In the Land of Blood and Honey

In the Land of Blood and Honey passed almost unnoticed among viewers and critics alike, except in the countries that emerged from the former Yugoslavia, where it created a considerable controversy.

In order to understand this, we'd have to explain the history of Balkans and origins of civil war that led to the collapse of Yugoslavia. But even the executive summary of such a story would take up more time than Angelina Jolie's feature film directorial debut.

So if you ignore historical background and accuracy, this is essentially a bad movie. The script is idiotic and acting mediocre. In order to make the movie more realistic the characters talk in English with local dialect. This might be convincing to the average viewer but sounds stupid to anyone who knows this part of the world.

The only good thing is the atmosphere at the beginning of the conflict, where most of the people believed the war would be over in a matter of weeks.

I find it remarkable that a star like Angelina Jolie devotes her times to humanitarian work and tells the world the untold stories of human suffering. At the same time it is regrettable that such stories are biased according to the current dogma envisioned by international politics and media. According to that, it is crystal clear who the good guys are and they should be absolved from all wrongdoing. On the other hand, for the supposed misdeeds of the bad guys the whole population of their country should be punished until eternity.

This is black-and-white image of the world which, in my opinion, is against the founding principles of UNHCR, where Angelina Jolie holds a distinguished post.

Everyone's been fuzzing about this movie, reviewing it and commenting (mostly bad things) about it, so I wasn't very eager to watch it. A very good friend of mine with whom we have similar taste in books and movies told me that it was not worth the time, so I didn't bother to watch it, because honestly I don't think that it's a good thing when actors become directors, singers - actors etc... But, when I finally decided to see this film, I wasn't expecting very much and was pleasantly surprised. I enjoyed it very much. I felt it. I know that most of the audience (especially the one from the Balkan) is thinking that an American actress don't have anything to do interfering with the Balkan history, but I think that Jolie studied her subject on the matter and did an amazing job presenting it to the worldwide audience. The thing about this story being a fictional one set in war that actually occurred is also a fact that shouldn't bother the audience and stop it from enjoying this great film, because I don't think it's fair to enjoy a fictional story about Jack and Rose, two love-birds on Titanic, and criticize this well written story about Ajla and Danijel. My point is, Angelina Jolie proved herself as a great director and producer, and others who say otherwise are just not happy with this film because it touches one serious matter that is still going on in Bosnia, even though the war is over.

This is a well intentioned film about the Bosnian war but unfortunately it doesn't work that well. Despite the powerful message it wants to deliver it doesn't draw one into the story.

Firstly the good points. Angelina Jolie makes a good attempt and achieves a good on location feel. The battle and destruction scenes are quite effective - realistic not exaggerated. It is interesting to see the war from 2 sides with lead characters on both sides of the conflict.

The main problem is in the story and screenplay itself. Maybe Jolie was taking on too much by both directing and writing. There have been more main stream movies about the Balkan conflict eg Flowers for Sarajevo and Behind Enemy Lines. I understand she was trying to make a very Un Hollywood movie but maybe a bit of a more traditional dramatic narrative would have been more compelling. Continuity in the story is lacking as the story is broken up between the love and scenes of fighting and other brutalities. The romance is unconvincing. Needed some serious editing.

The main actress is good but the main actor is a bit cold. Their scenes together are awkward and painful to watch.

Overall feels schizophrenic, disjointed and self indulgent.

