War Horse feels slightly contrived, as if Spielberg knew he was aiming for our hearts without entering through our minds. 

Film Review

Title: War Horse

Director: Steven Spielberg

Cast: Jeremy Irvine, Neils Arestrup, Benedict Cumberbach

Runtime: 146 minutes

Release Date: December 25, 2011

Reviewed by Rhys Dowbiggin

In their later years, most filmmakers choose to produce rather than direct. This is a simple transition for most, as the best filmmakers are at heart, idea men. The ability to take an idea and mould it into something real is a skill, an art. Many filmmakers are artists. I would say most are not.

Steven Spielberg returns to his first serious live-action film in five years (Munich was his last in 2005) with War Horse, the story of a young man named Albert and his horse. Set in the years preceding World War I, Albert bonds with a tough colt he calls Joey and when the horse is sent off to the front lines, the boy signs up to find his friend.

Adapted from a long-running stage play, there are stage elements involved here. A number of scenes feel very theatre inspired, which is a good thing. The composition of the shots and scenes are excellently executed and photographed.

This is an awards friendly film (or perhaps, an audience friendly film). Spielberg was always at his best when his technical brilliance meshed with an acute sense of reality. Saving Private Ryan was such a monumental achievement because of an unwavering honesty creating believable scenarios and genuine feeling. Ditto for films such as Minority Report, Schindler's List, Jurassic Park, Jaws and E.T.

War Horse suffers because it is a heartfelt film. Its purpose is too close to the surface, at times. A number of scenes, shots and characters are tools of emotion. For example, Albert’s best friend, Michael, has a recurring line: “Would you look at you, then." He says it on a number of occasions — paired with a massive smile on his face (somehow it feels as if the actor was cast because of the size of his smile) — all conveniently placed following a moment of inspiration, as if to tell us how to feel. Clearly, as Michael lets us know, this is a remarkable moment.

Spielberg also shades away from the serious violence and carnage of war. Saving Private Ryan was harrowing because we became witness to the reality the men experienced during battle, thus amplifying the power of the message. War Horse withholds this reality, choosing to focus only on the horse and boy. While effective, if Spielberg had chosen to make a less audience-friendly film, this could have been his best work in years. Nothing would be more powerful than Joey’s experience when seen through the bare-boned chaos of trench warfare.

The acting is largely very good. Neils Arustrup, of the far superior film A Prophet, is wonderful as an elderly Frenchmen taking care of his granddaughter. Benedict Cumberbach is a pleasure to watch as a classic British officer leading a cavalry charge. The other performers are largely formulaic, but still done very well.

That is not to say the film is a poor work. Spielberg has moments of brilliance, as any director of his pedigree should. His eye for composition is wonderful, and director of photography Janusz Kaminski is sure to hear Oscar bells. The shots in which Joey gallops through the mud, barbwire, and total madness of no man’s land are some awe-inspiring shots. One particular scene involves a momentary ceasefire between two trenches as a soldier from each side meet in no man’s land to free a wounded horse. It is wonderfully conceived, composed, and executed on a visual and narrative level - the kind of scene directors are remembered by.

War Horse will surely affect you. It is a heartfelt film with a valuable message. The only problem is at feels slightly contrived, as if Spielberg knew he was aiming for our hearts without entering through our minds.

Written by :

rdowb