When watching '9 Rota' or 9th Company in English, I did not get that thrill; nor did I get that emotional reaction that the war genre can so powerfully put across. War is a sad and tragic thing so when we see a war film, chances are it will simultaneously act as a tragedy which means an emotional response or a feeling deep down of pain and regret that it had to happen. Alas, I did not evoke this reaction but it did enjoy most of what I saw even if most of it seems borrowed anyway.
Some may remember Rambo III, from 1988. At one point, Rambo of the title comes face to face with a top Russian and hisses at him: "We've had our Vietnam, now you'll have yours". Of course, he was referring to the Soviet led invasion of Afghanistan which is the background for this film. 9th Company is certainly a film that has its place in history. I'm not well equipped on my Soviet film history bar Eisenstein and his montage movement of the 1920s but I do know a thing or two about the politics of the Soviets and for a Soviet film to make an example out of a very nasty Soviet defeat could probably be called something of a rarity. I cannot imagine any Communist Soviet leader actually commending a Soviet film that depicts a Soviet or indeed Communist defeat on such a large scale, so this is where 9th Company earns its place as a sign of the times: this is a Russian film about a Soviet failure and as a result, would only have been made in the post Communist years. One thing I can see, however, is a Soviet leader commending and enjoying a Soviet film that glorifies their victories and their beliefs.
But when Rambo says that line in Rambo III, it seems ironic that 9th Company feels so much like on of those American Vietnam war films. 9th Company may be Russian made but it borrows a lot from the United States and their Vietnam war films; namely Full Metal Jacket and Platoon but what a twosome to be inspired by. Like the former of those examples, 9th Company splits itself into two segments, possibly three by the final twenty minutes. There is the training segment and the war zone segment, the training segment of which is probably more interesting and somewhat better than the war zone one. One thing this may be down to is that director Fyodor Bondarchuk is not on screen for the first half but is not behind the camera enough in the second part to keep the good direction flowing like he did up to that point.
Although the boot camp is at times by the numbers, it does contain a fair amount of examples of good film-making. The whole idea that these characters will get to know one another and we get to watch them interact is one thing but the constant build up of an off-screen item that is Afghanistan itself as a dangerous and deathly place to go is another. There is a scene that is so well constructed that demonstrates this and that is when they are being briefed by a man telling them all the information the recruits don't want to hear: the fact the enemy could be anyone; the fact you must use a certain word in the village to avoid certain death and that you have to remember this word as a consequence (too bad the scene that arrives when this must be done is not as good) but the sucker punch is when the general tells them the Afghans have never been defeated on their own land, thus; the Soviets have even more reason to be fearful.
But apart from the recruits' tom-foolery and some good scenes involving nice training sequences in which characters must take hills and disable tanks, the first part is anchored in a good way by shouting drill sergeants. The intensity may not be as good as Full Metal Jacket but the dialogue and authenticity is just as successful. However, it is when they get to the middle east that the film becomes patchy. The film does not come off the rails but it more or less sticks on the route you expect it to. The new drill sergeant is the director himself and the actual mission for the troops is not to venture out to find someone or something (Apocalypse Now/Saving Private Ryan) or to defend a certain area (Zulu) or to take a certain area (A Bridge Too Far) but to bed down and wait for a tank column to arrive needless to say, it does somewhat disappoint. There is the odd attack by enemy forces to focus on but they are too few and far in-between everything else to get too excited over.
And that is the film; there is a good scene when a character must travel to the village to get matches but it is too refreshing to see a scene there of that drama rather than genuinely great. There is some dialogue between the soldiers and the film feels the need to focus on the soldier's events that must endured like celebrating the new year, fist fights through disagreements and uncontrollable egos spraying all over the place. But with the film bedding them down waiting for a column, what else can they do? The final fight may end the film on a high but so much action in a quiet film right until the very end feels out of place and a silly attempt to get us to change our minds on the film. This isn't a poor effort by any means but I get the feeling it could've been so much better had the troops in the desert had more to do.
Some may remember Rambo III, from 1988. At one point, Rambo of the title comes face to face with a top Russian and hisses at him: "We've had our Vietnam, now you'll have yours". Of course, he was referring to the Soviet led invasion of Afghanistan which is the background for this film. 9th Company is certainly a film that has its place in history. I'm not well equipped on my Soviet film history bar Eisenstein and his montage movement of the 1920s but I do know a thing or two about the politics of the Soviets and for a Soviet film to make an example out of a very nasty Soviet defeat could probably be called something of a rarity. I cannot imagine any Communist Soviet leader actually commending a Soviet film that depicts a Soviet or indeed Communist defeat on such a large scale, so this is where 9th Company earns its place as a sign of the times: this is a Russian film about a Soviet failure and as a result, would only have been made in the post Communist years. One thing I can see, however, is a Soviet leader commending and enjoying a Soviet film that glorifies their victories and their beliefs.
But when Rambo says that line in Rambo III, it seems ironic that 9th Company feels so much like on of those American Vietnam war films. 9th Company may be Russian made but it borrows a lot from the United States and their Vietnam war films; namely Full Metal Jacket and Platoon but what a twosome to be inspired by. Like the former of those examples, 9th Company splits itself into two segments, possibly three by the final twenty minutes. There is the training segment and the war zone segment, the training segment of which is probably more interesting and somewhat better than the war zone one. One thing this may be down to is that director Fyodor Bondarchuk is not on screen for the first half but is not behind the camera enough in the second part to keep the good direction flowing like he did up to that point.
Although the boot camp is at times by the numbers, it does contain a fair amount of examples of good film-making. The whole idea that these characters will get to know one another and we get to watch them interact is one thing but the constant build up of an off-screen item that is Afghanistan itself as a dangerous and deathly place to go is another. There is a scene that is so well constructed that demonstrates this and that is when they are being briefed by a man telling them all the information the recruits don't want to hear: the fact the enemy could be anyone; the fact you must use a certain word in the village to avoid certain death and that you have to remember this word as a consequence (too bad the scene that arrives when this must be done is not as good) but the sucker punch is when the general tells them the Afghans have never been defeated on their own land, thus; the Soviets have even more reason to be fearful.
But apart from the recruits' tom-foolery and some good scenes involving nice training sequences in which characters must take hills and disable tanks, the first part is anchored in a good way by shouting drill sergeants. The intensity may not be as good as Full Metal Jacket but the dialogue and authenticity is just as successful. However, it is when they get to the middle east that the film becomes patchy. The film does not come off the rails but it more or less sticks on the route you expect it to. The new drill sergeant is the director himself and the actual mission for the troops is not to venture out to find someone or something (Apocalypse Now/Saving Private Ryan) or to defend a certain area (Zulu) or to take a certain area (A Bridge Too Far) but to bed down and wait for a tank column to arrive needless to say, it does somewhat disappoint. There is the odd attack by enemy forces to focus on but they are too few and far in-between everything else to get too excited over.
And that is the film; there is a good scene when a character must travel to the village to get matches but it is too refreshing to see a scene there of that drama rather than genuinely great. There is some dialogue between the soldiers and the film feels the need to focus on the soldier's events that must endured like celebrating the new year, fist fights through disagreements and uncontrollable egos spraying all over the place. But with the film bedding them down waiting for a column, what else can they do? The final fight may end the film on a high but so much action in a quiet film right until the very end feels out of place and a silly attempt to get us to change our minds on the film. This isn't a poor effort by any means but I get the feeling it could've been so much better had the troops in the desert had more to do.