Rating: 
Summary: MEL GIBSON IS THE BEST EVER...
Review: "Gallipoli" is one of the greatest epics of all time (behind "Braveheart and "The Patriot"). Mel Gibson and Mark Lee (incl. the rest of the cast) gave great performances that were worthy of Academy Awards. Mel Gibson has always been my favorite actor and the light in my eyes. I'm very proud to be a fan of this awesome actor who is good in every movie he has been in because his movies vary (drama, war/epic, historical, comedy, action). Plus, Mel looks so fine in this movie (great EYE CANDY). Mark Lee is also kind of cute. If you love Mel Gibson, or just like to watch great movies, "Gallipoli" is the movie for you. I also recommend "Braveheart" and "The Patriot".
Rating:
Summary: Heartbreaking
Review: 'Gallipoli' is one of the most gut-wrenching & heartbreaking films of all time, & is simply a must. The utter futility of war & the callous disregard for human life displayed time & again by High Command are laid out before us as two young ANZACs (Mark Lee & Mel Gibson) are manouvred inexorably to their deaths, along with thousands of their comrades-in-arms, in order to provide a diversion for the landing of British troops.Ironically, the troops landed on Suvla Bay & were given the order to stay put. Many were slaughtered, caught between the Turks & the deep blue sea, while their officers dithered & High Command refused to issue orders. One Australian reviewer has rightly reviled the British High Command's cavalier attitude to the deployment & slaughter of ANZACs (universally lauded for their courage); what is not mentioned - either by the reviewer from Brisbane, or in the film itself - is the casual disposal of British troops. As every British schoolchild knows, whole British villages & towns were left without able-bodied men between the ages of 15 & 50 after WWI, such was the carnage. This war changed the face of western civilisation, fuelling a revolution in attitudes to class & war, & the sheer brutality & pointlessness of it all should no more be forgotten than the astonishing bravery & self-sacrifice displayed by ordinary men (& women - nurses, drivers, & others) in the most desperate of situations. I defy you to watch this film without crying. If you can, you need serious psychiatric help.
Rating:
Summary: Australians at War
Review: A gripping account about a duo of eccentric youths that join the Austrailian Lighthorse in 1915, during the second year of World War One. Mark Lee plays the patriotic Archy Hamilton, who was once a nationally acclaimed sprint runner in his country. Torn from becoming a proffesional athelete and the war, he decides to quit running and fight for his country. Mel Gibson puts on a believable role as the con-man Dunn, who eventually joins together with Hamilton making the ultimate duo of the century. Drawn together from across a continent, the two men meet their destiny on the rocky slopes of Gallipoli, a famous engagement with the German supported-Turks in which the British army attempted to use the Austrailians as a decoy. The under-equiped Austrailians are slaughtered by Turkish machine guns as they try to leap out of the trench. The movie has a terribly sad ending, but is an excellent view on what part the Austrailian Royal Army had in World War One.
Rating: 
Summary: The middle is dull, and it isn't really an anti-war film.
Review: A simple tale of a runner who would give his life for his country. While most people call this an anti-war movie, I would say that it is actually neutral on the subject of war. Archie wanted to serve Australia more than anything. He ran primarily for his country. That is why he wanted to serve in the war so desperately. But in the end, when he lost his life at Gallipoli, was it not the same result? Australia was only really recognized as a country with an identity after that battle. Australia wanted most of all to be recognized by the British. The battle in which Archie lost his life did just that. So in the end, Archie could have stayed out of the war and done just the same with his life. At any rate, the movie scores an A+ as far as acting, storyline, and especially in music. The middle part of the movie was rather slow and almost pointless for the most part. From when Archie and Frank got to Egypt to when they first saw real combat is a zone with little plot. Granted, this is an area where characterization, especially a love of Archie and Frank is built up, but overall the middle boring. Still, it has the best ending moment of any film I've ever seen, and it says a lot about reality, idealism, and the human spirit.
Rating:
Summary: In the trenches.
Review: A touching drama about the futility of war and the power of male friendship. "Gallipoli" stars a young Mel Gibson as a champion runner and reluctant soldier in the World War I battle of the Gallipoli Peninsula in Turkey. The story of his friendship with another runner (Mark Lee) and the idealistic dreams both men have of glory and adventure in the war develops into a ghastly look at the horror of a suicide mission and the waste that Australians experienced, as hundreds of their young men were slaughtered. Gibson was just another working actor at this point, not yet the megastar he is today, and he blends in with the fine ensemble cast and delivers a poignant performance, while Mark Lee steals the show as the naive boy who dreams of adventure and winds up in the horrific experience of trench warfare. A strong, emotionally wrenching war film, highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: In the trenches.
Review: A touching drama about the futility of war and the power of male friendship. "Gallipoli" stars a young Mel Gibson as a champion runner and reluctant soldier in the World War I battle of the Gallipoli Peninsula in Turkey. The story of his friendship with another runner (Mark Lee) and the idealistic dreams both men have of glory and adventure in the war develops into a ghastly look at the horror of a suicide mission and the waste that Australians experienced, as hundreds of their young men were slaughtered. Gibson was just another working actor at this point, not yet the megastar he is today, and he blends in with the fine ensemble cast and delivers a poignant performance, while Mark Lee steals the show as the naive boy who dreams of adventure and winds up in the horrific experience of trench warfare. A strong, emotionally wrenching war film, highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: What about Mark Lee?
