Symbolic war film skewers media

Rating: 9/10 (1 August 2009)

No Man's Land offers an excellent metaphor for the situation that leads to war: there is a man in the film who is lying on top of a mine that will destroy everything in the area if his weight is removed. In spite of all the help that is offered to the man there is really nothing that can be done; even the experts are unable provide a solution. Without knowing a great deal about the military conflict this scenario is a part of I think it's safe to say that the situation the armies are battling over is no less complicated. It's apparently far too complicated for the soldiers to understand. When two opposing soldiers discuss the causes of the war neither can pinpoint when or how the war started. In fact each man gives the same reason for his own involvement in the conflict: they joined up because the other side was destroying villages in their home areas.
These two opposing soldiers have a very complex relationship. Each proves unwilling to murder an unarmed man in close quarters. Through some complicated maneuvering each man is put in a position to have mercy on the other. For a short time they are able to get along; they even realize they have a mutual acquaintance from before the war. Nonetheless, in the course of trying to resolve the mine situation the two come to desire the death of one another; if the man on the mine is a metaphor for the nation's problems then the attempts of these men to resolve the situation becomes a metaphor for the war itself. Of course, if each man just tried to understand the other's situation their own conflict could have been avoided.
The film's other concern is the outside world's involvement in the conflict. We see UN forces that are mostly well meaning but clueless to even the most basic issues involved; they don't even have a person who can speak the language of the soldiers. The media is no better: we see a journalist who only cares about having a good story. She is completely indifferent to the people involved beyond what they can do for her; this is shown clearly in her attempt to interview one of the three men. Her third question is, "Did you place the mine under the other soldier?" which shows how ready she is to place the blame on one person or another instead of understanding both sides. The soldier's contemptuous answer is thus well deserved. After this reporter gets the dramatic bloodshed she wants she is willing to believe any excuse that will allow her to get back to a safe area; indeed she doesn't want to look at the trench where the man has been trapped anymore than she would have wanted to visit the country if there was no war.