Lance Wiebe
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 6
- Points
- 230
OK, let's see if I can make myself clearer.
Once an Infanteer, always an Infanteer. Gen Dallaire was not commanding a combat team, he was commanding a whole bunch of Infanteers, of which only some had what we would consider good training and good leadership. I submit that an Infanteer may have done a better job than an Artillery man.
Any senior armour or infantry officer can command combined arms operations. That is not my argument. My argument, I guess is really two arguments. I don't think an artillery officer should have been placed on command of Infantry troops. I don't think it was fair to him, or to those he led. I also don't believe that an artillery officer has the requisite personal experience to lead a successful combat team, or larger formation.
Out of all of the Brigades we had in WWII, how many were commanded by an artillery officer?
Once an Infanteer, always an Infanteer. Gen Dallaire was not commanding a combat team, he was commanding a whole bunch of Infanteers, of which only some had what we would consider good training and good leadership. I submit that an Infanteer may have done a better job than an Artillery man.
Any senior armour or infantry officer can command combined arms operations. That is not my argument. My argument, I guess is really two arguments. I don't think an artillery officer should have been placed on command of Infantry troops. I don't think it was fair to him, or to those he led. I also don't believe that an artillery officer has the requisite personal experience to lead a successful combat team, or larger formation.
Out of all of the Brigades we had in WWII, how many were commanded by an artillery officer?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Lance Wiebe said:
Can't say off the top of my head, but in WWII bdes were more homogeneous. Better to look at div commanders. In any case, IIRC McNaughton was a gunner (commander of the Army and later MND), and I think Crerar was as well. Simmonds? Zipperhead? Not sure, but if he was an infanteer what was he doing commanding an Armoured div, and if he was a black-hat why was he commanding a corps that was mostly infantry? I'd like to point out that the German commander on the Italian peninsula was a Luftwaffe officer. Kesselring was considered quite adept, though he had the advantage of defence.
By the time one hits full Colonel I would expect one has a broad based education in the profession of arms in general, not just one's own arm of service. Dallaire was comd of 5ème bde, and gunner or not, should have had a fundamental understanding of all of the arms under him. I think he acutely feels his failure in Rwanda, and probably second guesses himself often.
It's easy for those of us who's experience of command (in my case a rifle section with never a shot fired in anger) is limited to judge his choices from the comfort of our living rooms (or, in Kevin's case, the dubious comfort of his tent/jeep/iso trailer) well after the fact with 20/20 hindsight. The difference between a successful general and a failure is often fortune. That he didn't choose the MacKenzie route is only an indication of the differences between those two officers, and should not be taken as an indictment of Dallaire, or non-infantry commanders.
I've met LGen Dallaire a few times. He was once my bde comd, before Rwanda. I also met him at a time when he was probably near his lowest ebb. The haunted look he had was one of the most disturbing things I have seen (it was shortly after the tragic events of Rwanda, and I whispered to an acquaintance that he was the comd in Rwanda - Dallaire heard the word "Rwanda" and looked at me. A look I will never forget). Most recently I met him at a dedication function. I think his championing of humanitarian interventions is his attempt at atonement for what he himself sees as his failure in Rwanda, and it is what keeps him from being found under Ottawa park benches. In that regard I can grudge him nothing.
His example has done more for Canadian soldiers suffering from mental injuries than anything else - perhaps justifying his promotions. We should thank him for that, if nothing else.
Acorn
G
gratefulcivi
Guest
Did anybody actually see the film? How was it?
I'd hoped to post a review, but I drove in from out of town and had my [expletive] car die before I got there. Some valves and pistons unsuccessfully tried to occupy the same space at the same time. :crybaby: Really helpless feeling, being made immobile in a strange city. CAA towed me home, thank God for that.
