"Mr. Boniface! I've been a member of this Mess for 23 years, Sir. In all that time I've never seen anybody - man, woman or child - walk into this mess with his hat upon his head. I do not see you now, Sir!" – Major Lauderdale (Richard Attenborough)
Shortly after World War 2, the British Empire, once the largest Empire in all of World History (at one point holding sway over ¼ of the world's population), began granting independence to many of her oversees colonies. This period of decolonisation began in 1945 and ended as late as 1997, though by the early 1980s the yielding of independence to Zimbabwe and Belize meant that most of the major colonies had been set free. This freedom came at a "cost", and wasn't entirely benevolent. Britain did her best to destabilise and divide these colonies before departing, and retained control of as many local industries and institutions as she could.
With the dismantling of the Empire came a wave of films, during the late 1950s and early 60s, which were openly critical of colonialism ("The Hill", "Battle of Algiers", "Z" etc). "The Guns at Batasi" belongs to this group, but is more interested in exploring the confusion that emerges when a country is granted the right to self-determination.
Set in a military outpost during the last days of the British Empire, the film revolves around a by-the-books Regimental Sergeant Major, played by Richard Attenborough, caught between two dissident factions in a newly-created African state.
The film highlights how many post-colonial governments are overthrown by populist rebel groups, and how the process of decolonisation often creates a period of violent turmoil, different factions rising to occupy the vacuum that the Empire once filled. But unlike films like 1959's "North West Frontier", "Batasi" isn't interested in "praising" the Empire for keeping order (this "order" came at a horrible price- millions dying across the West Indies, for example, and almost 1.8 billion in the Indian colonies etc). No, the film is instead obsessed with the far-ranging identity crises that often occur during specific types of social unrest. For example, Richard Attenborough plays Major Lauderdale, an ultra-patriotic disciplinarian who with the collapse of the Empire now seems like a 19th Century anachronism. Like an emasculated man desperately holding on to outdated codes of masculinity, honour and nationalism, Lauderdale is continually mocked behind his back by both his officers and a liberal female MP. Lauderdale's inability to adapt to this "brave new world" is mirrored to the numerous African officers he encounters, characters who likewise find it difficult to comprehend the freedoms they've been given.
What eventual emerges is a film that is very critical of previous British values. Made during the height of the second-wave British feminist movement, the film ushers in an era of change, not by celebrating the freedoms and "liberations" of the 1960s, but by mocking the archaic world it has replaced. Attenborough, whose Major Lauderdale is one of the celebrated actor's finest creations, is thus an amplification of the kind of caricatural military man Alec Guiness played so well in "The Bridge Over The River Kwai", a cartoon whom we both chuckle at and sympathise with.
What's most disturbing, though, is that after all these post-colonial films, most of which were openly critical of colonialism, British and American cinema began releasing a slew of films that began capitulating to certain imperialist tropes and racialized fantasies.
In 1984 author Salman Rushdie commented on this trend, describing a spate of British productions (David Lean's "A Passage to India" and Attenborough's own "Gandhi" helped counter this somewhat) as "the phantom twitchings of imperialism's amputated limb". These were epics which are bathed in a kind of colonial nostalgia. They served as apologias for Imperialism, romanticised the native and offered up a kinder, gentler version of colonialism. Meanwhile, "the native", because he's portrayed as being "closer to nature" ("Out of Africa", "Indochine", "The Piano" etc), and thus less corrupted than his white counterparts, often acted as a symbol designed to redeems certain white characters (as well as the colonising culture that he is associated with).
But made in the early 1960s, "The Gun's of Batasi" is a bit more complex and doesn't succumb to these later trends. "For the first time in the history of my country, Sergeant Major, it is the African who is putting the shell into the breech and giving the order to fire!" an African General yells, the native empowered by the white man's departure.
But of course the white man is determined to retreat into history with his head held high. "I've never come across a misfit of your size and quality before!" Major Lauderdale responds, "If you do happen to go putting a shell into the breech, sir, I sincerely hope that you'll remember to put the sharp end to the front!"
Witty spars like this are common in the film, the humour only dissipating when you realise that these African Generals are going to spend the next few decades killing their countrymen with British guns. "Who put the guns into their hands!" a female officer, seemingly the only voice of reason in the film, mourns. "You!"
