I was asked to review the movie “Wandea. triumph or death," so I hereby do so.
My overall rating is positive, although the masterpiece of movie art is not this image. Of course, I am aware of the limited budget resources available to the creators of this film, which made it impossible to give more momentum to the batalistic scenes, but especially at first it gives the impression of a "historical reading", in which following the information text there are scenes illustrating the events mentioned, a bit like in a documentary alternatively than a feature film.
The authors surely consciously decided to show the cruelty of the pacification of Wandea by the “hell columns” of Republican troops, not wanting to empathize viewers with besides naturalistic scenes. On the 1 hand, this restraint is glorious, especially in the context of contemporary practices in cinematography, but on the another hand their “marking” makes the viewer gotta believe, as a word, the genocidal multitude of these practices, whose scale and unfettered cruelty were no little than, for example, the Volyn massacre on Poles. The authors of the movie correctly pointed out 3 reasons for the Wandea uprising: the defence of Catholic faith, allegiance to the rightful king and opposition to forced conscription into the Republic's army, but the extermination anti-Catholicism of the revolution is besides also poorly exemplified. I besides regret that with respect to the chiefs of the uprising, at least his first "generalissimus", the driver of Andegavenii Jacques Cathelineau, was not adequately exposed.
One episode in the movie seems to me to be historically unbelievable. I am referring to the "secret" and unwritten clause in the peace treaty of 1795 between the insurgents and the Republic, in which the emissary promises in exchange for the laying down of arms and the designation of the fresh government of the release and handing over to the Wandeans of the young King Louis XVII. It is not that the promise was not kept, but that the young king died of exhaustion the same year, but the likelihood of it being made at all. After all, from the revolutionary point of view, this would be a deadly offer for them, as with the king, the royalists could choice up the full monarchic France, not just Wanda.
The movie defends itself primarily by making the action axis of the main character's story, i.e. François-Athanase de Charette de la Contrie (see portrait), and this is due to the fact that of all the generals of the Catholic and Royal Army he was the least typical figure. Before the revolution, not very spiritual and at first reluctant to enter the uprising, he underwent a large and affirmative evolution, which gives the movie a "nerve" dramatic. We see Charette gradually transforming herself into a hero without fear, fighting to the end without any hope of triumph until the martyr sacrifice of his life and increasing religiously, besides rejecting the temptation of suicide. The latest scenes of the movie are so poignant that they scope the level of large tragedy, causing the audience to see a Cataract “pity and fear”. To conclude: despite any workshop shortcomings, it is simply a profoundly moving and real movie both historically and psychologically, so it is essential to see it.
Prof. Jacek Bartyzel
for: fb profile