I'm not stalking LGen Dallaire (and I'm not his publicist either), but I saw this the other day too, and I thought it also might be of interest (Sharing the stage with Linda McQuaig and Naomi "No Logo" Klein? What a bizarre combination!):
http://www.uoftbookstore.com/online/merchant.ihtml?pid=695143&step=4
Navigating a New World Conference Tickets
Random House of Canada and the University of Toronto Bookstore Reading Series proudly present NAVIGATING A NEW WORLD. Join us for this extraordinary day of ideas, debate and discussion that will focus on Canada and the urgent challenges facing the international community today. This exceptional event features speakers LGEN ROMEO DALLAIRE, LINDA MCQUAIG, LLOYD AXWORTHY, NAOMI KLEIN, THOMAS HOMER-DIXON AND IRSHAD MANJI, and moderators CAROL OFF AND BILL CAMERON.Tickets can be purchased at the University of Toronto Bookstore Special Orders Desk (2nd floor of the Bookstore), online at www.uoftbookstore.com, or by calling (416) 978-7989/(416) 978-7908. All tickets are non-refundable. A portion of the proceeds from ticket sales will be donated to PEN Canada. TICKETS ON SALE SEPT 7TH, 2004.
Product Code: 46130
Note: Saturday November 6th, 2004
Convocation Hall
1 King'd College Circle
9:30am to 6:00pm
Comment: Tickets are Non-Refundable
I'd hoped to post a review, but I drove in from out of town and had my [expletive] car die before I got there. Some valves and pistons unsuccessfully tried to occupy the same space at the same time. :crybaby: Really helpless feeling, being made immobile in a strange city. CAA towed me home, thank God for that.
I'm not stalking LGen Dallaire (and I'm not his publicist either), but I saw this the other day too, and I thought it also might be of interest (Sharing the stage with Linda McQuaig and Naomi "No Logo" Klein? What a bizarre combination!):
http://www.uoftbookstore.com/online/merchant.ihtml?pid=695143&step=4
Navigating a New World Conference Tickets
Random House of Canada and the University of Toronto Bookstore Reading Series proudly present NAVIGATING A NEW WORLD. Join us for this extraordinary day of ideas, debate and discussion that will focus on Canada and the urgent challenges facing the international community today. This exceptional event features speakers LGEN ROMEO DALLAIRE, LINDA MCQUAIG, LLOYD AXWORTHY, NAOMI KLEIN, THOMAS HOMER-DIXON AND IRSHAD MANJI, and moderators CAROL OFF AND BILL CAMERON.Tickets can be purchased at the University of Toronto Bookstore Special Orders Desk (2nd floor of the Bookstore), online at www.uoftbookstore.com, or by calling (416) 978-7989/(416) 978-7908. All tickets are non-refundable. A portion of the proceeds from ticket sales will be donated to PEN Canada. TICKETS ON SALE SEPT 7TH, 2004.
Product Code: 46130
Note: Saturday November 6th, 2004
Convocation Hall
1 King'd College Circle
9:30am to 6:00pm
Comment: Tickets are Non-Refundable
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Lance said:
Or maybe a worse job, or maybe no difference at all. His real role as the mission commander was not to be engaged at the tactical level, and after the rank of LCol, we generally train officers to be able to command operations of all arms, as most armies do. At that level the officer is leading other officers, and leading troops only indirectly. Gen Dallaire had a Belgian Col who was his "Inf SME"-Dallaire's immediate focus was on the military-political level of things, which is where the mission commander is expected to focus. It really was immaterial what his MOC was: it was an issue of human qualities not technical training.
As for the supposed "lack" of ability of Artillery officers to understand or command other arms, I disagree completely, based on my own expreience and on current facts. First, when I was commanding a rifle coy, I learned over time that if I were to be taken out of action, the best guy to take over was not one of my young Pl Comds (forget the Coy 2IC-he'll probably never get fwd in time) but instead my FOO, assuming that officer was otherwise competent (which they almost always were). The FOO has to understand the tactical working of the other arms, and he must be intimately familiar with the tactical plan of hte commander he is supporting, as the lives of the assaulting inf, sappers and tankers depend to a great extent on how well he does his work. I found that with most FOOs, I needed to give only a minimum of explanation: they "got it" pretty quickly. As well, a FOO was normally a more experienced guy who had been through a few attacks, etc unlike the Pl Comds.
Second, I give you the current example of the past Commander of 1 CMBG, now Comd LFWA: BGen Stu Beare. You would, I think, have to go far to find a better Bde Comd in our Army. And he is a Gunner! I have seen some Inf and Armd Bde Comds who were abysmally bad: it really isn't about the capbadge, it's about the person wearing it. Cheers.
Or maybe a worse job, or maybe no difference at all. His real role as the mission commander was not to be engaged at the tactical level, and after the rank of LCol, we generally train officers to be able to command operations of all arms, as most armies do. At that level the officer is leading other officers, and leading troops only indirectly. Gen Dallaire had a Belgian Col who was his "Inf SME"-Dallaire's immediate focus was on the military-political level of things, which is where the mission commander is expected to focus. It really was immaterial what his MOC was: it was an issue of human qualities not technical training.
As for the supposed "lack" of ability of Artillery officers to understand or command other arms, I disagree completely, based on my own expreience and on current facts. First, when I was commanding a rifle coy, I learned over time that if I were to be taken out of action, the best guy to take over was not one of my young Pl Comds (forget the Coy 2IC-he'll probably never get fwd in time) but instead my FOO, assuming that officer was otherwise competent (which they almost always were). The FOO has to understand the tactical working of the other arms, and he must be intimately familiar with the tactical plan of hte commander he is supporting, as the lives of the assaulting inf, sappers and tankers depend to a great extent on how well he does his work. I found that with most FOOs, I needed to give only a minimum of explanation: they "got it" pretty quickly. As well, a FOO was normally a more experienced guy who had been through a few attacks, etc unlike the Pl Comds.
Second, I give you the current example of the past Commander of 1 CMBG, now Comd LFWA: BGen Stu Beare. You would, I think, have to go far to find a better Bde Comd in our Army. And he is a Gunner! I have seen some Inf and Armd Bde Comds who were abysmally bad: it really isn't about the capbadge, it's about the person wearing it. Cheers.
Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Simonds was a gunner also. The black beret came from Monty, not the RCAC! The senior commanders of the Canadian Army were very shy about promoting gunners to top command because there were so many of them - it started to look like freemasonry! But Matthews was also a gunner and was a very good division commander, Copp says because of the fact he was a gunner. Doctrine was firmly artillery based in any event - the brigades were indeed more homogenous, BUT don't forget they all included their "own" field regiment of 25 pounders. The arty reps worked very closely with the infantry - they had to - and post war accounts don't show very well, in my opinion, how closely the infantry brigades were to "their" field regiments. The official orbat had the three field regiments belonging to divisional headquarters and the CRA (Commander, Royal Artillery). In practice, my understanding is that it was different.
Infantry officers didn't seem to be too successful as division commanders - Hoffmeister was outstanding, and he commanded an armoured division! Vokes was competent but not at all brilliant.
Hey guys, sorry to bring back an old topic to life ;D
I was wondering if any of you knew if the movie that LGen Dallaire made was to go out on DVD??? I haven't had a chance to see it at the Vancouver film festival.. :-[
Any of you with some information??
Frank
I was wondering if any of you knew if the movie that LGen Dallaire made was to go out on DVD??? I haven't had a chance to see it at the Vancouver film festival.. :-[
Any of you with some information??
Frank
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I personally am a supporter of LGen Dallaire. I have had the opportunity to both hear him speak and discuss with him at length what he experienced in Rwanda. For those who call him a failure, I must concede that yes, he did fail in his mandate. But at the same time, it is ridiculous to blame the failure on the fact he was an artillery officer or a french officer. If I recall correctly, in his book, he recounts speaking numerous times to General Baril about the situation, trying to influence some semblence of international support at the UN, yet after his plea for help, he gets sent a bunch of unarmed, decrepit, obselete American APCs. How was the man supposed to suceed in this mission? The mission was a victim of international apathy, not the fault of one general. LGen Dallaire put his faith in the system, and the system failed him and the hundreds of thousands who lost their lives in the massacre. In the aftermath of the event, he was broken, as he tried to take his own life several times. Yet some question his character? I do not believe there is any way to question the character or ability of an accomplished general who put his faith in the international system yet failed because a few politicians decided that Bosnia was more important due to its proximity to Europe. I say it is the politicians, not General Dallaire who should be blamed for what happened 10 years ago. Before we criticize him for the actions he took, we must ask ourselves, based on our training, what would we have done? Would it have worked out any better? At the time the media didn't seem to care so what difference would it have made if he did go to the media, as it was suggested? It was a hopeless situation, a situation I hope this world and all military personnel never see again. It is a dark chapter in the UNs history and a failure of humanity. Please, give the General some respect. He did what he could, but failed because of an apathetic international community.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1153389189813
One last dance with the devil
On location in Rwanda, as the cast and crew of Shake Hands with the Devil try to recreate an unimaginable horror
Jul. 22, 2006. 09:14 AM
ALLAN THOMPSON
SPECIAL TO THE STAR
KINIHIRA, Rwanda—Against a stunning backdrop of verdant hills checkered with terraced farm plots, banana groves and mud houses, Roy Dupuis sits alone, quietly transforming himself into Roméo Dallaire.
