brought forth clearly. While riding over the corpse of Nolan, Cardigan threw the blame on Lord Lucan, Lucan in turn threw the hot potato to Raglan, and Raglan laid the blame on the poor innocent man who wrote the order that Raglan himself dictated to him. Nolan was right, Raglan and Cardigan were wrong and didn't care to accept that, the light brigade was lost, and a blaming game ensues. In true 60s anti-war style, the arrogance of those in charge of the war machine brings about its own destruction. It is a war Engalnd should not have been involved in, but the arrogant big wigs made the decision to go. All this happens to the backdrop of Britain choosing to join in on a foreign war - to save Turkey from Russia. Note Lord Raglan's line: "It is a sad day for Britain when her officers know too much what they are doing." Nolan is the man trying to fight vainly against the ignorance-entrenched system. He believes in good sound leadership and decision making, and as such is constantly at odds with the stuffy and arrogant attitudes of his superiors - they are always right and he should speak when he's spoken to, even if he has a valid idea. In contrast to these men is Nolan (David Hemmings), an idealistic military man with 'principles'. To him, he is the most important part of that machine. He's more concerned with what his men drink out of in the mess, and punishing them for their wrongdoings, rather than on running a well oiled military machine. He believes that he is always right no matter what, simply because as the captain he is in charge. We meet, and are disgusted with, Lord Cardigan (Trevor Howard) whose arrogance is the driving force behind all he does. The audience is invited to feast upon the bumbling Lord Raglan (John Gielgud), who nonchalantly sits at his desk in the war office and calls the shots based only on his devotion to England's great past, rather than on any rational thought. Arrogance, the film conveys very clearly, which is based purely upon blissful ignorance. The idea of the film is to shamelessly point out the blind arrogance that lies behind the decisions made by those at the top to go to war. ![]() The film is a classic piece of late sixties film making both in the bizarre arty techniques used, and in the bold anti-war message. The Charge of the Light Brigade is an example of one of these misfires. However, not all these ideas worked well in practice. ![]() Lester did this to achieve an original knockabout and racy product, and Richardson did it to achieve a more stark and poignant effect for the supposed thinking-man's 'swinging' audience of the time. The two of them were mavericks, often eschewing traditional and reliable modes of film making in preference to trying out unchartered techniques - born out of nothing else but their own imaginations. Tony Richards was an ideas man, in some loose sense a lot like his contemporary 60s director Richard Lester. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |