User reviews

While I would be the first to admit that this slight little film will probably not change your life, it is very clever and well worth watching. It is the story of an inept little French village in West Africa that discovers that World War I has been raging for 6 months. So, as patriotic Frenchmen, they decide to launch a completely inept invasion of a nearby German village--even though they had been on excellent terms for some time. The silly slogans and patriotism as well as the ensuing stupidity of their assault is a great mini-version of the real war back in Europe. The parallel is actually quite smart as is the acting and direction.

A slight movie, yes, but it will give you a little chuckle and it's all harmless fun.

Black and White in Color is a French anti war movie, done as a black comedy, which won the Best Foreign Film Academy Award in 1976.

World War I is the setting for the French colonists fighting the Germans on the Ivory Coast. The French draft the locals in order to battle the Germans, supplying the natives with guns, uniforms, and other equipment and attempt to train their reluctant soldiers in the ways of war.

The result is a combination of keystone cops and a Marx Brothers saga, with everyone running around, clueless. No one really gets hurt as the real fighting is occurring far from Africa. I am reminded of The Mouse That Roared with Peter Sellers for comparison to Black and White in Color. A funny satire with a positive universal message on man's follies, this is worth watching.

Fall of 1914. French and Germans, living in colonies side by side (Togo or Cameroon, take your pick), feel compelled to be at war with each other since that is what's happening back home, too. Naively and almost playfully at first, until the game starts getting uglier and they experience the horror of casualties nobody had really wanted. Both sides get professional help and they become hardened by the everyday routine (the Germans winning, because their officer studied in Heidelberg...)and start killing each other more efficiently, until finally the war ends and the British arrive to restore law and order in the territories. The long column of British troops, all Africans and Asians, is led by one junior officer on horseback - who when his face is eventually revealed, turns out to be Indian.

Annaud shot the film in the Ivory Coast, then a very staunchly pro-French country. He refused to show anybody the script and pretended he was shooting a very different type of movie. At the gala premiere performance in Abidjan, when the French officials realized the entire picture was a spoof on French colonial policies, they walked out, much to the embarrassment of the Ivorians, who were just as unaware of what Annaud had been up to...

...Nous Ouvre la Barrière

La Liberté Guide Nos Pas.....

Borrowing from one of the most famous military marches for its original title ("Black and White in color" became the title when it was awarded an AA),"La Victoire En Chantant" remained Annaud's best : bitter and utterly uncompromising qualities .At the time ,he had not been swallowed by the Hollywood machine and he did not need a Brad Pitt to flog his stuff.

His actors are not very famous on an international level but all of them are to be commended:Jean Carmet,Jacques Spiesser,Catherine Rouvel or Jacques Dufilho are all excellent thespians .

Africa 1915:the French colonizers do not know their country is at war.but a geographer learns the whole story and urges his compatriots to join the fight against those Barbarian Germans .There are Germans in the neighborhood,therefore they have become enemies.So let's enlist the natives and let's wage war through "black" intermediaries.

A brilliant metaphor of the absurdity of war,an excellent spoof on jingoist spirit .You should see the heroes having a picnic while their men go to be slaughtered.

Annaud's Black and White in Color is an ambitious film packaged as a modest anti-war satire. It meets and exceeds its ambitions, with an intelligent script that keeps us, the audience, fully in-the-know throughout. There is a satire of colonialism, of civilian zealots, of arrogance, of racism, of the Great War and politicians, of the emptiness of slogans and braggadocio, and also of the lust for power and the acquiescence of ordinary people to powerful people. The on-location filming in the Ivory Coast was a treat. It's a story that keeps us thinking all the time about what's absurd, what's realistic, and about knowing right from wrong.

It is more than 20 years since I saw BLACK AND WHITE IN COLOR, but this lovely and masterful film still stands out in my memory as a great movie-going experience. What remains after twenty years? The delicate sense of humor and irony which skewers the irrational nationalistic fervor that prevents people from seeing the truth before their eyes and the feelings in their hearts; the extraordinary beauty of the images drawn from the saturated African light; the awful sadness I felt, as comedy descended into tragedy, and I realized that this absurd situation was terribly real, terribly true.

I don't know if this film is available on video, but certainly , in whatever venue, it is an opportunity not to be missed.

Colonial exploitation couched in goofiness for almost two hours. There is not one likable character in the whole film.

While an interesting concept, and potentially subtle for those lacking any familiarity with colonial history (particularly in Africa), the film never makes it beyond detached irony in its treatment of the subject.

