Since the Second World War, different filmmakers have explored the topics of unconventional warfare: insurgency, guerrilla warfare, terrorism, and special operations. Yet until now, this cultural representation has received only limited and casual scholarly attention. Therefore, Paul B. Rich's study, Cinema and Unconventional Warfare in the Twentieth Century, is a welcome contribution. In his comparative analysis of certain key films, he focuses not only on Hollywood's take on this subject, but also on the treatment received in British, French, and Israeli cinema, as well as in the classic neorealist masterpieces of Roberto Rossellini (Paisà, 1946) and Gillo Pontecorvo (The Battle of Algiers, 1966; Burn, 1969). What makes Rich's contribution worthwhile is that he provides detailed context and background while turning the spotlight on lesser-known movies from different backgrounds.

As a whole, the cinematic representation of war is a major cultural factor with far-reaching consequences. As Rich points out, “cinema creates a world of its own and often generates powerful myths” (ix). This is especially the case when it comes to the popular imagining of war, where “some films broadly reflect some of the conflict with quite a degree of realism while others never attempt to do so and glamorize and falsify in the interest of good box office receipts” (x). On the whole, film remains a “highly dubious way to understanding the past” (4), and the record on unconventional warfare underscores this point.

What sets the films that Rich examines apart from conventional war movies is the fact that they provide a rather different set of images and tropes. For example, counterterror operations usually lead to highly professionalized elite forms of war, with only limited forms of citizen participation (8). Furthermore, unconventional wars are “dirty,” often involving assassination, sabotage, disinformation, and torture, difficult subjects to tackle in mass-market cinema (5).

The cinematic exploration of unconventional warfare began in earnest during the era of decolonization: British films realistically depicted aspects of counterinsurgency in Malaya, Kenya, and Cyprus (The Planters Wife, 1952; Simba, 1955; Windom's Way, 1957; The High Bright Sun, 1964) but did not create a distinct cinematic myth and faded from public memory (48). In contrast, The Green Berets (1968), a major Hollywood film on counterinsurgency in Vietnam produced with assistance from the US military, is still widely shown—despite its “cartoon quality” (48).

The exploits of special operations forces in the Second World War were celebrated in 1950s British cinema, and these films formed the foundation for later action movies (54). During the 1960s, the genre became increasingly fantastic and detached from historical background, but it was also transformed into a “mass market commodity” (60–65). Hollywood's interest in this subject developed only by the late 1970s, but then effectively took it over by featuring raiding by lone archetypical action heroes (Missing in Action, 1984; Rambo: First Blood II; 1985, Rambo III, 1988) or spectacular counterterrorist operations (The Delta Force, 1986). In 2001, Black Hawk Down signaled a more serious and realistic approach, culminating in a reenactment of the hunt for Osama Bin Laden with assistance from the Central Intelligence Agency (Zero Dark Thirty, 2012) (72–73). But in retrospect, Hollywood has created a myth of the Special Forces “centred on the insertion and extraction of small groups of highly trained warriors in overseas operations, fulfilling a calibrated, but decisive, counter-terrorism role” (75–76).

Whereas Hollywood's imagination of terrorism and counterterrorism is largely apolitical and exaggerated, Italian neorealism established a “benchmark” (126) for depicting terrorism, guerrilla, and partisan warfare in newsreel-like cinematography. While its anticolonial messages does not resonate with audiences anymore (126), The Battle of Algiers, because of its insights, became a training device in counterinsurgency, most recently after the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 (127–28).

In contrast to Britain, Italy, and the United States, France—beset by a bitter colonial struggle and sporadic domestic terrorism—has only recently revisited those issues. Because of the sensitivity of French veterans and displaced settlers, on the one hand, and repressed memory, on the other hand, it took until 1992 for major film to deal with the military defeat in Vietnam (Dien Bien Phu), and until 2006/2007 before the Algerian war was again addressed after a few implicit forerunners during the late 1960s and 1970s (178). Israeli cinema adopted a different outlook: the confrontation with Palestinian terrorism during the 1970s was dramatized almost simultaneously (Operation Thunderbolt, 1977). But since the highly controversial invasion of Lebanon (1982), the purpose and moral framework of counterterrorism have repeatedly been questioned (179).

In drawing conclusions, Rich is skeptical. Although the filmography has offered audiences “glimpses” into conflicts involving guerrillas, mercenaries, terrorists and special forces (208), it simultaneously distanced them from the realities of unconventional warfare: “all too often, they were by a desire to attract a mass audience with fantastical plot lines, melodramatic narratives and spectacular special effects at the expense of serious cinematic realism” (208). At least, a growing trend of post-heroic and internationalized films has begun to examine the viability of torture and the effectiveness of counterterrorism operations (Rendition, 2007; Good Kill, 2014; Eye in the Sky, 2015; The Report, 2019) (214).

Rich's study on cinema and unconventional warfare is a valuable and well-informed contribution not only to film studies but also to military, intelligence, and terrorism disciplines. Although mostly descriptive (it would have profited from more analysis and comparisons), nonetheless, Cinema and Unconventional Warfare in the Twentieth Century will be the reference point for further research into this so far neglected field of study.