Forbidden Ground

According to Stuart Hall, Cultural Studies' outlook takes for granted the fact that knowledge in all its forms is always, unavoidably, contextually bound. With this in mind, and given that Cultural Studies is the study of an ever-changing culture, I think that spectators should analyze Forbidden Ground not only as a complex contextual intervention or as a representation/dramatization of certain ideologies and mores within the framework of WW1, but also as a film that thanks to its powerful and emotional leading characters, it gives an in-depth exploration of the human conscience that certainly appeals to present-day audiences.

Pierre Mackerey in 'A Theory of Literary Production' (1978) says that 'what is important is what the text does not say'. For this reason, I would like to bring to the fore the symbolic meaning that Forbidden Ground conveys. Actually, silences and close-ups are recurrent throughout the movie to create this dramatic atmosphere. I should first point out that the character of Grace Wilkins (Denai Gracie) is essential to offer an accurate view of women's relegation to the private sphere at the time. From a critical perspective, and as Grace is usually shown in closed spaces, this could be interpreted as a subtle way of underlining the tragic circumstances suffered by some women, especially the ones who due to their impure actions, were considered to threaten patriarchy. In this respect, we should also keep in mind, for example, the long-standing Nature/Culture dichotomy that, according to Sherry Ortner in 'Is Female to Male as Nature is to Culture?' (1982) or Simone De Beauvoir in 'The Second Sex' (1949), relegates women to being the 'Other' of men. And yet, this view is cleverly reversed in the scene where Sergeant Wilkins (Johan Earl) finally returns to England and kneels on the graveyard. However, a description of this particular scene would reveal too much information and I prefer leaving this task for any avid spectator who really wants to take a look 'beyond the canvas', that is, for those who are eager to explore the psychological aspects of the human being.

Thus, human connection is more important than any other issue in Forbidden Ground. In this respect, we should pay attention to the soldiers' uniforms and the lack of distinguishing badges or patches that identify them. Director Johan Earl states that he wanted them to symbolize every soldier on the battlefield and not just one unit. And the battlefield itself could be a metaphor of our daily lives too, for life in itself is a roller-coaster, a story within the story, always a constant struggle.

Forbidden Ground connects with problems that affect most audiences, pointing out the cruel reality and imperfections of those past times but, at the same time, it gives a final message to understand Sergeant Wilkins' physical and mental journey. This said, perhaps it is not coincidental that, in the above mentioned scene, he is shown by a river/lake, for the contact with Nature has always been said to symbolize a new beginning or at least, the chance to be redeemed from past mistakes and start from scratch.

The whole team and cast that made this movie possible should be praised for their dedication and effort (Adrian Powers did a brilliant job co-directing and editing). But above all, I should say that Johan Earl deserves a special mention. Earl's work as a screenwriter, director and actor is absolutely outstanding and all his artistic decisions only enhance the high quality of the movie. With this in mind, I should conclude by asserting that Forbidden Ground is an excellent film to watch and a good exercise to unveil its hidden meanings. For this reason, it could also be taken to the academic field.

This Australien film is about the horrors if the First World War's trench wars. Three British soldiers are lost out in the so called no mans land, between the two forces of war on the West Front. The film starts off with the order of sending the men out on a suicide mission against the enemy front. After the shooting is over, the three find each other, and that one of them is severely injured. What's even worse is that they have to get out, because they know there will be an air raid against the enemy front in a few hours time. Then have to get back.

Director Johan Earl had casted himself in the main role here, in his second feature film. after working more ad an actor and special effects man for years. It's been 14 years since his last film.

Making a good depiction of the horrific trench war is not each, and I think it's well done here, though it's made on a very small budget. I like a good true war story told on film, but it's difficult for actors to bear a drama, especially when if comes to dialog and dramatic feelings on screen. The actors do their very best here, what I'm not too fond of, is the side story back home. Not back acted, but if makes the temperature in the film fail. The film would have been better concentrating on which story is the most important, and what should be the main theme of the film.

The best and most exciting scene comes towards the end of the film, so don't give up too early!

The music is OK, but used badly between the two different scenes of the film, and feels forced and too loud on the "back home-scenes". I solos wonder why the Germans have to be so ugly and scarred. Not necessary if you ask me. The movie is also a bit slow, and is over without getting the satisfaction you really want out of it.

Except if your specially keen on war movies, this isn't the one you should be going out of bonds to get hold of.

Dramatically the movie held my interest and it takes a realism aspect to do this. But then I saw a major goof when a soldier's watch was revealed to have a quartz works. I moves second by second with jerks, not gently. How hard would it be to find a vintage watch? So it lost a star from this anachronism and I found the rest of the movie more difficult to watch as a reality trip.

The acting, however, was very good, although the marriage sub plot seemed a space saver, not an asset. As a genre type, this was an anti war movie that really takes no sides and that is a plus. The best war movies show the reasons not to have them and that really brings out the dramatic effects.

If you can get past the watch thing, then go ahead with my recommendations.

Some good effects and filmed scenes for the budget. But for god sake either have australian actors play australian soldiers or use British actors for british soldiers. The terible accents destroyed any ability to take the actors seriously. Also the germans did not usually spend all night plastering trenches with machine gun fire and artillery just to pick off the odd British wounded straggler! There was some honor amongst soldiers

I watched Forbidden Ground recently and can't recommend this film highly enough. It was emotive and gripping and had me on the edge of my seat the whole way through.

My only gripe is that this film is marketed as a massive war action film, and while there are numerous battle scenes and action sequences, I would call this film a drama/thriller made in a war setting.

If you're a military extremist who must have every technical detail 100% accurate in order to enjoy a film set in war, this might not be the film for you. I found the attention to detail was great, sure it has errors and faults, which war film doesn't? I'm no war historian but when you consider the budget for which this was made (reportedly like under half a million) my hat tips to the filmmakers regardless of any perceived military technical errors.

The way their lives and connecting tales were interwoven was fantastic, and done in a way you rarely find in film these days. Performances were great and I was totally immersed in their world.

I and my entire family loved this film. If you enjoy film and love watching films that move you, then I highly recommend Forbidden Ground.