The steely-eyed Quebec actor cast as the retired Canadian general is practising his lines, murmuring unfamiliar military lingo that wasn't part of his English vocabulary before taking the role of Canada's most famous soldier for the film version of Dallaire's Rwanda genocide memoir, Shake Hands with the Devil.
Dupuis, whose most recent role was hockey legend Rocket Richard, is sipping a can of Nestea and puffing Gauloise cigarettes. Finally, he gets up to stroll across the set and chat with crew members, lamenting that he forgot to bring the charger for his camera and won't be able to snap his own photos of the scenery that so mesmerized Dallaire, whose tragic story inspired this film.
Squint your eyes just a bit and the handsome 43-year-old Dupuis looks eerily like Dallaire, sporting a carefully groomed moustache, summer tan uniform and authentic blue beret. Indeed, Dupuis is even wearing Dallaire's original army nametag and decorations from 1994.
Dallaire is collaborating on this project — right down to a line-by-line review of the script — and insisted on giving Dupuis the decorations to add authenticity.
He also gave Dupuis something of himself.
"I feel a real connection with this man. He opened up to me," Dupuis says during an interview on the set, the first time he has spoken with media since the gruelling shoot began in Rwanda a month ago. "I'm here because of him."
In a chapel at the St. Jean military base near Montreal, Dallaire and Dupuis talked for hours. "Mostly he talked and I listened. He was generous because he wants this story told."
"This is the first time I accepted doing a movie without reading the scenario first," Dupuis says. "It was mainly my meeting with this man that got to me on this. This story should not die, it should be remembered so that maybe we could stop something like another genocide from happening."
Like others, Dupuis acknowledges he barely noticed news of the Rwanda genocide in 1994. "I recall hearing about it, that's pretty much it. Then basically when he started talking about it, it was like, `Holy shit, what happened over there?'"
In this tiny central African country that witnessed the slaughter of up to 1 million people when Hutu extremists set out to exterminate the Tutsi minority and Hutu moderates, Dupuis and the rest of the production team are visiting sites that are the virtual stations of the cross of the Rwanda genocide.
Cast and crew alike have been struck by the breathtaking beauty of the country and the crushing poverty. Ragged bands of small children line the roadway to every shooting location, calling out "muzungu" (Kinyarwanda for "white man") and asking for empty water bottles to reuse.
Shooting in Rwanda has added authenticity — including the red dust that covers nearly everything — but it has proved complicated and expensive. The country has no film industry and none of the gear — cranes, booms or complicated lighting equipment — required by major movie productions.
On this day, the set is a magnificent vantage point near a tiny village called Kinihira, a spot that Dallaire regarded as his secret place. Amid the carnage of the genocide, this is where the Canadian general who commanded a doomed United Nations mission would retreat to "become human again."
And Dupuis says that is exactly the Roméo Dallaire that he intends to portray, a human being, not a hero.
"In a sense it is a heroic role because he went — in French we say `au-delà de lui-même' — farther than himself. But he did not succeed in what he would have wanted to do, so that's why he sees himself as not being a hero.
`I'm not trying to play a hero. I'm trying to play everything I feel about him, as a human being'
Roy Dupuis, actor
"I'm not trying to play a hero. I'm trying to play everything I feel about him, as a human being."
Shake Hands with the Devil is being produced by Laszlo Barna and Michael Donovan. The film will be distributed next year in Canada by Seville Pictures. Donovan, who won an Oscar for the Michael Moore documentary Bowling for Columbine, has spent the past four years on the Dallaire project.
The director, Ottawa-born Roger Spottiswoode, says the movie will be a compelling, factual account of Dallaire's Rwanda experience, all the more real for being shot on location. Early plans to shoot in South Africa were quickly abandoned after Spottiswoode visited Rwanda himself.
"It is the story of a disaster for a country and the personal disaster of a person who was put into a meat grinder and left with very little," Spottiswoode says during a lunch break on the set, pausing only to marvel at the spectacular scenery.