8.5/10 - An excellent film, which perhaps relies too heavily on dialogue to get its points across. Nevertheless, Attenborough's Major Lauderdale is such a cauldron of pent up emotion, that we can't resist watching his wild theatrics. Worth one viewing.
Shortly after World War 2, the British Empire, once the largest Empire in all of World History (at one point holding sway over ¼ of the world's population), began granting independence to many of her oversees colonies. This period of decolonisation began in 1945 and ended as late as 1997, though by the early 1980s the yielding of independence to Zimbabwe and Belize meant that most of the major colonies had been set free. This freedom came at a "cost", and wasn't entirely benevolent. Britain did her best to destabilise and divide these colonies before departing, and retained control of as many local industries and institutions as she could.
With the dismantling of the Empire came a wave of films, during the late 1950s and early 60s, which were openly critical of colonialism ("The Hill", "Battle of Algiers", "Z" etc). "The Guns at Batasi" belongs to this group, but is more interested in exploring the confusion that emerges when a country is granted the right to self-determination.
Set in a military outpost during the last days of the British Empire, the film revolves around a by-the-books Regimental Sergeant Major, played by Richard Attenborough, caught between two dissident factions in a newly-created African state.
The film highlights how many post-colonial governments are overthrown by populist rebel groups, and how the process of decolonisation often creates a period of violent turmoil, different factions rising to occupy the vacuum that the Empire once filled. But unlike films like 1959's "North West Frontier", "Batasi" isn't interested in "praising" the Empire for keeping order (this "order" came at a horrible price- millions dying across the West Indies, for example, and almost 1.8 billion in the Indian colonies etc). No, the film is instead obsessed with the far-ranging identity crises that often occur during specific types of social unrest. For example, Richard Attenborough plays Major Lauderdale, an ultra-patriotic disciplinarian who with the collapse of the Empire now seems like a 19th Century anachronism. Like an emasculated man desperately holding on to outdated codes of masculinity, honour and nationalism, Lauderdale is continually mocked behind his back by both his officers and a liberal female MP. Lauderdale's inability to adapt to this "brave new world" is mirrored to the numerous African officers he encounters, characters who likewise find it difficult to comprehend the freedoms they've been given.
What eventual emerges is a film that is very critical of previous British values. Made during the height of the second-wave British feminist movement, the film ushers in an era of change, not by celebrating the freedoms and "liberations" of the 1960s, but by mocking the archaic world it has replaced. Attenborough, whose Major Lauderdale is one of the celebrated actor's finest creations, is thus an amplification of the kind of caricatural military man Alec Guiness played so well in "The Bridge Over The River Kwai", a cartoon whom we both chuckle at and sympathise with.
What's most disturbing, though, is that after all these post-colonial films, most of which were openly critical of colonialism, British and American cinema began releasing a slew of films that began capitulating to certain imperialist tropes and racialized fantasies.
In 1984 author Salman Rushdie commented on this trend, describing a spate of British productions (David Lean's "A Passage to India" and Attenborough's own "Gandhi" helped counter this somewhat) as "the phantom twitchings of imperialism's amputated limb". These were epics which are bathed in a kind of colonial nostalgia. They served as apologias for Imperialism, romanticised the native and offered up a kinder, gentler version of colonialism. Meanwhile, "the native", because he's portrayed as being "closer to nature" ("Out of Africa", "Indochine", "The Piano" etc), and thus less corrupted than his white counterparts, often acted as a symbol designed to redeems certain white characters (as well as the colonising culture that he is associated with).
But made in the early 1960s, "The Gun's of Batasi" is a bit more complex and doesn't succumb to these later trends. "For the first time in the history of my country, Sergeant Major, it is the African who is putting the shell into the breech and giving the order to fire!" an African General yells, the native empowered by the white man's departure.
But of course the white man is determined to retreat into history with his head held high. "I've never come across a misfit of your size and quality before!" Major Lauderdale responds, "If you do happen to go putting a shell into the breech, sir, I sincerely hope that you'll remember to put the sharp end to the front!"
Witty spars like this are common in the film, the humour only dissipating when you realise that these African Generals are going to spend the next few decades killing their countrymen with British guns. "Who put the guns into their hands!" a female officer, seemingly the only voice of reason in the film, mourns. "You!"
8.5/10 - An excellent film, which perhaps relies too heavily on dialogue to get its points across. Nevertheless, Attenborough's Major Lauderdale is such a cauldron of pent up emotion, that we can't resist watching his wild theatrics. Worth one viewing.