NOTE IMDb
7,1/10
2 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueAnachronistic strict Regimental Sergeant Major Lauderdale (Sir Richard Attenborough), on a remote colonial African army caught in a local coup d'etat, must use his experience to defend those... Tout lireAnachronistic strict Regimental Sergeant Major Lauderdale (Sir Richard Attenborough), on a remote colonial African army caught in a local coup d'etat, must use his experience to defend those in his care.Anachronistic strict Regimental Sergeant Major Lauderdale (Sir Richard Attenborough), on a remote colonial African army caught in a local coup d'etat, must use his experience to defend those in his care.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Victoire aux 1 BAFTA Award
- 2 victoires et 2 nominations au total
Avis à la une
About the only British war film I can think of that was more tension-filled than "Guns at Batasi" is "Zulu"--and that puts it in awfully good company. In addition, Richard Attenborough has a terrific performance as a very rigid and very traditional Sergeant Major.
The film is set in Africa in one of the nations that is still a member of the Commonwealth--though it has achieved the distinction of finally having its own government. However, like so many nascent African nations, it's unstable--and soon after the film begins there is a coup and the government topples. The problem is that a group of British soldiers are stationed there and the new leaders want the Brits to give up their weapons as well as surrender a man to them. But, the tough-as-nails Sergeant Major isn't about to do either of these unless he has a direct order to do so. And, it doesn't matter if there is a know-it-all member of Parliament (Flora Robson) telling him to do this--she is not his superior officer and he is not about to break the chain of command.
As I said, it's a very tense little film. You may not appreciate the Brit-focus (after all, they were a Colonial nation until just before the film took place) nor casting an unnecessary sex interest (why include this--isn't there enough action already--plus who stops to have sex when they are facing what appears to be certain death?!). I could look past these things and just saw it as a darn fine action-adventure film. Worth seeing.
The film is set in Africa in one of the nations that is still a member of the Commonwealth--though it has achieved the distinction of finally having its own government. However, like so many nascent African nations, it's unstable--and soon after the film begins there is a coup and the government topples. The problem is that a group of British soldiers are stationed there and the new leaders want the Brits to give up their weapons as well as surrender a man to them. But, the tough-as-nails Sergeant Major isn't about to do either of these unless he has a direct order to do so. And, it doesn't matter if there is a know-it-all member of Parliament (Flora Robson) telling him to do this--she is not his superior officer and he is not about to break the chain of command.
As I said, it's a very tense little film. You may not appreciate the Brit-focus (after all, they were a Colonial nation until just before the film took place) nor casting an unnecessary sex interest (why include this--isn't there enough action already--plus who stops to have sex when they are facing what appears to be certain death?!). I could look past these things and just saw it as a darn fine action-adventure film. Worth seeing.
This is a brilliant representation of a classic Regimental Sergeant Major, and shows the classic values that should continue to thrive (and sadly don't) in our military of today.
Over the top? Yes... a little...but show me a TRUE RSM who isn't. Such men really existed... and they were a source of inspiration, guidance and customs and traditions for many.
Well done by Sir Richard.
From what I've heard, he spent a year preparing for this role by understudying real RSMs at the RSM-prep school in Sandhurst.
I've used this film as a training aid when teaching leadership to young soldiers - and I continue to enjoy it today.
Over the top? Yes... a little...but show me a TRUE RSM who isn't. Such men really existed... and they were a source of inspiration, guidance and customs and traditions for many.
Well done by Sir Richard.
From what I've heard, he spent a year preparing for this role by understudying real RSMs at the RSM-prep school in Sandhurst.
I've used this film as a training aid when teaching leadership to young soldiers - and I continue to enjoy it today.
10beeryusa
I'd never even heard of Guns at Batasi before but I was amazed to find that it's a superlative film. I was expecting standard British stiff-upper-lip fare that the British did so well in the 1950s and '60s, but what I wasn't expecting is that a film I'd never even heard of rivals and even exceeds top-notch British dramas like Sidney Lumet's 'The Hill'.
The film stands squarely on Richard Attenborough's pitch-perfect performance as a Regimental Sergeant Major - the performance of a lifetime, especially when you consider that Attenborough is the complete opposite of the character he plays in this film - in reality he's soft-spoken and unassuming, yet the character he's playing is not at all those things. To say that this role was a stretch somehow doesn't do the performance justice - Attenborough literally becomes the RSM, and every moment he's on screen is incredible. Some reviewers assume that his performance is over-the-top, but I can assure everyone that British NCOs do act like this - or at least they did in the 1960s - I had the honour of knowing one of them.
Not that Attenborough is doing it all alone - the other performances are perfect too, as is the direction. The fact that the film was made in a studio in England makes you realise what a great job a truly great crew can do for a film - there's no way you'd think this movie wasn't made in Africa.
