Reviews

5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Act of Valor (2012)
9/10
You go for the realism, not the delivery of lines
24 February 2012
Warning: Spoilers
***POSSIBLE SPOILERS***

In 2007, the self-titled "Bandito Brothers," Scott Waugh and Mike McCoy filmed a video for the US Navy's Surface Warfare Combatant-craft Crewmen that had actual US Navy SEALs in it. Both decided to make a film about SEALs but their SEAL advisors were so dismissive of the actors the directors hired to play SEALs that a unique idea was born: the use of actual active duty SEALs to portray themselves in an action film.

What results is unprecedented cooperation between the Department of Defense and a motion picture--going even further than Black Hawk Down's mammoth support. Indeed, there probably has not been a movie like this since the Army Air Corps films of World War Two.

Lieutenant Rorke and Chief Dave lead a platoon of SEAL Team 7, based at Coronado. Rorke is going to be a father while Dave already has five kids. They are long time veterans of the Teams and close friends. Of course, Rorke and Dave are real SEALs. I've read on a blog that both are coming to the end of their real-life service and thus were not worried about exposing their identities in a film.

Meanwhile, a CIA agent (Roselyn Sanchez) is abducted in Costa Rica. She was tracking a Russian mafia arms dealer, Christo (Alex Veadov), who is selling weapons to narcotraffickers. Rorke's platoon is sent into action. This is the first action set piece and it's extremely impressive as the SEALs HALO into Costa Rica with the help of two Navy SWCCs and two Army 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment MH-47s. Like all of the action displayed in the movie, the SEALs themselves choreographed the action--the Bandito Brothers just filmed what the SEALs drew up. There's nothing fake about how these operations are portrayed. How the Army deploys the two SWCCs is outstanding in and of itself. Well done to the Banditos for this part of the film.

The SEAL Platoon then discovers that Christo is supplying suicide vests to a Chechen Islamic terrorist named Shabal. Shabal intends to deploy sixteen Filipino Islamist terrorists through Mexico to major American cities to wreak havoc on the U.S. economy.

The remainder of the movie shows the SEALs, along with members of SEAL Team 4, scurrying around the world to stop Christo and Shabal--from Somalia to the Pacific to Mexican islands and then finally Mexicali.

This film has gotten panned by a lot of critics and this is not a surprise. Most movie critics are left wing and don't appreciate many (any?) military movies. Is is true that the plot is not that complex and the dialog from Rorke and Dave is stilted at best. But these men aren't trained actors. That said, Senior Chief Billy, another real SEAL, obviously has some acting skill and has way too much fun during his interrogation scene with a detainee.

But unlike Roger Ebert, I wasn't looking for Olivier-like delivery of lines. What Rorke, Dave and their men do best is LOOK like real SEALs because they ARE real SEALs. They hold their weapons, move, and stack during Close Quarters Battle exactly as real life operators would. Black Hawk Down made an effort to teach its actors this but you still cannot truly replicate reality without real life operators.

The end firefight sequence is as good if not better than the ones in Black Hawk Down. Throughout the movie, we see camera shots from the perspective of a SEAL holding out his carbine. This is very effective as it gives you an idea of what CQB is like

This was the only military movie I can think of where I had not one major criticism about inaccurate uniforms, weapons, or equipment. A minor gripe was the SEALs using visual light laser pointers rather than IR ones, but this was probably done for the sake of the audience.

This was also only the second movie I can ever remember being at that when it ended, the entire theater was silent. The first time was Arlington Road which ended with a major twist. This time, it was because a list of all the SEALs killed since 9/11 was scrolled. There was no casual talking or laughter. It was as silent as a library.

The casual public won't care too much about this film. Limousine liberals won't like it. And I find it amusing that some are complaining that Call of Duty is better. Give me a break and get off your couch in your Mom's basement.

If you have any interest in the *real* military you must see the film because few films have ever had this much realism. Certainly, I will not be able to look at any other future military movies displaying firefights without holding it to the standard set in this movie.