"It's the story of a great tragedy and a remarkable person ... It's a story that has actually not been told before, even though people may think it has. I hope we'll get past them thinking Hotel Rwanda is the only story."
This is the first feature-film depiction of Dallaire's story. The Hollywood production Hotel Rwanda featured Nick Nolte in a composite character — a hard-drinking Canadian colonel — that was loosely based on Dallaire, but was neither a flattering nor accurate portrayal.
Both Dupuis and Spottiswoode spent hours talking to Dallaire about the film.
"He was very, very clear that this was not to be the story of a hero. He doesn't see it that way at all. I said that I understood that but that I would do my best to make it a truthful portrayal of him," Spottiswoode says. "But I can't alter the facts to make less of him.
"He was unable to prevent this happening, he stayed here as a witness to these events and could not carry the burden later. He's a sort of Shakespearean character," Spottiswoode says.
The film will also include difficult scenes of Dallaire's suicide attempts.
"I told him I was going to do it and I don't think he liked it very much, but he didn't stop me. I don't know how much he will approve of what we are doing. I hope his friends tell him that we got it right, but it will be painful," Spottiswoode says.
"We have to sort of part company. I'm not making it for him. I'm making it for other people. It's going to be kind of brutal in a way and I hope it will be honest."
The script moves back and forth between Dallaire's time in Rwanda and the period of his mental collapse and retirement from the military years later, with the Dallaire character speaking to a therapist.
Dallaire was scheduled to travel to Rwanda early this month to visit the set, but cancelled at the last minute.
"He's tired, that's what they told us," Spottiswoode says. "To be honest, it was unimaginable to me that he could ever come. How could you come back and see this being reproduced?"
One scene takes Dallaire through a village where there were so many bodies on the road that he had to get out and remove them to drive through. In another he encounters the body of a woman who has been brutally raped.
"We're just trying to be accurate and honest and not do a sort of Hollywood movie," Spottiswoode says.
"We're not changing events; we're not doing heroic shots or heroic moments. We're not using movie techniques to create a leading character. We're portraying somebody who went through a very difficult time and doing it honestly."Please see Devil, H8
Additional articles by Allan Thompson
One last dance with the devil
On location in Rwanda, as the cast and crew of Shake Hands with the Devil try to recreate an unimaginable horror
Jul. 22, 2006. 09:14 AM
ALLAN THOMPSON
SPECIAL TO THE STAR
KINIHIRA, Rwanda—Against a stunning backdrop of verdant hills checkered with terraced farm plots, banana groves and mud houses, Roy Dupuis sits alone, quietly transforming himself into Roméo Dallaire.
The steely-eyed Quebec actor cast as the retired Canadian general is practising his lines, murmuring unfamiliar military lingo that wasn't part of his English vocabulary before taking the role of Canada's most famous soldier for the film version of Dallaire's Rwanda genocide memoir, Shake Hands with the Devil.
Dupuis, whose most recent role was hockey legend Rocket Richard, is sipping a can of Nestea and puffing Gauloise cigarettes. Finally, he gets up to stroll across the set and chat with crew members, lamenting that he forgot to bring the charger for his camera and won't be able to snap his own photos of the scenery that so mesmerized Dallaire, whose tragic story inspired this film.
Squint your eyes just a bit and the handsome 43-year-old Dupuis looks eerily like Dallaire, sporting a carefully groomed moustache, summer tan uniform and authentic blue beret. Indeed, Dupuis is even wearing Dallaire's original army nametag and decorations from 1994.
Dallaire is collaborating on this project — right down to a line-by-line review of the script — and insisted on giving Dupuis the decorations to add authenticity.
He also gave Dupuis something of himself.
"I feel a real connection with this man. He opened up to me," Dupuis says during an interview on the set, the first time he has spoken with media since the gruelling shoot began in Rwanda a month ago. "I'm here because of him."
In a chapel at the St. Jean military base near Montreal, Dallaire and Dupuis talked for hours. "Mostly he talked and I listened. He was generous because he wants this story told."
"This is the first time I accepted doing a movie without reading the scenario first," Dupuis says. "It was mainly my meeting with this man that got to me on this. This story should not die, it should be remembered so that maybe we could stop something like another genocide from happening."