Review: After reading all the reviews I'm amazed That nobody mentioned Mark Lee's performance.He "is" the movie. That's one of the most moving and nuanced portraits that I've ever seen. I watched the movie for the first time as a child And still today the last scene haunts me. The movie is beautifully shot,and the acting is great;But Lee's acting is what carries It,and I'll always wonder why he didn't become a major star.
Rating:
Summary: Gallipoli
Review: Although Mel Gibson's on the front cover of the DVD, he actually co-stars with the very blonde Mark Lee (who was on the original poster), one of those actors who you might have expected to be much more famous nowadays than he is. The DVD itself is fine, although it's a shame there aren't many extras - it's in widescreen and there's an interview with Weir, but there isn't a director's commentary, which is a shame.
The film itself leads up to the famous battle of 'The Nek', one of the most pointless assaults in a wasteful campaign. The first two-thirds of the film are essentially character-building (and, whisper it, a little dull), and most viewers will be waiting for the final battle. Although it doesn't have the blood-and-thunder approach of 'Saving Private Ryan', it's just as memorable, and played out almost in real time. The actual attack was over and done with within forty minutes, with the eventual loss of over 300 ANZAC soldiers in an area the size of a tennis court - a small total compared to the tens of thousands killed at the Somme and Passchendaele, but just as horrific for being essentially futile.
The soundtrack seems to be causing some controversy in these reviews - for some reason, Weir chose part of Jean Michel Jarre's synth opus 'Oxygene' to go over the top of the bits where the main characters are running, an odd choice which, although not massively distracting, seems a bit old-fashioned nowadays. Apart from that, the rest of the film hasn't dated.
Rating:
Summary: Will senseless carnage ever end?
Review: Among the abundance of research material I have accumulated over the years, here is a brief commentary which is relevant to this film. I would be grateful to anyone who can identify the source. "The generals thought they could do the job in three days. Land on the Gallipoli peninsula, clear it of Turks and disable the seaward defences. With a bit of luck it could all be accomplished in 72 hours. They failed too, and at a much greater cost in lives than the naval assault. For 259 days, from April 1915 to January 1916, the allied forces hung on to their toeholds on Gallipoli. A total of about 500,000 men were landed there over the course of the campaign and almost 300,000 of them became casualties. For the Turks it was a great victory and marked the time they successfully stood against the greatest empire the world had ever seen. It threw up Mustapha Kemal, an obscure divisional commander, and propelled him on the road that would lead him to become the 'Father of the Nation.' For the Australians it would provide the sacrifice that tempered their newly-forged nation in blood. For the British it was just another fiasco in a war full of them." I also want to acknowledge Ernest Raymond's novel Tell England, (subtitled A Study In A Generation), published in Great Britain in 1922 and now out-of-print. Anthony Asquith directed an earlier film version (1931) of Raymond's novel, Battle of Gallipoli. Directed by Peter Weir and co-starring Mel Gibson (Frank Dunne) and Mark Lee (Archy), this film first focuses on Frank and Archy's childhood and youth, then shifts its attention to Gallipoli where so many of their eager and courageous comrades perished during combat with Turkish forces. So many lost their lives, to a significant extent because they were poorly-prepared for and then poorly-led in combat. To Weir's credit, he allows the narrative to unfold without (or so it seems to me) imposing his own political opinions. Some have referred to this film as being "anti-war." They may be correct but I prefer to view Gallipoli as an indictment of morally corrupt and incompetent leaders who betray the trust of youth, waste their lives to achieve unrealistic objectives, and then wash their filthy hands in the blood of those whom they have sent to their death. The acting is consistently outstanding but even more impressive to me is the cinematography. Credit Russell Boyd with capturing a series of images which have an impact I lack the eloquence to describe. They simply must be seen. One is of naked young soldiers swimming beneath the surface of a harbor under attack and as they struggle to escape death, the water becomes pink. (I wonder if Spielberg had that scene in mind when he planned the water-level photography during the first action sequence in Saving Private Ryan.) Weir co-authored the spare but literate screenplay with David Williamson. Well-done indeed. Those who share my high regard for this film are urged to check out All Quiet on the Western Front (1930), Attack! (1956), Paths of Glory (1957), and The Big Red One and Breaker Morant (both released in 1980). The next time political and military leaders are seriously thinking about placing young men and women in harm's way, they should first be required to sit down and watch all of these films one after another...and then after taking a brief break, see them again.
Rating:
Summary: Postscript: Too real to be invented
Review: And if you think the climax of the movie, the charge by the Australian Light Horse at The Nek, is too ludicrous, too horrible, too absurd to be true, too insane to have ever been allowed to take place, well.... it happened, and it happened just as it is portrayed in the film. Such is the madness of war.
|
