- Release Date: 13/04/2024
- Cast: Henry Cavill, Alan Ritchson, Alex Pettyfer, Eiza González, Babs Olusanmokun
- Director: Guy Ritchie
A Half-Decent Entertainer, Saved by Comedy, Ritchson and Cavill
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare” is based on the book “The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare: The Mavericks Who Plotted Hitler’s Downfall, Giving Birth to Modern-Day Black Ops” by Damien Lewis. The book recounts Churchill’s clandestine group of cutthroat special operations soldiers who adhered to no rules, were not particularly keen on following orders and were bewitched only by their thirst for violence, mayhem, and chaos. However, in the act of quenching that very thirst, they ended up being one of the most vital resources of their country against the Nazis. These men were also ardent Nazi haters for their own personal reasons and were united by this sentiment more than anything else.
Lewis’s book particularly delves into one operation of the team (operation Postmaster) wherein they were tasked to destroy an Italian ship, Duchesse, anchored in Fernando Po, which was carrying a large cargo aimed at restocking and reinforcing the Nazi U-Boat armada in the Atlantic. These U-Boats were not only crippling supplies and destroying any form of help that the European allies were receiving but were also one of the primary reasons why the American soldiers were unable to join the war, as the threats posed by the armada were too great to safety and rationality.
While the film is based on this true story, Guy Ritchie brings his own sensibility to how the characters and the story are envisioned and lets his imagination run wild with how the action sequences of the film unfold. One look at the real characters at the end of the film will tell you all you need to know about an honest recreation of how the true story might have unfolded. We have seen something similar to this in Quentin Tarantino’s “Inglorious Basterds”. While “Inglorious Basterds” was brimming with numerous subplots, grotesque action-violence, immersive setups, and build-ups to violence and mayhem, as well as dialogues between characters that not only had literary merit but were also the strongest aspects of the film, Guy Ritchie’s film is a lot more relaxed, heavier on creative and clean action than violence, and has exchanges between characters that are not particularly literary in nature but are more concerned with entertaining and extracting laughs more than anything else.
This approach to storytelling has two sides to it. While this will reel in a lot more audience than what can be expected from a film like “Inglorious Basterds”, it will also prove to be a lot less aesthetically and cinematically satisfying for audiences who have been exposed before to better films of this nature from the 50s and 60s Hollywood. That was an era when Alistair MacLean and the adaptations of his works (“Guns of Navarone”, “Where Eagles Dare”) were a rage among audiences and the film fraternity. A film like “The Dirty Dozen” also exists, which was loosely based on the same story idea that we can attribute “The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare” to take inspiration from. Hence it is safe to say that a film of this nature has always found takers provided it knew where exactly to fit in. This was one of my major issues with Ritchie’s film as it felt like an effort that was confused between too many things and ended up being neither wholeheartedly.
I was underwhelmed by the action and the violence of the film. I was expecting a visionary like Guy Ritchie to deliver creative and never-before-seen action and violence, which was also the need of the hour for a film of this nature. Sadly, the action felt pedestrian, and in the latter half of the film, it turned out to be quite repetitive. What worked in its favour was how the actors, particularly Henry Cavill and Alan Ritchson, portrayed the action and carried their respective characters through it. If it were not for the amount of fun and charm that they brought to these sequences and the physicality that their respective presence and mannerisms infused in the action sequences, the film would be devoid of anything great to write home about in terms of the action. Sadly, it does turn out to be one of the most underwhelming aspects of the film. Another problem that I had with the action was how relaxed the characters looked when they were pulling it off, except Cavill and Ritchson, who tried to infuse some physicality into it. There was no sense of urgency in anything. This was one aspect that the director should have intervened in and advised the actors better. I understand Ritchie going with an ultra-cool vibe to everything about the action, but it didn’t necessarily work out in the way it was meant to.
One department that the film cannot be faulted in is the performances. Cavill and Ritchson practically carry the film on their able shoulders. The first sequence involving the two and their horrible impression of two drunk men on a boat was the perfect beginning to what we get throughout the course of the film. The film is peppered with little actions, mannerisms, and dialogues for the characters that make ordinary sequences special. The inherent charm of Cavill and Ritchson is so strong and is utilized so well by Ritchie that there are no dull moments in the film, primarily because of how immersed we are in the performances of the two actors and their chemistry.
Eiza González, Babs Olusanmokun, and Til Schweiger, the man who played Sgt. Hugo Stiglitz in “Inglorious Basterds,” are involved in a subplot that feels superficial and is put there solely to expand the story as it does precious little to add to the overall outcome of the conflict. However, watching Stiglitz play an evil Nazi after what his character was about in Inglourious Basterds was amusing enough on its own. González is fast becoming one of the best actresses to play short but charming roles in films otherwise dominated by men. I don’t know what it is that she is doing to her face and structure, but it is working to her detriment and draining her otherwise alluring presence of some of her inherent charm, which in turn is reducing the impact of her performance, of which her charm is an important element. Olusanmokun is becoming a Guy Ritchie regular, and after his cameo in “Wrath of Man,” he gets another character that may not have a lot to do but is visible throughout the film. He does his part well.
The comedy, the dialogues, along with the set pieces of the film, are by far its second biggest strength after the performances of Cavill and Ritchson. When you look at the film in totality, it might not account for a lot. There were films of this nature in the 50s and 60s that are still more shocking, entertaining, and pulsating.
However, “The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare” has numerous set pieces that almost live up to the entertainment quotient of those classics. These sequences are not too far apart or too few, which proves to be another good news for the film. Add to that, you have some seriously funny banter between characters performed by some of the most charming and charismatic actors of recent times. I never expected Alan Ritchson to overtake Cavill in scenes, but he does so with élan here. This was definitely a sweet surprise for me.
The film does understand its strengths, and Ritchie tries to stick to them as far as possible. However, a little more tipping of the scale towards either being a serious and gritty take on the story or an absolutely bonkers and outrageous manner of approaching the story, like in “Inglourious Basterds,” would have served the treatment better and turned this into a far better film than what it ends up being
Dear Reader,
Every day, our team at EastMojo travels through rain, rough roads, and remote hills to bring you stories that matter – stories from your town, your people, your Northeast.
We do this because we believe in truthful, independent journalism. No big corporate backing, no government pressure – just honest reporting by local journalists who live and breathe the same air you do.
But to keep doing this work, we need you. Your small contribution helps us pay our reporters fairly, reach places others ignore, and keep asking the tough questions.
If you believe the Northeast deserves its own fearless voice, stand with us.
Support independent journalism. Be a Member.
Thank you,
Karma Paljor
Editor-in-Chief, eastmojo.com
I was incrementally frustrated by how poor and weak the antagonists in the film were. They were bigger noobs than what we got in terms of terrorists in the recent Bollywood atrocity, “Bade Miyan Chote Miyan,” and this was including the ever-so-charming and devilish Til Schweiger’s character. How he is killed in the end is almost an insult to his performance. If that was not enough, the film has one of the most underwhelming climactic battles that one could expect in a Guy Ritchie film. Interestingly, taking all this into account, the film still proved to be a decent entertainer, and I wouldn’t mind rewatching it. I believe that is a testament to the charm of its stars and the power of efficient comedic dialogue and situations.
Rating: 3/5 (3 out of 5 Stars)
The views expressed in this article are that of the reviewer and do not reflect EastMojo’s position.
Also Read | Fall Guy blends heartwarming romance with exhilarating action