Like others, Dupuis acknowledges he barely noticed news of the Rwanda genocide in 1994. "I recall hearing about it, that's pretty much it. Then basically when he started talking about it, it was like, `Holy shit, what happened over there?'"
In this tiny central African country that witnessed the slaughter of up to 1 million people when Hutu extremists set out to exterminate the Tutsi minority and Hutu moderates, Dupuis and the rest of the production team are visiting sites that are the virtual stations of the cross of the Rwanda genocide.
Cast and crew alike have been struck by the breathtaking beauty of the country and the crushing poverty. Ragged bands of small children line the roadway to every shooting location, calling out "muzungu" (Kinyarwanda for "white man") and asking for empty water bottles to reuse.
Shooting in Rwanda has added authenticity — including the red dust that covers nearly everything — but it has proved complicated and expensive. The country has no film industry and none of the gear — cranes, booms or complicated lighting equipment — required by major movie productions.
On this day, the set is a magnificent vantage point near a tiny village called Kinihira, a spot that Dallaire regarded as his secret place. Amid the carnage of the genocide, this is where the Canadian general who commanded a doomed United Nations mission would retreat to "become human again."
And Dupuis says that is exactly the Roméo Dallaire that he intends to portray, a human being, not a hero.
"In a sense it is a heroic role because he went — in French we say `au-delà de lui-même' — farther than himself. But he did not succeed in what he would have wanted to do, so that's why he sees himself as not being a hero.
`I'm not trying to play a hero. I'm trying to play everything I feel about him, as a human being'
Roy Dupuis, actor
"I'm not trying to play a hero. I'm trying to play everything I feel about him, as a human being."
Shake Hands with the Devil is being produced by Laszlo Barna and Michael Donovan. The film will be distributed next year in Canada by Seville Pictures. Donovan, who won an Oscar for the Michael Moore documentary Bowling for Columbine, has spent the past four years on the Dallaire project.
The director, Ottawa-born Roger Spottiswoode, says the movie will be a compelling, factual account of Dallaire's Rwanda experience, all the more real for being shot on location. Early plans to shoot in South Africa were quickly abandoned after Spottiswoode visited Rwanda himself.
"It is the story of a disaster for a country and the personal disaster of a person who was put into a meat grinder and left with very little," Spottiswoode says during a lunch break on the set, pausing only to marvel at the spectacular scenery.
"It's the story of a great tragedy and a remarkable person ... It's a story that has actually not been told before, even though people may think it has. I hope we'll get past them thinking Hotel Rwanda is the only story."
This is the first feature-film depiction of Dallaire's story. The Hollywood production Hotel Rwanda featured Nick Nolte in a composite character — a hard-drinking Canadian colonel — that was loosely based on Dallaire, but was neither a flattering nor accurate portrayal.
Both Dupuis and Spottiswoode spent hours talking to Dallaire about the film.
"He was very, very clear that this was not to be the story of a hero. He doesn't see it that way at all. I said that I understood that but that I would do my best to make it a truthful portrayal of him," Spottiswoode says. "But I can't alter the facts to make less of him.
"He was unable to prevent this happening, he stayed here as a witness to these events and could not carry the burden later. He's a sort of Shakespearean character," Spottiswoode says.
The film will also include difficult scenes of Dallaire's suicide attempts.
"I told him I was going to do it and I don't think he liked it very much, but he didn't stop me. I don't know how much he will approve of what we are doing. I hope his friends tell him that we got it right, but it will be painful," Spottiswoode says.
"We have to sort of part company. I'm not making it for him. I'm making it for other people. It's going to be kind of brutal in a way and I hope it will be honest."
The script moves back and forth between Dallaire's time in Rwanda and the period of his mental collapse and retirement from the military years later, with the Dallaire character speaking to a therapist.
Dallaire was scheduled to travel to Rwanda early this month to visit the set, but cancelled at the last minute.
"He's tired, that's what they told us," Spottiswoode says. "To be honest, it was unimaginable to me that he could ever come. How could you come back and see this being reproduced?"
One scene takes Dallaire through a village where there were so many bodies on the road that he had to get out and remove them to drive through. In another he encounters the body of a woman who has been brutally raped.
"We're just trying to be accurate and honest and not do a sort of Hollywood movie," Spottiswoode says.