Altogether a fantastic movie - probably the best new film (new to me anyway) I've seen in the last two years. This blows everything else out of the water.
Oh, and for those worried that it's a war film - definitely not. It's a drama set in a military barracks, but psychological drama is what we have here, and unlike a lot of those kinds of films this one has a heart and a sense of humour. Don't miss this one!
The film stands squarely on Richard Attenborough's pitch-perfect performance as a Regimental Sergeant Major - the performance of a lifetime, especially when you consider that Attenborough is the complete opposite of the character he plays in this film - in reality he's soft-spoken and unassuming, yet the character he's playing is not at all those things. To say that this role was a stretch somehow doesn't do the performance justice - Attenborough literally becomes the RSM, and every moment he's on screen is incredible. Some reviewers assume that his performance is over-the-top, but I can assure everyone that British NCOs do act like this - or at least they did in the 1960s - I had the honour of knowing one of them.
Not that Attenborough is doing it all alone - the other performances are perfect too, as is the direction. The fact that the film was made in a studio in England makes you realise what a great job a truly great crew can do for a film - there's no way you'd think this movie wasn't made in Africa.
Altogether a fantastic movie - probably the best new film (new to me anyway) I've seen in the last two years. This blows everything else out of the water.
Oh, and for those worried that it's a war film - definitely not. It's a drama set in a military barracks, but psychological drama is what we have here, and unlike a lot of those kinds of films this one has a heart and a sense of humour. Don't miss this one!
I discovered this film, quite by chance, whilst looking through the early evening schedules for BBC1. Billed in the newspaper as a "Second World War drama" it is anything but, actually being set in early '60s East Africa just after countries like Kenya achieved independence from Britain. Richard Attenborough is splendid as the RSM who worships "spit and polish" as much as he does HM The Queen. (Odd to think she's still on the throne and "reigning" over the same but very much changed realm.) Attenborough's characterisation of the type of man who ran the British Army is spot on. Are such men still with us? Flora Robson also gives a entirely believable performance as the naive and opinionated Labour MP. We know such women are still amongst us. The supporting cast of actors portraying the sergeants and reluctant conscript give this film great credibility. Mia Farrow is an unexpected guest and we can only envy Wilkie for getting his wicked way. Jack Hawkins, as ever, gives a stock performance as the officer who remains stiff upper-lipped in the face of adversity. Altogether an unexpected treat.
It's the early 60's, Africa is being decolonised and a supposedly peaceful transition from colony to independent nation goes awry. All that stands between order and "enemies of the new state" being butchered is Dickie Attenborough's RSM and his Sergeant's mess. He has to defend his barracks, put up with a naive left wing politician, a young girl who's taken a fancy to a conscript private who wants his last day in the army to go without a hitch, a wounded African officer who is greatly respected by the RSM, but is an enemy of the new army he's supposed to be in charge of and a largely absent British officer corps. But this won't get Dickie down; the worse things get, the more determined and resolved he gets. Some of his dialogue is fantastic and his calm (and not so calm) put downs of those who threaten him or complain to him are brilliant. Like Anthony Hopkins in "Remains of the Day", his is a lifetime of service and duty; but one that kicks serious ass.
It's one of Attenborough's finest performances: Certainly up there with Brighton Rock.
It's one of Attenborough's finest performances: Certainly up there with Brighton Rock.
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesBritt Ekland had been cast as Karen Eriksson but pulled out three weeks into production. She had just married Peter Sellers who apparently was so jealous of her casting alongside John Leyton that he asked his actor friends David Lodge and Graham Stark who were also in the cast, to secretly spy on her. After being frequently quizzed on the telephone by Sellers about the shooting and who she acted with, Ekland left the Pinewood Studios in Buckinghamshire, and joined Sellers in Los Angeles. 20th Century-Fox sued Ekland for $1.5 million; Sellers counter-sued for $4 million claiming the Fox suit caused him "mental distress and injury to his health".
- GaffesThe personal weapon used by the British is the Sterling sub machine gun which replaced the Sten in the British Army in 1953. This weapon is held with the left hand on the barrel and never the magazine or housing. Holding the magazine is a throwback to its predecessor, the Sten. The experienced senior members of the Mess are holding it incorrectly whilst the most inexperienced among them (Private Wilkes) holds it correctly and naturally.
- Citations
RSM Lauderdale: Will you stick a boomerang in that great Aussie cakehole of yours until I've finished?
- ConnexionsFeatured in Film Review: Richard Attenborough (1968)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Guns at Batasi?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Durée1 heure 43 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Les Canons de Batasi (1964) officially released in India in English?
Répondre