Triage

Definitely a worth wile movie to watch, regardless of its overthrowing qualities and contrived passions. A traumatized war photo-journalist, returns home from kurdistan, taking the pictures more that he can hoard. But not just the pictures, he is consulted by the psychiatrist and the movie unfolds. The movie hits rock bottom when his psychiatrist tells him "We can't take the pain away, we have to live with it forever...this is called life" when the protagonist is lying on his bed. Collin Ferrell acting is great like always (Cassandra's dream, In bruges). Overall he does justice to the movie. To be honest this movie seems as it is well behind its time, in moments i felt like it was 80's film. What i actually mean is the movie would have nominated for awards if it was 80's, 2010 was a wrong time. The overall acting is good,I like the score too, the worst part is the movie itself. The movie doesn't lead us anywhere, nonetheless this movie is different than other in the respect that, it doesn't attenuates like other movie. It only gets denser after every minute of it. Last but no the least great story this movie had potential and i myself was expecting much from it but overall the movie is mediocre. 6/10

TRIAGE is a well chosen title for this film about who survives an who dies in war: at times those triage decisions are made by serendipity (read 'bad luck'), at times they are made by physicians or medics tending the wounded on the battlefield, and at times they are submerged in the apparent 'survivors' only to later crush the life from those who make it home. Writer/Director Danis Tanovic has adapted Scott Anderson's novel is a manner that carries the seemingly simple act of 'triage' throughout the film, showing how that action can affect the lives of friends, family, and psychological wholeness of the victim.

Mark Walsh (Colin Farrell, in yet another powerful role) and his buddy David (Jamie Sives) are war photographers for a newspaper edited by Amy (Juliet Stevenson). Their current assignment is Kurdistan and the terrifying realities they not only experience but also commit to film are of such a horrid nature that they both are in shock: they not only witness killings and landmine explosion deaths, but they also watch one Dr. Talani (Branko Djuric) triage the wounded, deciding who can survive care and who is so near death that they are put aside to be later 'executed' by Dr. Talani in a compassionate gesture to end their futile suffering. The tension is so great that David decides to return home, leaving Mark to carry on the assignment. An explosion occurs and Mark is seriously injured but survives and after being tended by Dr. Talani he is encouraged to return home. There is no news as to where David is.

Mark returns home to his adoring Elena (Paz Vega), presents his photographs to Amy, and begins to heal: David's wife Diane (Kelly Reilly) is due to deliver their first child in two weeks and has had no word from David. We watch as Mark, eroded by his experiences in Kurdistan, retreat into a state of decline. Elena grows fearful as Mark, despite hospitalizations and medical care, continues to deteriorate and out of desperation she calls her grandfather Joaquin, a psychiatrist who treated the victims of the Spanish Civil War (Elena is still angry that her own grandfather treated the perpetrators of the destruction that war caused). Joaquin slowly brings Mark into the acceptance of how his mind has triaged the events in Kurdistan and leads Mark to discover the truths about incidents in what war for which he has blamed himself. We finally understand David's disappearance at the moment when his and Diane's child is born.

This is a tough story to watch: subtitles would help the audience understand the many dialects used in the film. But the message is clear and the acting is superb by every member of the cast, even very small but cogent cameos by Reece Ritchie as a boy in Beirut and Dada Ashi as a Ugandan woman - two of the early incidents Mark must remember and face in his work with Joaquin. The cinematography is dazzling, especially the use of flashbacks of a raging river so important in Mark's memory recall, and the constant focus on the blue and yellow tags that mark the triage decisions. This is another powerful anti-war film, this time as seen through the eyes of a non-combatant observer. It is important to see.

Grady Harp

Firstly, let me just say that the TIFF audience did seem to like it and they responded well to it. There were quite a few moments of light humour that were enjoyed and the Q&A session revealed that a lot of people truly were touched by the movie.

Next, let me say that the story was quite powerful. The character played by Farrel was developed and real. It would be hard not to be emotionally effected by this film, and it would be hard not to leave with something to think about.

Unfortunately, a great story and a great character don't make for a great movie. While many of the scenes were spectacular and a lot of the dialogue worked quite well, on a whole the film didn't do its story justice. It actually felt, much of the time, as if I were watching the subplot of another film. In fact, if you've watched enough war films you'll probably find that this movie WAS the subplot to many of those films. That alone doesn't equal a bad film, but it does make it more challenging for the film to hold its own. That didn't happen. Farrel's character--due to his acting as well as the writer/director's desire to explore that type of character--was fine through and through, but the characters around him all tended to speak their lines solely for the purposes of advancing Farrel's character, or to push out a philosophy of war. To illustrate this, just pay attention to the scene in which we're introduced to the grandfather, Christopher Lee's character. That scene introduces a whole back story and turbulent relationship that has nothing to do with anything... it was just pinned on the story awkwardly so as to justify a powerful speech in which he defended his questionable actions in a long-ago war. Well, that's pretty much what the rest of the story felt like. And the payoff wasn't great. It ended mostly how you expect it will end, and gives a message we've heard from a thousand other films.

So, again, if I had the option, I'd give this story a 9/10. The execution of the story remains a 6.

Specialist, low-budget, low-key but praise-able Colin Farrell stars in this tough, low budget British war film, as an army photographer right in the thick of Iraqi fighting war-zones. He returns home to Ireland and struggles to readjust, being shell shocked.

The story, although very real, sometimes seems diluted and gets lost. The acting is effortless, solid and ultimately low-key, like the film, and fails to be anything but unimpressive - even if commendable in nature. The tone is moody, chilling at times and the pace is slow and emotion building (making it hard to submerse in).

In Summary - Not everyone's cup of tea and almost too morose to be enjoyed. I think Farrell fans will prefer it as he is the main piece. A commendable production.

This movie is basically about how even a photojournalist(Colin Farrell) who is a vet at taking pictures of war and death can be traumatized. The story starts off with a very ambitious journalist and photographer that sees the horrors of war with his partner and best friend. The thing is at first I just didn't think the stuff he went through in the beginning section of the movie would be enough to traumatize a person like the photojournalist in the movie. But there is enough flashbacks later on to show the reason why. I personally thought it should have put more emphasis on the horrors of war and the part about the photojournalist's wife figuring out the change in her husband seemed to drag. Also some of the situation just isn't all that believable, and believability is a key factor for a movie like this. And most of the story revolve around digging into the photojournalist's mind because of his change in character and the change in his character isn't anything all that terrible. It starts to pick up and get a bit interesting when Christopher Lee who is basically a psychologist in this is put into the equation. And the digging of the mind got interesting and this movie has some good parts. But the direction and everything else isn't all that well made in a professional manner and just seemed like a work done by a novice. Now not all movies should look professional in order for it to be better, but this is the type of film that would have been better if it went that direction.

5.5/10