While The Battle of Algiers may be based on a historical event may be a complex and deeply emotional masterpiece, its theme is a simple one. Like David and Goliath, it’s a story about the weak rising above and beyond all impossibilities set by the strong. The French bullied the citizens of Algiers and treated them like dirt. We see this often in the movie and we see it in both direct actions and in symbolism. For example, when the mob of French citizens attacks a group of Algerians with no reason other than to prove their dominance and relieve the tension the Algerians have inflicted on them. The French see themselves as the righteous, the do-gooders, and the David in this story, when in truth, they are actually the Goliath. It hard to side with the Algerians when they use such horrific tactics as bombing and guerilla tactics, but it’s even harder to side with a group that tortures, massacres innocents, and holds an entire nation hostage in the pursuit of some radical imperialistic agenda. As Morton Deutsch puts it, “Injustice breeds conflict, and destructive conflict gives rise to injustice.” Like the modern movie V for Vendetta, this movie is a reminder that ideas and principles are stronger than perceived. That people like Ali, who are considered insignificant and “rats”, can change the world around them by simply uniting under a single goal. It’s what makes the movie so brilliant and interesting. Ali doesn’t emerge the triumphant hero, but instead plays a single important cog in the wheel of revolution. Ali isn’t portrayed as some enormous hero of justice, but as a man trying to find something to get behind that he can die for. Just like in the myth, Ali is facing an enemy he knows he has no chance against with every intention of winning.
Recent Comments
Third World Literature 
I liked what you had to say about it being hard to sympathize with the Algerians, but even harder to sympathize with the French colonizers in the movie. All of the violence makes it hard to take sides with either the colonizers or the colonized. I also thought you made a strong reference to David and Goliath. The Algerians’ solidarity is what allowed them to be able to overcome the French authority. Just one person, one idea can spark a revolution. This concept reminded me of the scene in the movie, also mentioned in Shohat and Stam’s article, when one Algerian rebel is walking through the prison on his way to his execution and his cries of praise for Algeria spark those of others until they are all shouting in solidarity.
I don’t think it’s a matter of picking sides over the other in this argument. For every action there is a reaction, and the action the French took was the decision in colonizing a land that is not theirs to conquer in the first place. I just think no country ever have the right to invade another for their own personal interest, and I think that’s exactly what the french did. Some argue that colonizing is the a method in introducing civilization; yet there are many ways one can help a country out! isn’t what the UN is for? The reaction of the Algerians was only predicted because the way the French colonized their territory; violence causes violence.