Imagine a film so raw, so unflinching in its portrayal of war, that it leaves you questioning everything you thought you knew about right and wrong. That’s The Battle of Algiers, a 1966 masterpiece now streaming on HBO Max. This isn’t your typical war movie—it’s a bold, controversial exploration of Algeria’s fight against French colonial rule, and it’s as relevant today as it was decades ago. But here’s where it gets controversial: the film doesn’t shy away from humanizing the Algerian rebels, even as it exposes the brutal tactics of both sides. It’s a perspective that divided audiences then and still sparks debate now.
Legendary film critic Roger Ebert called it a ‘great film’ that operates on a level of ‘bitter reality,’ warning that its unflinching honesty might be too much for some viewers. Ebert, who awarded it four stars in his 1968 review, noted its universal appeal, suggesting that even if you’re not interested in Algeria’s history, you could substitute any other conflict—Vietnam, Northern Ireland’s Troubles, or the Israeli-Palestinian struggle—and the film’s themes would still resonate. And this is the part most people miss: Ebert’s interpretation evolved over time. In 2004, he admitted the film’s sympathies clearly lie with the Algerian National Liberation Front (FLN), not in some neutral middle ground. This shift highlights the film’s enduring power to challenge and provoke.
The French, unsurprisingly, weren’t thrilled. The country’s press fought to delay its release until 1971, and even then, it took years for the film to be widely accepted. But time has a way of softening defenses, and eventually, even the French came to appreciate its historical significance. Bold claim: This film doesn’t just document history—it shapes how we think about resistance, colonialism, and the moral gray areas of war.
The Battle of Algiers has inspired countless revolutionary films, including Paul Thomas Anderson’s One Battle After Another, which similarly explores the complexities of violent resistance. In Anderson’s film, a revolutionary watches The Battle of Algiers, a subtle nod to its influence. But here’s the kicker: while some see Anderson’s film as condemning violence on both sides, others argue it clearly sides with the revolutionaries. Sound familiar? It’s the same debate Ebert sparked decades ago.
Sadly, Ebert passed away in 2013, so we’ll never know his take on Anderson’s film. But his legacy lives on in The Battle of Algiers, a film that continues to challenge, inspire, and divide. Thought-provoking question: Does humanizing one side of a conflict justify their actions, or does it simply remind us of the humanity we often forget in war? Let’s hear your thoughts in the comments—agree or disagree, this is one film that demands discussion.