"We're not changing events; we're not doing heroic shots or heroic moments. We're not using movie techniques to create a leading character. We're portraying somebody who went through a very difficult time and doing it honestly."Please see Devil, H8
Additional articles by Allan Thompson
I saw the film this evening, opening night.
It was very good and not overly Hollywood slick. It's actually deliberately not a Hollywood production. I can also see how some people would find the story a bit hard to follow, due to the amount of detail. I thought Roy Dupuis was excellent.
I haven't read the book, but hopefully others can give their opinion on how the film and the book compares.
It was very good and not overly Hollywood slick. It's actually deliberately not a Hollywood production. I can also see how some people would find the story a bit hard to follow, due to the amount of detail. I thought Roy Dupuis was excellent.
I haven't read the book, but hopefully others can give their opinion on how the film and the book compares.
I saw the movie tonight.
It's been some time since I read the book, but the movie seemed to follow rather well, and didn't pull any punches. I don't think the crowd in the Bytowne Theatre in Ottawa were expecting to see half decomposed corpses on the screen. Lots of very quiet people in that audience after the movie. Personally I think it's something everyone should see. Make folks realize we don't life in a storybook world with happy endings occuring of their own volition...
It's been some time since I read the book, but the movie seemed to follow rather well, and didn't pull any punches. I don't think the crowd in the Bytowne Theatre in Ottawa were expecting to see half decomposed corpses on the screen. Lots of very quiet people in that audience after the movie. Personally I think it's something everyone should see. Make folks realize we don't life in a storybook world with happy endings occuring of their own volition...
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I usually don't post many comments as I usually just read them however I would like to add a few comments on this topic:
I watched the movie a week ago. I also read the book in 2004. The book went into more detail but you can't cover everything in a movie. I believe the movie did a good job portraying the events that took place. As mentioned in other posts, it was nice to see that it was not "hollywoodized" and had a Canadian "flavor" to it. A lot of money, time and effort were put into this film to make it as realistic as possible including filming in the actual locations that the events happened. Although the movie is more graphic than I thought it would be I believe that it was an important aspect of the movie in order to tell the story.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Some people say he failed; and I'm not saying he did or didn't. However I believe based on what i read in the book, news articles and some research i did on the internet (after i read the book) that he did the best he could given what he was directed to do, resources he had to do it with and the bureaucratic red tape he dealt with at the UN.
I would also like to add that I don't believe that he is "playing the sympathy card". I don't think seeing what he saw and going through what he did is worth any status he has received from it. With the negative side of things, there are some positive. With this “status” he has created the General Roméo Dallaire Foundation which is a charitable foundations for less privileges children. After his experience he worked with DND, CF and veterans affairs in matters relating to post-traumatic stress disorder. When he came back, there were no organizations or social programs within DND as the understanding of PTSD was limited at the time. He helped organize the program our soldiers are using today when they come back from Afghanistan.
I'm posting this not to start a bun fight, only to pass my opinion on this thread and shine a different light on the subject.
I watched the movie a week ago. I also read the book in 2004. The book went into more detail but you can't cover everything in a movie. I believe the movie did a good job portraying the events that took place. As mentioned in other posts, it was nice to see that it was not "hollywoodized" and had a Canadian "flavor" to it. A lot of money, time and effort were put into this film to make it as realistic as possible including filming in the actual locations that the events happened. Although the movie is more graphic than I thought it would be I believe that it was an important aspect of the movie in order to tell the story.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Some people say he failed; and I'm not saying he did or didn't. However I believe based on what i read in the book, news articles and some research i did on the internet (after i read the book) that he did the best he could given what he was directed to do, resources he had to do it with and the bureaucratic red tape he dealt with at the UN.
I would also like to add that I don't believe that he is "playing the sympathy card". I don't think seeing what he saw and going through what he did is worth any status he has received from it. With the negative side of things, there are some positive. With this “status” he has created the General Roméo Dallaire Foundation which is a charitable foundations for less privileges children. After his experience he worked with DND, CF and veterans affairs in matters relating to post-traumatic stress disorder. When he came back, there were no organizations or social programs within DND as the understanding of PTSD was limited at the time. He helped organize the program our soldiers are using today when they come back from Afghanistan.
I'm posting this not to start a bun fight, only to pass my opinion on this thread and shine a different light on the subject.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
Resurrecting this because of a notable update:
