This movie creates a back story about the people responsible for the terrorist attacks in Casablanca in the 2000s. Those are real events but the movie doesn't really deal with them per say.
The movie focuses on a rendition (best guess account) of the lives of the terrorists starting at early age and up until that fateful day. It is a movie that tries to explore life and hope and struggle. It aims to give a perspective behind the act. Movies like CITY OF GOD and TSOTSI did the same for criminals, while this one deals with terrorists essentially.
I loved the early parts of the movie, but as it progressed it became very obvious and predictable, outside of the real events that are well known. The things it used artistic vision for, those were completely see through and predictable, and that is a huge problem for any production. As viewers we have to put it through a litmus test and not give it a free pass because of the subject matter; a movie should stand on its own script regardless what it is about.
The story starts great, showing us the early life of the main protagonists i would say from around age 8, keeping in mind one brother is decently older than the other. Those growing up parts, are a great exploratory story, almost a documentary (made up one) on their own. Because the movie spans around 20 years a lot takes place, a lot changes, including the cast. Many movie years later we enter the part where we transition from that childhood story into adulthood story and the radicalization part of the movie. This is where things begin to bog down big time.
I have to say it feels like two different movies and i did not enjoy the second part. I felt that it was incomplete. I don't know, maybe the writers and producer were trying to thread carefully with the issue but watching this movie, i do not see the radicalization they wanted to show. It does not hit home. There is no energy behind it. If anything, i expected the movie to play out with the kids we saw become crime king pins; no really. That's how they set it up. The shift towards religion is not portrayed well. The scenes that we get are i'm sorry to have to say that, really low energy and acted out subpar. Monotone is a simple catch all summary. Now i understand something about inner peace and calm in the face of eventual suicide, but the motivation of becoming a "horse" is not shown here. They wanted to show the gradual path towards the final act, yet from first adult scene to credits, there is no change. They act the same, do the same. There is no curve. It just becomes it. Over and over the same thing scene after scene. Same scene content, different movie month. But there is nothing behind them to show escalation or real increase of commitment or anything at all really. The viewer eventually walks away with nothing gained on the subject as credits roll.
For a movie whose purpose was to tell us how bad life, hopelessness, poverty, corruption push people towards what they can find solace in (whether good or evil) it does not achieve this purpose. If anything from what it showed, those boys should have never become radicalized because the content they used was not there for that to occur. Again i understand it could be self censored for variety of reasons but still, how can you deliver half a movie that captivates the viewer with their earlier life and turn it into nothingness in arguably the vital parts?
To me they really couldn't put into script what they wanted to do here. I keep saying that i cannot tell if that is on purpose or due to faults but ultimately does it really matter? If you make a movie about such a subject, you have to have a very clear vision of how you will proceed at all stages. This is not a moral story or a judgement story either. The movie does not plant thoughts about right or wrong. It just makes an account of what they think happened based on the location and time the movie covers ( 1980s-2000s Marocco slums). They could have done so much more with that. The connection between childhood and adulthood is completely missing, the duality between family and friends is very shallow. There are few scenes that somewhat attempt to show the protagonists manifesting how they have changed on those around them, but they are so generic and completely arbitrary and reasonable for somebody in a muslim country they do not even stand out as events. I watched it twice and i just cannot find the radicalization process they wanted to show. They simply failed to cover that properly. This is why this movie feels so bland at the end.
As a last thought, one thing it did do, is it did cover how poor and low educated people are exploited by others for their purpose. That is the one thing it did deliver on properly. Which again is extremely generic and it applies to a lot of things in life and not exclusive to the situation in this movie. Every time i try to give the movie credit, i really cannot. The thing i just praised it for, i discounted it at the same time. And that is just the situation here. Once you press on the sensitive aspects, HORSES OF GOD has nothing to push back with.
7/10 only because of early story and captivating start.
The movie focuses on a rendition (best guess account) of the lives of the terrorists starting at early age and up until that fateful day. It is a movie that tries to explore life and hope and struggle. It aims to give a perspective behind the act. Movies like CITY OF GOD and TSOTSI did the same for criminals, while this one deals with terrorists essentially.
I loved the early parts of the movie, but as it progressed it became very obvious and predictable, outside of the real events that are well known. The things it used artistic vision for, those were completely see through and predictable, and that is a huge problem for any production. As viewers we have to put it through a litmus test and not give it a free pass because of the subject matter; a movie should stand on its own script regardless what it is about.
The story starts great, showing us the early life of the main protagonists i would say from around age 8, keeping in mind one brother is decently older than the other. Those growing up parts, are a great exploratory story, almost a documentary (made up one) on their own. Because the movie spans around 20 years a lot takes place, a lot changes, including the cast. Many movie years later we enter the part where we transition from that childhood story into adulthood story and the radicalization part of the movie. This is where things begin to bog down big time.
I have to say it feels like two different movies and i did not enjoy the second part. I felt that it was incomplete. I don't know, maybe the writers and producer were trying to thread carefully with the issue but watching this movie, i do not see the radicalization they wanted to show. It does not hit home. There is no energy behind it. If anything, i expected the movie to play out with the kids we saw become crime king pins; no really. That's how they set it up. The shift towards religion is not portrayed well. The scenes that we get are i'm sorry to have to say that, really low energy and acted out subpar. Monotone is a simple catch all summary. Now i understand something about inner peace and calm in the face of eventual suicide, but the motivation of becoming a "horse" is not shown here. They wanted to show the gradual path towards the final act, yet from first adult scene to credits, there is no change. They act the same, do the same. There is no curve. It just becomes it. Over and over the same thing scene after scene. Same scene content, different movie month. But there is nothing behind them to show escalation or real increase of commitment or anything at all really. The viewer eventually walks away with nothing gained on the subject as credits roll.
For a movie whose purpose was to tell us how bad life, hopelessness, poverty, corruption push people towards what they can find solace in (whether good or evil) it does not achieve this purpose. If anything from what it showed, those boys should have never become radicalized because the content they used was not there for that to occur. Again i understand it could be self censored for variety of reasons but still, how can you deliver half a movie that captivates the viewer with their earlier life and turn it into nothingness in arguably the vital parts?
To me they really couldn't put into script what they wanted to do here. I keep saying that i cannot tell if that is on purpose or due to faults but ultimately does it really matter? If you make a movie about such a subject, you have to have a very clear vision of how you will proceed at all stages. This is not a moral story or a judgement story either. The movie does not plant thoughts about right or wrong. It just makes an account of what they think happened based on the location and time the movie covers ( 1980s-2000s Marocco slums). They could have done so much more with that. The connection between childhood and adulthood is completely missing, the duality between family and friends is very shallow. There are few scenes that somewhat attempt to show the protagonists manifesting how they have changed on those around them, but they are so generic and completely arbitrary and reasonable for somebody in a muslim country they do not even stand out as events. I watched it twice and i just cannot find the radicalization process they wanted to show. They simply failed to cover that properly. This is why this movie feels so bland at the end.
As a last thought, one thing it did do, is it did cover how poor and low educated people are exploited by others for their purpose. That is the one thing it did deliver on properly. Which again is extremely generic and it applies to a lot of things in life and not exclusive to the situation in this movie. Every time i try to give the movie credit, i really cannot. The thing i just praised it for, i discounted it at the same time. And that is just the situation here. Once you press on the sensitive aspects, HORSES OF GOD has nothing to push back with.
7/10 only because of early story and captivating start.