To place the film on par with the Battle for Algiers or All Quiet on the Western front is a bit of a stretch. This may have been one of the last relics of colonialism in Africa before African filmmakers claimed the genre as their own and cast "the natives" as real human beings rather than sad pawns abused by European protagonists.

This film stands in its caliber up there with Oh! What a Lovely War (1969), All Quiet on the Western Front (1930), and Johnny Got his Gun. It is World War in a microcosm.

The film is not dated, nor will it ever be. All long as men fight for territory or for ideals, this film will stand among the top few as a testament to the idiocy and pettiness of war. Was not available for many years.

"Ich auch"-- closing line -- as the two lieutenants walk together off set-- burned in my memory from one viewing nearly 30 years ago. If you saw it you will remember.

The point here is that, in a clash of foreign colonial powers, the locals inevitably get the worst of it. This point is made early on and gets little further elaboration as the drama plays out. Giving the Oscar for best foreign film to a movie which was, let's be honest, a decent enough but obvious and not unusually clever satire on a serious topic (WWI), had to be some misguided exercise in political correctness before such nonsense had been given a name. Yes, it is fairly remarkable that a film with international appeal could be financed and shot in a place like the Ivory Coast. We get this. But an award for BEST foreign film, at a time when many national cinemas (Germany, France and Italy especially) were churning out a pretty impressive product, seems like tokenism. There. I said it. Go ahead and be offended.

The film itself is watchable enough but ordinary. The pacing is slow, the characters are not particularly sharply drawn, and the plotting - mostly a series of military misadventures and misunderstandings - is nothing really clever. It works well enough, but had me neither slapping my knees in merriment, nor nodding in acknowledgement of its cinematic skill. If Hollywood had cranked out something along the same lines we would have expected a higher level of creativity. It has unexpected moments of simple entertainment thanks to some old-fashioned knockabout comedy, but even this is executed with no display of unusual skill on the part of the film's makers. Everything manages to hold together well enough and move the story along - the cinematography of the African locations looks good - but there is just nothing here that is special enough to elevate the project above the realm of the merely good and giving it such a prestigious award as if it does seems dishonest. Watch it, but don't let the Oscar voters snow you. It's an okay movie, and an honest attempt at creating international cinema in an unexpected place. It's just not THAT GREAT.

Short Review: Not worth watching. Makes 90 minutes and a cool premise feel like a slog. If you really want to see it, look up clips of the best parts instead. Definitely not good for a modern audience, and probably wasn't good for an audience at the time either. 3/10 Quality, 3/10 Enjoyment. Watched November 2022

Summary - A French town on The Ivory Coast gets word that WWI has broken out and the local German village is now their enemy. The once friendly french quickly work themselves into a patriotic frenzy and decide to attack their former neighbors. Possessing no formal army or militia, they decide to use their African slaves as soldiers. Given 1.5 days of training, the Africans are predictably slaughtered in the attack, while the french townsfolk have a picnic nearby. Seeing the massacre, the young geographer of the town takes charge and begins enslaving and training more locals of different tribes to serve as his army.

Long Review: This movie promotes itself as a comedy satire war piece. Unfortunately, its almost complete lack of self awareness defeats any attempt at real satire, as the movie continues to treat the black actors almost as badly as their narrative counterparts. There are approximately 3 good jokes, and while they all come at the expense of the French colonizers, none of them is any more complex than 'I called them fat in a language they don't understand and they thought it was fun instead of rude'. If you cut the filler, travel shots, and repeat jokes, you're only left with about 30 minutes of material. And it's so incredibly slow. Sometimes it's hard to make a 90 minute movie feel like it's enough time for the content, and sometimes you feel like you're watching scenery shots occasionally spaced out with part of the movie you wanted to see. This is neither. It never really stops or lingers, it just seems to quietly shuffle along hoping you'll only notice when it does something funny. Somehow afterwards, it feels like you haven't really watched anything. The 'satire' scenes drag on too long and usually only have one joke. Often characters will act in a way that seems intentionally ridiculous, but the movie almost never acknowledges it, leaving you to wonder if that was in fact a joke. The geologist (our part-time main character) seems to be some sort of Nazi allegory or admirer. He's blond-and-blue and at one point sits in front of his new slave army in new uniform as as they parade before him. I'm not sure if it's a textual thing I'm missing because I'm not french, or if it's some strange idea from the creators. Either way, it's a pretty terrible idea for someone who is ostensibly our hero. Finally, the last 10 minutes of the movie introduces our best character; the the Indian-British general. He shows up far too late, and should have instead been an act 3 twist to spice up our war.