Plotwise, the movie is a *** star at best. Had it been a standard action movie star vehicle, it would have been okay but not standout. But due to the realism, it has to go ****.
31 out of 56 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Toy Soldiers (1991)
7/10
Surprising Amount of US Special Forces Accuracy
14 September 2006
Toy Soldiers is an okay action movie but what really stands out is the amount of effort that the scriptwriters and director put into portraying American counter-terrorist forces accurately. Just check out the end credits--there are more than a dozen US military officers and officials listed. The movie accurately portrays the FBI as having control of the hostage situation but turning it over the US Army's Delta Force (who are unnamed in the movie as the Pentagon was still denying their existence at this time) once the President waived the Posse Commitatus Act of US Code. The US Army forces at the end are accurately dressed and armed for the time. And even the use of an AH-64 Apache for air support--which might seem a bit over the top, is not terribly unrealistic. Far more expensive and frankly better movies have portrayed American counter-terrorist forces with far less accuracy.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A tear in my eye as I sat watching, proud to be an American
8 August 2005
I am a former US military historian and had the opportunity on Saturday evening to view an advanced screening of The Great Raid. The screenplay was based on two books: William Breuer's "The Great Raid on Cabanatuan" and Hampton Sides' "Ghost Soldiers."

It is January 1945. The U.S. Sixth Army has landed in Luzon in the Philippines and is advancing upon Manila. The retreating Japanese Army are under orders from Tokyo to kill all the prisoners of war they hold. The Japanese do not respect those who surrender and also do not want the POWs to testify to the many Japanese war crimes committed from the invasion onward. Early on the movie, we are shown the real life war atrocity at an island POW camp where Americans are forced into air raid shelters and then immolated.

The Sixth Army's commanding officer, General Kreuger (Vietnam veteran Dale Dye, Captain, USMC (Ret), who was the film's military adviser) has intelligence from "stay behinds" (Americans who fled into the hills after the surrender) and Philippine guerrillas that the Cabanatuan POWs are in grave jeopardy as the Sixth Army closes in.

Kreuger turns to Lieutenant Colonel Henry Mucci (Benjamin Bratt, commander of the 6th Ranger Battalion. Unlike other Ranger battalions, Mucci's Rangers are untested, comprised primarily of soldiers who came to the Pacific Theater of Operations as animal handlers. Mucci has trained his men well though and yearns for a mission where they can prove themselves.

Mucci selects Captain Bob Prince (James Franco), a young Stanford graduate, to plan and lead the raid on Cabantuan. Though Mucci tells Prince that the Captain will lead the raid, Mucci is to accompany Prince and his 120 volunteers on the mission, causing frictions along the way.

Meanwhile, at Cabantuan, the remaining 500+ POWs are in the worst state, the healthier ones having been moved to work forced labor elsewhere in Japanese territory. The POWs are led by Major Gibson (Joseph Fiennes) who is racked with malaria. He does his best to keep his men disciplined and away from the wrath of their sadistic Japanese captors. Gibson's best friend is Captain Redding (Marton Csokas), a man who admits to no friends except the Major and who plans of escaping despite the Japanese threat to kill ten POWs for every man who tries to escape.

In Manila, Margaret Utinsky (Connie Nielsen) is an American nurse with a forged Lithuanian passport working with the Filipino underground. She is part of a smuggling ring that is getting needed medicines into Cabantuan. She was married to a friend of Gibson who later died. Gibson and Utinsky carry the torch for each other and wonder if they will ever be reunited.

Thus, the movie moves on three fronts: Mucci and Prince and the 120 Rangers who must cross 30 miles of enemy held territory to Cabantuan amidst thousands of Japanese soldiers; Gibson and the POWs at the camp; and Utinsky and the Filipino underground.

Some critics have complained that the movie is a bit slow and talky. This is true in the early going but it is absolutely necessary to establish the conditions the POWs were living under and the acts of brutality and torture that occurred not only to the POWs but the Filipino resistance. You cannot understand just how important the raid is until you understand what is happening to the POWs and what horror is to come. That said, the unrequited love story between Gibson and Utinsky was unnecessary and tacked on 30 minutes to the movie.

The Filipino and Filipino-American community should love this movie as it portrays their people in a very positive light. Prince's Rangers are dependent upon Captain Juan Pajota, a skilled guerrilla leader who scouts and leads the Rangers into enemy territory, and then is tasked with holding off several thousand Japanese troops while the Americans raid the camp.