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland Before I begin,

I would like to preface this review by saying that I am in no way an expert on the Bosnian War. So, before I receive any hate mail from angry Bosnian's or Serbian's about how I am just a stupid American who is criticizing events that I didn't live through, please realize that I am not criticizing Bosnian's or Serbians or war tactics or cultural differences. My job is to criticize FILMS!!! Angelina Jolie hates Serbians, there I said it! I am joking of course, she loves all races. Angelina Jolie (Salt) receives her first writing and feature film directing credits here in "In the Land of Blood and Honey"; a film that is surprisingly almost entirely in Serbian and Bosnian. There has been some controversy (at least there was for a few months) about this actually being an idea Jolie stole and called her own. But after all is said and done, whether or not she came up with the original idea will be the least controversial aspect to arise from this film. Starring Zana Marjanovic and Goran Kostic, it is not the acting which drags this film down, it is the storyline Jolie chooses to focus on instead of a straight forward war story. Chronicling the systematic encampment, rape and slaughter of the Bosniak (Bosnian Muslim) ethnic group during the Bosnian War sounds like some very compelling and powerful material, and "In the Land of Blood and Honey" would have been compelling and powerful, if that was what the movie was about. Instead we get a love story, set in the Bosian War between a high ranking male Bosnian Serb soldier (Kostic) named Danijel and his female Bosniak prisoner (Marjanovic) named Ajla, and a very unsatisfying love story at that. In fact the few instances when the story turns its focus from Ajla to her sister, who has not been captured and is attempting to build a resistance against the Serbs, the film becomes far more interesting and gritty. So much so, that an argument could be made about how Ajla's sister would have made a more realistic and compelling focus for this full length feature film than Ajla herself. Furthermore, without Ajla's sister's subplot, "In the Land of Blood and Honey" is a war film that only lightly dabbles in the brutality of war for less than a third of the movie and then it's back to the flimsy love story. In the end, Jolie attempts to address the political, brutal and cultural elements that make war so complex, but spends far, far, far too much time telling the remedial Romeo and Juliet love story between Danijel and Ajla. I am not against love stories by any means, but to have an average love story set during a fairly recent war, where genocide, rape, and political cover-ups took place, the love story aspect tends to take away (or dumb down) every other important point the film is attempting to make. This is kind of like having a hardcore love story in "Schindler's List". It just doesn't work.

What will undoubtedly anger mass audiences the most: Because of the way Jolie structures her film, the tone inevitably does come off as one sided in the same way the aforementioned "Schindler's List" does. Which in and of itself isn't bad, i.e. Nazi's are horrible people. But because "In the Land of Blood and Honey" is a far less developed film, the "all Serbian's (except for one) are inherently ruthless and cruel" mentality this film encourages, comes off as unnaturally skewed especially to those (like me) who are unfamiliar with the in-depth events of the Bosnian War. Now I am not saying that the Serbs in this film, who are shown ethnically cleansing a mass group of Muslims, were not horrible people, BUT the way this movie presents an entire race (The Serbs) as irrational and blood-thirsty, could be perceived as quite one sided. And for that reason, I can see many audiences finding this the most off-putting aspect of "In the Land of Blood and Honey". But then again, I am not a critic of wars.

Final Thought: I will give Jolie some credit here for manufacturing some brilliant shots (mostly the war scenes) that work to show her talent behind a camera. But much as Jolie tries, it seems as if she knows more about the logistics of a love story than about creating a compelling war film. Not to say that "In the Land of Blood and Honey" isn't a watchable effort, and does minimally redeem itself in the final two scenes of the film, BUT how this film was nominated for a Golden Globe only proves that the Hollywood Foreign Press will do anything to hang out with big stars.

Please visit my page on Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/x-52464-San-Jose-Indie-Movie-Examiner and leave any comments you have about this or any review. The more hits I get the better. Thank you.

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus

The story was sequenced without actual lead. No reality was involved, in one scene Aila was brutally raped in next she looks happy and having sex with her loving man etc. There are traces of true but whole story of Bosnian war was completely simplified. This looks like a bad copy of Emir Kusturica movie "Life is a miracle" 2004. Angelina Jolly should look this movie and she wouldn't probably never made this film. At the end it looks like somebody ordered cheap story for daily use. Pity! On the other hands actors did professional job. Scenes and environment are very realistic and authentic. Music is somehow out of story. I think that scenario had potential but with lot of changes and adjustment.