Plot Doctor: The worst part is, there's the bones of a great film here. It just needed to have the guts to make the Africans the main characters. A film where we watch the ineptitude and self congratulatory nature of the bumbling colonizers seen through the eyes of the Africans. At first we follow the French and Germans as our main characters and we slowly become aware of how ignorant and gullible they are. Perhaps hint that their slaves handle all the real business negotiations while the Germans and French sit and get drunk. When war breaks out, highlight how quick they are to turn on their former friends. It's important to switch between the two factions and show how they are each incompetent and malicious in their own way. We grow to feel more with the locals as the first third of the movie progresses. Make fun of the missionaries and show how they would often be scammed with fake or shoddy 'False Idols'. Show us how the tribes people were happy to go along with the colonial ridiculousness right up until they were told to throw themselves into the meat grinder. Then the movie switches the African's point of view. We get subtitles now for the local language, and we watch as behind the scenes, the slaves of both factions meet in secret and plan a fake war to trick the French and Germans. For our final beat, have the British show up at the end, just in time to foil our African heroes plan and reveal them to their colonizers... Only for it to be revealed that the British slaves have pulled a similar gag and tricked the British into thinking that the war is over. We get a little wink and a nod and close on the Africans basically in charge, corralling and organizing the three factions of bickering white people.~/

At the time I'm writing this we are at war in the USA. I would hope that anyone worn down by the reality of these times would see this picture. What a testament to the insanity.

My favorite part in this movie is when the natives are traveling and singing as they carry the lazy priests along their journey. The translations of the lyrics are hilarious, considering the pompous priests have no idea what they are singing and think its rather quaint.

A 10 and a 0 poke.*

*see my other reviews for poke definition

This Ivory Coast Best Foreign Language Film Oscar winner - the country's only ever Oscar contender - that is, however, mostly spoken in French, with the rest being translated into English via burnt-in sub titles(!), had been shown on local TV in the late 1980s as part of a cycle dedicated to such recipients, but I had missed out on it back then. It surprisingly triumphed over the more touted official French and Italian entries, namely COUSIN COUSINE (an upcoming viewing) and SEVEN BEAUTIES (both 1975) - the later of which was even nominated for Best Direction! The film looks great and is well-served by an ironically bouncy score courtesy of Pierre Bachelet (best-known for his electronic accompaniment to several softcore titles of the era!). Still, while the director won his only Oscar here, his debut effort, he would become more renowned for subsequent efforts such as QUEST FOR FIRE (1981), THE NAME OF THE ROSE (1986) and THE BEAR (1988).

The premise is a very original one - albeit still reminiscent of KING OF HEARTS and THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING! THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING! (both 1966) - involving the reaction of a French military contingent stationed in the West African country at the outbreak of WWI (even if they only learn of the conflict six months after it began and have no idea whether the hostilities were still raging by then!). Still, their code of ethics renders them duty-bound to join in the fight and, under the reluctant leadership of Jean Carmet, lead an assault on the German ranks posted there…but, having been so long out of action, they suffer a mighty trashing!

Following this, a young, soft-spoken geographer (who had opposed the impetuous initial offensive) takes matters in hand – his organized yet stern handling of the situation (such as negotiating with the local tribes to provide experienced warriors in a subsequent onslaught) garners him the respect of his elders (including shifty store owner Jacques Dufilho and his idiot brother – who likes to take it out on the natives! – and a couple of priests) and the admiration of the two women at the settlement (especially Catherine Rouvel, still retaining the sultry looks of her star-making role in Jean Renoir's LUNCH ON THE GRASS seventeen years earlier!). Eventually, he ends up having Kurtz-like delusions of grandeur and lapses in loyalty by taking on an attractive African woman as his lover. Ultimately, they lose the battle on account of the unpredictable elements: the victorious British army turns up to take over control and the wannabe strategist learns he has a lot in common with the similarly learned German commanding officer!

French colonists in Africa, several months behind in the news, find themselves at war with their German neighbors. Deciding that they must do their proper duty and fight the Germans, they promptly conscript the local native population. Issuing them boots and rifles, the French attempt to make "proper" soldiers out of the Africans.

What has been pointed out about this film that may be of interest is how much more critical the film is of the French than it is of the Germans, despite the fact the Germans are portrayed as the bad guys. And, of course, by the 1970s, the French had fought the Germans twice in the last 50 or so years in some pretty massive wars, so it is interesting not to vilify them.

But what is more interesting, at least to me, is the choice to put the story in Africa. World War I is not very well known in America. We are not taught much about it. And it surprises me that battles were even fought in Africa. This should not surprise me, but it does, because I cannot recall for the life of me ever being told such a thing. And that makes me want to learn more. Not the film's intent, but a consequence just the same.

In this biting satire on war, colonialism and racism, French troops in 1915 Gabon learn that their country has declared war on Germany. Knowing that there are German troops nearby, they decide to train the colonized Africans to fight. Only one person in the French contingent seems to have an iota of reason to his thinking.

I think that "Noirs et blancs en couleur" (called "Black and White in Color" in English) shows imperialism in its most pathetic, depraved form. Not only do the colonizers want the colonized people to fight for the empire, but there's one scene that especially emphasizes this. When some rich people go out for a picnic, they watch the fighting as though it's a spectator sport; a form of entertainment, if you will. But they get mighty shocked when they see how violent it is. Apparently, these colonialists are so completely brainwashed by their own pro-war, nationalistic propaganda, that they fail to realize how ugly war actually is, and they're in for a rude awakening when they find the truth.

Anyway, this is definitely a movie that I recommend. We could use some advice from it, what with the mess that we've made in Iraq. Certainly a good one for Jean-Jacques Annaud, and it definitely deserved Best Foreign Language Film.

In a remote French governed outpost in Africa run by tradesman and missionaries, word reaches them that France is at war with Germany. In an act of blind patriotism, they decide without any training or common sense, to attack a small nearby German settlement.

Whilst the satire knocking the French, war and the treatment of the local villagers is fun to watch it's not exactly subtle. There are laughs to be found here and indeed the characters, who are largely corrupt and stupid and don't really understand why they are going to attack the Germans, are fun company to be sure. Enjoyable then, but not as clever as it thinks it is.

Somewhat familiar, but often very funny anti-war, anti-imperialist satire/farce.

A motley bunch of French, holding down a colonial fort in Africa, discover that WWI has been declared, so go and attack their German neighbors, using their native semi-servants as soldiers, with disastrous results.

Few films manage to wrestle so well, with so many issues – racism, nationalism, religious hypocrisy, etc.

If it kept to it's most original moments, and didn't fall over the edge occasionally into the silly or obviously preachy at times it would be a great film. As is, I might well re-visit. Some professional critics rave, some hate it.

this film lead me on a odyssey: to see as many films of the former colonial masters views of themselves. none of the other films reached the level of brilliance of Black, White in Color.

the sheer madness of a rag tag ARMY marching to destruction, followed by the racially "superior" colonist being carried in their SEDAN chairs can only be equaled by SPRING TIME FOR Hitler via the Producers. the writers create many great characters and many moments of hilarity follow. some of my favorite moments: the priest"s servant on his Muslim pray rug praying with a Christian cross dangling from his neck. the priests again, being carried in their SEDAN chairs while being throughly mocked by their porters.

the last scenes, with the french consoling the Germans over their loss and the two young strategists comparing notes, self assured of their superiority, can world war two be far?

Black and White in Color is a 1976 film about the unctuous specter of war and its curious effects on the small African colonial community of Fort Coulais. The white colonists of the town largely consists of wholesale merchants the Rechampots (Dufilho, Legros and Doll), the sexually frustrated Simon's (Monnet and Rouvel), two bumbling Catholic priests (Berling and Boignan), a permanently drunk sergeant (Carmet) and young geographer Hubert (Spiesser). It is through a care package sent to Hubert that the townsfolk discover France has been at war with Germany for a little over a month and in a patriotic fervor decide to take on the nearby settlement in German Togoland. To do this however they must coop the large black population.

Exploding onto the scene as a powerful calling card for director Jean-Jacques Annaud, Black and White in Color benefits from some sly and surprising comic set-pieces. Those expecting the dour humorlessness of Enemy at the Gates (2001) will instead find moments of genuine mirth, plain and in the open among the noxious absurdity of war. In one scene palanquin carriers chant clever songs as they labor to bring the priests to their destination. While whites hear them and think they're gibberish, the locals know they're singing about the quality of their passengers. On many occasions the white colonists celebrate their piddly (and few) successes while black Catholic converts Caprice (Barrier) and Assomption (Atchory) shake their heads in disbelief; muttering to themselves "ugh, white people."

There are times when the light-hearted humor threatens to sabotage the themes of the story from within. Thankfully we have the character progression of the young Hubert Fresnoy who at first seems the least enthused about battling the Germans. As the only learned member of the colonists, Hubert reluctantly leads the defense of Fort Coulais and the Sisyphean task of taking the neighboring German settlement. When we first meet him, he's drafting a letter to a school friend. In it he writes "I dare say, that in many respects the natives are not far from meriting the honored name of men," pitting him as the most enlightened of his compatriots. Yet war takes a toll on idealists as both Hubert and the audience come to realize. A toll that might just rob him of his humanity.

If ever there was a character that best exemplifies the goals of the film it'd be Jacques Dufilho's Paul Rechampot. While being the most outspoken and vain of the white colonists, he's also the most selfish, going so far as to bury cans of sardines and other supplies so their conscripted army won't take them. Bearing a thick, angry mustache, fierce eyes and brimming with hubris, the man against the elements superimposes a thesis of absurdity; like herding cats or confidently pissing in the wind.

What's ultimately missing from Black and White in Color is serious input from the locals themselves. Shot entirely in Cote d'Ivoire, the film feels like a satirical screed on war, religion and colonialism which, while well argued, nevertheless feels like it could have used at least one strong black character. Assomption gets a moment to shine as he gatekeeps for Hubert but we never get to really see the horrors of war up close from the subjugated perspective; from the soldier's perspective. So many men die as a result of hostilities yet the film's preoccupation with the white settlers blunts what could have made for a more damning film.

Thankfully, Jean-Jacques Annaud's clever direction and a few choice satirical images sure to stick with you make Black and White in Color worth a gander. Sure it might be plagued with one too many "white- guilt chic" moments, but at least you know it's heart is in the right place.

It takes long enough to start to pick up that I began to seriously doubt its reputation. Once the film does begin in earnest, however, it's immediately so acridly biting in its wry, sardonic dark humor that it's almost not funny at all - and therefore, paradoxically, only more so. This stirs together absolute absurdism recalling Monty Python (replete with jaunty musical themes) with the most severely critical, primarily anti-war ethos of films like Stanley Kubrick's 'Paths of glory.' The French colonists and their attitudes would be infuriating, despicable and villainous, if not for the fact that they are total bloviating fools. The hot-blooded excitement to violence, the chest-beating jingoism and militaristic bluster, the racist colonial assumption of right to rule and commanding superiority, the literal elevation and easy living of an arbitrary select few while countless others do all the real work, the emphatic disregard for or corruption of intelligence and reason in the face of possible action and questioned allegiance, and more: filmmaker Jean-Jacques Annaud leaves nothing out of his original story, and screenwriter Georges Conchon keeps these notions foremost in mind in penning his screenplay. The result is uneven as the picture doesn't maintain the same level of electric vitality throughout its ninety minutes, but 'Black and white in color' is nonetheless a stark, shrewd takedown of all such thoughts.

The cast is a joy as all lean into the utmost hot air of their ridiculous characters, and all the work of the crew - sets, props, costumes - help to bring the story to vivid life. The various strains of horrid racism that are woven into this tapestry are especially ugly, but part and parcel thereof, and moreover benefit from such mindful dispensation that they only feed into the overall tenor of the feature. I think it's only reasonable to observe that the plot at large is decidedly loose in its construction, presenting more as a broad image rather than a distinct, solid thread, and this accentuated not least in the way that the timeline of the proceedings, and even characterizations, become particularly scattered and amorphous. To whatever extent this is true, however, the scene writing handily picks up the slack, and outside of the core ideas it's the chief strength of the screenplay. Like a series of short sketches tied around central tenets, the movie serves up a delicious feast of piercing, incisive satire; though the whole is a little lax in how it's stitched together, the end result is roundly entertaining all the same.

Given the subject matter, let alone the achingly dry tone and relaxed form of the tale, I can understand how this won't appeal to all. If I'm being honest, I think I'm marginally let down insofar as I had high expectations based on the premise and its acclaim, and ultimately it's not entirely what I anticipated. For whatever imperfections one may cite, however, much more so than not this is superb and smart in its cutting judgment of war, militarism, colonialism, and all that goes hand in hand with these concepts. As a matter of personal preference it won't meet with equal success for all comers, and for my part I think it stops short of being a must-see. If you do have the chance to check out 'Black and white in color,' however, it's well worth anyone's time.