BootDigest
Such a frustrating disappointment
Holstra
Boring, long, and too preachy.
Brenda
The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one
Theo Robertson
In October 1973 during the Jewish festival of Yom Kippur an Arab coalition led by Syria and Egypt launched a pre-emptive strike against Israel . The Israelis wre caught with their pants down and the Eygyptians made initial gains in the south of Israel . Within three days the Israelis managed to rally their forces and by the end of the month the Israelis had managed to deal a decisive blow to the Arabs in general and the Eyptians in particular that Egypt never again threatened Israel . That said the 1973 war remains the closest the Israelis have come to losing a war and this 2000 Israeli film makes a powerful anti-war statement that war is a brutal and terrible thing even for the victors . As Bertrand Russell once said " There's no winners or losers , only survivors " Congratulations to director Amos Gitai for showing war for what it is . Based upon his own experiences of the conflict this is both straight from the heart and straight from the horses mouth which shows the human cost of conflict . The story centres around a small microcosm of the war where two Israeli soldiers caught up in the chaos volunteer for a medical unit carrying out cavesac of wounded IDF troops If there's a problem to KIPPUR it's probably too realistic for its own good . The camera doesn't do much , the average shot length is overly long , there's long segments devoid of dialogue and there's little in the way of incidental music . In other words this is a movie that should be studied long and hard at University film classes as an example of realism in cinema , but possibly won't be better known beyond that . By a bitter irony it won't be acclaimed as being an anti-war classic because .... well you know who's going to feel sorry about Israeli soldiers being maimed and killed in a conflict where it's the Arabs who are the aggressors ? As a footnote one thing that is distracting is the tanks used which are Merkava tanks which didn't enter service until 1979 . In 1973 the Israelis would have been using the British made Centurion as their main battle tank , but that said nearly every single war film you'll ever see has the same type of anachronism where tanks are involved
ynhockey
While I can appreciate the message that the director was trying to get through with this movie, while watching I was constantly reminded of how boring the movie was, and how I could be doing something better than watching it, for instance, watching fish in a tank.The camera work was bad, the story... what story? And the little character development that was there didn't make any impression on me at all.Being from Israel myself, I had very high hopes for this movie, but Gitai flat-out blew it.Back to the point of the movie - I believe it was trying to portray how war is terrible, especially for the common soldier. However, Gitai failed on all accounts: firstly, the viewer never feels sorry for the main characters, because they're never in danger and never lose anyone they really care about. Secondly, in his crusade to portray war as terrible, he completely destroys the image of the Israeli army. Thirdly, and this is probably the most important, the main characters (Russo and Weinrub) don't die, but return home safely. It's as if, right at the end, Gitai spit on his message, and decided to create a new one: nightmares happen, but eventually they're over and life returns to the way it used to be.Whatever you do, don't see this movie. Not only is it bad, but it's also plain boring. Movies are meant for entertainment, or for provoking thought, or both. This film provides neither.
stevefuzzy
The movie is deeply flawed. The opening and ending love scenes are irrelevant, pretentious, yet totally boring.The middle section, dealing with the breakout of the war hold more promise. I believe they truly reflect the level of disorganization and panic the Israeli military was going thru in the early hours of the war.The depiction of rescuing wounded from muddy battleground was on the money; my father, who did exactly that in that war, vouches for this. It certainly brought back memories of the national psyche at the time.If you can forgive the student-project production quality of the movie, and are curious about what it was like for the common Israeli soldier, then watch this. However, if you like your movies to be professionally produced, this ain't it.
featurefilm
When I screened Kippur, I was very enthusiastic. I had waited a long time to finally be able to see it.Huge disappointment.There is no story line. No acting. No directing. No Camera work. Nothing with the exception of a constant annoying helicopter hummer and the never-ending noise of a diesel engine.Save time. Avoid the movie.