The desire for historical accuracy is also very impressive in this film. For example, Cabantuan curiously featured a few British POWs, gathered in from British possessions in Southeast Asia. One minor character is shown with an accent. There is the "stay behind" American officer. Most impressive is the inclusion of the Alamo Scouts, a little known Army long-range reconnaissance unit that helped scout the camp in preparation for the raid. Weapons appear to be accurate--the Filipinos with older M1928 Thompsons and water-cooled .30 caliber machine guns and the Japanese even carrying Japanese arms (rare for Hollywood). We are even shown a Japanese Banzai Charge--a suicidal rush of soldiers with bayonets, successful against a poor Chinese Army in the 1930s, but not so successful against the American forces.

I read Sides' book and the plot hews very closely to the real-life events. In reality, this is a 3 1/2 star movie but the detail to historical accuracy is worth another 1/2 star. It is the best movie I have seen in what is an admittedly poor year for Hollywood. It should do very well in Red State America. Maybe even in Blue States: at the end of the film, newsreel footage of the actual Rangers and POWs is shown as the credits roll. Only one person that I could see got up to leave. Almost the entire audience stayed until this segment was over.

This movie is patriotic and not politically correct. The Japanese military police are portrayed as they were: sadistic, brutal, and cold.

If you watch this entirety of this movie, with the Rangers storming the camp and carrying the emaciated POWs on their shoulders and don't feel proud to be an American, then you're just a Communist.

**** out of ****
19 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hardware (1990)
1/10
The worst movie in the history of the universe
15 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I wish I could select "0." On a friend's suggestion, I saw this movie in the theater in 1990 and the memory was such that it took many years of therapy to be able to cope in society once more...

I realize that hard-core sci fi fans do not care much for realism or continuity but let's consider the plot here (SPOILER alert).

The movie starts out in this hot red desert like world. We're not sure if there's been some apocalypse or it's just your run-of-the-mill science fiction dystopia. No explanation is given for why some things look like a wasteland and some things are built up and futuristic in their technology.

Moses is a Marine or some kind of soldier but he never seems to report for duty. He gets this robotic head from a scrap dealer for his live-in girlfriend Jill, who's an artist. They talk about children and Moses says that he's "given up" on that idea a long time ago. There's the suggestion that some calamity has made people sterile. Despite this, I seem to remember a reference in the movie about the government sterilizing people. Say what? The robot head manages to build itself a body from Jill's artistic scrap supplies and proceeds to go on a killing spree. It seems that the government has created the "MARK 13" android to hunt down the populace to stop overcrowding. Say what again? People are sterile or being sterilized, the world outside their city is a wasteland and overpopulation is a concern? Moses has a friend, some sort of space jockey named Shades. With the world so dystopian, it's a bit odd that people are still going into space. Anyway, it's up to these three to try to stop the MARK 13.

As overdone as this plot is, you might say it's okay for a late night movie on Channel 5 but then suddenly there is a sideplot of this pervert who likes to spy upon Jill. He calls her up and says he wants to do something rather pornographic with a string of popcorn. When this line was uttered, everyone in the theater about gasped or laughed in embarrassment. What the point of this was, who can tell. Of course, the MARK 13 blasts him in short order so the screenwriter obviously didn't care.

Bullets and shotgun pellets have no effect on the MARK 13. Worse, the robot kills off the main character Moses. Okay fine. But Moses dies with a big chunk of the movie left! Shades? Well he's too busy getting wasted on some sort of drug. That leaves Jill. Mind you, all kinds of small arms don't work on the thing but Jill's baseball bat slays the beast. My friend dubbed it "the emotional baseball bat." One of the songs in the movie was a repetitive track with the lyrics "This is what you want, this is what you got." As we left the theater, one of the group I was with got up and said "This is what we wanted...and this is what we got."
10 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Warm Family Movie
4 July 2005
I felt moved to comment in regards to the first review. This movie is NOT a sports movie. It's not a NASCAR movie per se. It's not about winning the Oscar for Matt Dillion or Lindsay Lohan. It's a FAMILY movie. They are so rare these days. I was prepared for a more sexed up version after reading about the digital altering of Lindsay but I have to say that I felt that the content was approproriate for all ages. The plot is not Shakespeare but is typical old-time Disney fare: young person gets a chance to pursue her dreams and a person/animal/or Herbie is redeemed through belief and love. I saw this movie on a date and of the kids in the theater, they seemed to have a good time. I saw many a Disney film like this growing up. In today's oversexed and debauched entertainment world, I'm glad to see there are still films like this for kids. Sure, NASCAR will be thrilled to be introduced to the grade school set, but it's not a race film. Come on it's Herbie for crying out loud!
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed