Deserter

I watched this film with interest. It appears to have some vague reality to the history of the Algerians fighting against the French.

Amazon lists this film as produced in 2016, when in fact it was filmed/produced in 2002. I could not figure out why Tom Hardy is so young in this movie if it had been produced in 2016. The fact it was produced in 2002 makes more sense" . Hardy and his colleague "Simon Murray" are 18 years younger!

I should study the French Foreign Legion a bit, because I am unaware of the brutality imposed by senior officers upon the recruits and the junior ranks. Paul Fox as Simon Murray is dazzlingly good looking. Hardy's youthful look is quite striking.

This movie is listed as "Legion of Honor on Amazon. On IMDb, it is listed as "Deserter". It is a bit confusing, as I came away from this not knowing exactly who the deserter was. I also question the historical accuracy of this film. Having said that, I do like it and I may watch it again to put together some of the "missing pieces".

Having recently read Simon Murrays factual book 'Legionnaire ' on which this is based - I tracked down the film. The result sadly lacks the grit and gruesome integrity of the book in almost all respects. The casting doesn't really help either, with the main character coming across as rather too honest and righteous compared to his colleagues. I had hoped that the film may have captured the atmosphere of the conflict in some respects but found it sadly lacking. Likewise the quandary of whether or not to support the 'Generals Revolt' coup attempt was dealt with on a rather local basis and contradicts and belittles what actually happened. Its not a well known part of world history outside Algeria or France so for this reason alone it is worth a watch - but don't make the mistake of thinking it paints a true picture of the conflict. To learn more take a look at 'The Battle of Algiers' which was banned in France for years, or even the rather cheesy 'Lost Command' (Anthony Quinn).

Not the most exciting film in the world, and it would've been nice to see a bit more action on the battlefield, but as a cheap knockoff of much better movies like Full Metal Jacket, Deserter isn't bad at all.

Brady is quite effective in an early role, his camaraderie with his fellow soldiers is quite touching sometimes and what war scenes exist are efficient enough for a low budget flick. There is also effective use of overseas locations that add to the atmosphere.

For fans of his earlier work, it's well worth checking out... just don't expect it to go above 'average' at any point, that's all. 5/10.

This is a good 'Foreign Legion' Film and a fairly open representation of a very complicated Period of 20th century History.

France,Algeria and the Foreign Legion all were changed by this series of events and for Simon Murray this was very much a significant time of Personal development and Experience. He also wrote a Book about this time which is also a good read for anyone interested in Legion History.

This is one of Tom Hardy's early Films,but in my Opinion, underrated.

He brought depth and character to 'Dupont' and while the Script lost a little clarity at times by the end of the tale Hardy related the complex nature of Dupont and the Challenges facing many at that time and place!

Sometimes it helps to step outside of the familiar. In "Deserter", my American perspective gets broadened by looking at an Arab country through the eyes of a young Brit placed within the French Foreign Legion. With my own country removed entirely from the scene, I thus start with no default "side" here. The movie does start off following the FFL, but of course expands before too long to show us (some of) the Arab side as well.

I'd like to know, but don't know, how true to reality the movie is. Most of what we're shown seemed very plausible to me. A few bits did feel "Hollywoodized" but perhaps were reasonable distillations of multiple events.

What made the biggest impression on me was the discomfort of Murray as he came face to face with the inexorable underlayment of the whole situation: that military occupation is fundamentally wrong because it is not consensual. That's a good lesson for everyone.

I'm surprised this only has a 5.3. I wouldn't call it a great movie, but it's well done and involving and deserves a higher score.

My biggest complaint is that the accents were hard for me to understand, especially near the beginning. With the mixture of different national origins of the characters and some of the dialog being in French with the rest in (mostly) French-accented English, a lot of the early lines were lost on me. I almost stopped watching after about 10 minutes due to this. I'm glad I didn't.