Chroniques et points de vue:Chronique amazon.fr:Ce film de sir Richard Attenborough
(Gandhi) relatant l'amitié entre l'activiste noir sud-africain Steven Biko et un rédacteur en chef sympathisant (Kevin Kline) ne connut qu'un succès mitigé. Le style du réalisateur est particulièrement brillant dans la première moitié du film qui traite de la vie et de l'histoire de Biko, mais une fois le leader entre les mains de la police blanche, le récit se concentre sur le personnage de Kline et sur ses efforts pour fuir le pays avec sa famille. En choisissant de faire dériver l'histoire sur le destin du journaliste, le réalisateur commet une grave erreur qui ôte au film toute sa puissance. La vie et l'oeuvre de Steven Biko méritaient bien toute la durée du film.
--Tom Keogh
Disponibilité: Usually ships in 24 hours
Produits similaires:
la suite
Produits similaires:
L'avis des consommateurs
Note moyenne:
-
A Study of Loss
The criticism I've heard when this movie is being discussed has always bothered me to some degree. The knock against it is that Denzel Washington is so strong in the role of Steve Biko, and he himself was such an important figure in South African history, that he deserves a movie of his own. Now, while I agree with this assessment, and hope that maybe a Djimon Hounsou or Chiwetel Ejiofor will revisit the role at some future date, I can't help but feel that these people are judging the movie for what they wanted it to be, and not what's actually up there on the screen.
Not only that, but I feel that the loss of Biko midway through the film actually serves a purpose. And that purpose is, by the final half-hour, when we're privileged enough to have a few flashbacks of him, we realize what a loss he has been to the movie, and to the world. So by having him cut out of a good portion of the film, we're made to grieve his death while the movie continues to soldier forward.
Oh, and by the way, it's not like that second half is a dog, either. It's just not quite as good as the first. I mean, if this movie were cut in two (ala "Kill Bill"), we'd being saying that part one was brilliant, while part two was merely very good. And considering that the 80's were hardly a golden age for Hollywood, that ain't bad.
Now, getting back to Denzel, this is not only the best performance of his career, but possibly one of the greatest ever captured on celluloid, and I find it deeply disconcerting that he didn't win an Academy Award for this performance while he was honored for a menial role in "Training Day" (I'll post a review later explaining my opinion). Not only that, but why, dare I ask, was he nominated in a supporting role, when the Golden Globes acknowledged him as a leading man? Sure, his character was murdered an hour and a half into the movie, but Anthony Hopkins had no more of a lead in "Silence of the Lambs" than Denzel was here.
I hate to cry racism against "liberal" Hollywood, but how else can you explain this, along with the fact that some of the best performances of recent years, given by black actors, have been overlooked? For example, Delroy Lindo in "Clockers," Giancarlo Espisito in "Bob Roberts," Larenz Tate in "Why Do Fools Fall in Love," and the list just goes on and on. I could probably name 50 more if given the time. Not to mention the fact that Spike Lee has never been nominated for Best Director, not even for "Malcolm X" or "Do the Right Thing," neither of which can be disputed as one of the best films of their respective years.
But now I've gone off on a rant, and forgotten to mention Kevin Kline's great supporting work here, and Richard Attenborough, who has yet to top this movie in the seventeen years since it's release. This is also his best work to date, in my opinion, and even tops his much more lauded "Gandhi."
Of course, if you're watching this movie for the first time and don't understand why anyone would make such a fuss about it, I challenge you to sit through the closing credits without being moved to tears. It's just a remarkable bit of filmmaking, simple but powerful, and may be the best end credit sequence since Martin Ritt's "The Front."
Note: 
-
It looks like South Africa
I suspect the details of the escape from South Africa were over-dramatized at some points. But my main point is simply this: having lived in South Africa for two years, I can confirm that the movie transmits a perfect impression of what the country feels and looks like. I don't mean the political situation under apartheid; I mean the streets, roads, landscapes, and how people interact with each other - a good example is the jokes between the delivery man from Lesotho and the South African border guards. The film was mostly shot in Zimbabwe, to maximum effect.
Note: 
-
* pretty boring ...
I had to watch this movie for a History Project. My teacher made it sound inspiring and dramatic. Maybe it was, but it's hard to know when it makes you fall asleep after 10 minutes. Look elsewhere buddy.
Note: -
Cry Freedom commits an apartheid of its own
I always found it ironic that "Cry Freedom," while it's supposed to be about the inhumanity, ignorance and hate behind apartheid, it commits its own apartheid by making Steven Biko play second fiddle in what should be his story/film. Instead, as Hollywood filmmakers often do, it makes the minority character a bystander in what should be his/her own story, and pushes a white character into the lead. Like "Mississippi Burning," which basically shows us how two white characters singlehandedly kept the Civil Rights movement alive, "Cry Freedom" shows us how a white journalist battles apartheid. By far, Denzel Washington's portrayal of Biko is outstanding, the best performance here. He receives a four star, but the director and the film receive less than a one star for committing its own apartheid, pushing a minority to the back of the bus -- and unfortunately, Hollywood continues to do this -- just go see the implausibility that is "Last Samurai."
Note: -
* Cry Freedom ...
Whether it is historically incorrect or not the story of this movie was more than moving. Denzel Washington fits so well into
the characters shoes which is Stephen Biko. Biko was a black man, an ambitious,envious personality who opposed then south african government and became a I-don't-care anti-apartheid activist. Biko is more than lucky to have a friend, a white man who is conscious and empathic journalist, Donald Woods, and who stands behind all Biko's activities and by this Biko gained more popularity.Anyways it doesn't take long for the south african government to get rido of Biko forever and it is then when the white man D.Woods has to sacrifice his beautiful life in South Africa in order to reveal the truth to the world about Biko's murder.
A great movie by all means. Biko and Woods are two people that I'll never forget for their brave hearts.
