Reviews

This is the story of the Battle of Ia Drang in Vietnam-- a 3-day battle at LZ (landing zone) X-Ray in which a little over 400 American soldiers faced 2000 of the men of the Army of North Vietnam and eked out a narrow victory. Terrible lessons were learned from this battle: the North Vietnamese learned that they could stand up to superior American firepower (helicopters, M-16s, artillery), and the Americans learned that one American with same could kill a significantly larger number of the enemy. This led to the "meat-grinder" theory of the war which caused so many American casualties, and an even greater number of Vietnamese deaths.

Basing his movie very firmly on Gen. Hal Moore's and Joe Galloway's book "We Were Soldiers Once and Young," Randall Wallace has produced what I think is the very finest movie on the Vietnam War ever. In fact, I think it is even superior to the much ballyhooed Private Ryan. The battle scenes are intense, relentless-- and these are balanced by looks back at the homefront where the wives left behind at Fort Benning are having to cope with the loss of their men. There is a lot seen from the perspective of the North Vietnamese as well. This is very unusual and quite refreshing in a war picture.

All the performances are good-- no exceptions. Sam Elliot's Sgt. Major Plumley is a gruff delight as he plays the ultimate career soldier. Barry Pepper turns in a strong performance as the journalist Joe Galloway. As for Mel Gibson-- well, this may be the best performance he has ever given. Subtly underplaying his role as (then) Lt. Colonel Hal Moore, he still embodies leadership and experience, devotion to home, duty and his men. And at the end of the battle it is through his eyes that you experience all the pain the loss of so many of his men has brought him.

Tom and Mae Garvey (Mel Gibson, Sissy Spacek) are the owners of a small eastern Tennessee farm that has been in the Garvey family for generations. It is the early 1980s, when the staggering U.S. economy threatens the welfare of the American family farm. The Garveys' struggles are compounded by the fact that their property is in a flood plain, and by the enmity of Tom's rival Joe Wade (Scott Glenn), who is a wealthy and powerful foe. This is not lighthearted entertainment.

For me, the film's most powerful moments come when cash-strapped Tom has to leave the farm to find work elsewhere. He unknowingly becomes a scab in a factory where the regular labor force is on strike. At least there is a regular paycheck, but the contrast between the man-made hell of a iron foundry/steel mill and the natural beauty of the family farm is compelling, and you can see why the Garveys struggle to hold on to their agricultural way of life, however hard it is. The cinematography for this movie is way above average, a celebration of rural America.

Sissy Spacek delivers her usual fine performance. Mel Gibson is very good-- his Tennessee accent quite convincing. The two youngsters who play their children deserve special praise for their natural performances. This is a good, thoughtful movie-- not romantic, thrilling or exciting-- but one the family can watch together and think what sacrifices they would make to keep a heritage and a way of life preserved.

I would like to begin this review by lodging a complaint against Mr. William Shakespeare. The man was a joke. His works were not historically accurate. Hamlet-- not historically accurate. MacBeth-- not historically accurate. Richard III-- uh uh, no way.

Let's face it-- despite the fact that Braveheart is a better movie than any filmed Shakespeare (outside of Kurosawa)-- it is not historically accurate, either, and if that is the sole standard by which you judge movies then you are going to be sadly disappointed in it. If, on the other hand, you appreciate good characters, heart-lifting drama, and exciting battle sequences, then you should be thrilled with Braveheart. Each to his own taste.

Personally, I think Mel Gibson stands in pretty good company with Shakespeare.

Normally my instinct-- on the few occasions I am exposed to utter tripe-- is to walk away without complaining. Let others see the film and make up their own minds. Who knows, some might even like it. Chacun a son gout.

But this waste product is so puffed in its own conceit it begs me to comment. It is the worst movie/DVD experience of my life. I was trapped by company or I would have walked out-- of my own house! It purports to be a comedy. It is not funny. It purports to be a commentary on the turmoil of Northern Ireland. It is nothing more than the typical cheapjack cynicism the British pass off as political insight. It purports to star David Thewlis. Unfortunately it does.

The premise of this movie is so painfully weak that it falls apart like wet toilet paper even to describe it. Let us just say that someone with a high school equivalency degree will guess the significance of the phrase "divorcing jack" long before the Thewlis character does-- and that the tedium of waiting for Thewlis's character to catch up is not enlivened by a succession of ridiculous characters such as the nun imposter (oh, haha, heehee), the unbelievable Boston Globe reporter or the overdrawn IRA gunman (Jason Isaacs, who should choose his roles better.) What really keynotes this as a bad movie for me is that the discovery of what the Big Secret is, the rationale behind all these deaths, takes place OFF SCREEN-- and then someone has to sit down in another scene and painfully tell Thewlis all about it. An anticlimax to an anticlimax, and so typical of the incompetence of this director!

Maybe this one should have been called "Payback." Do you remember those old teasing, technicolor Doris Day flicks from the sixties (pre-Lib) like That Touch of Mink and Lover Come Back, where Doris plays a perfectly competent career woman who becomes utterly goofy when she encounters Cary Grant or Rock Hudson? The last scene always had her coming completely apart as the big male envelopes her in his arms and utters something to the effect of "There, there, little woman.." Well, this wonderful Sinatraesque movie is a spin on that--- except, to the delight of the distaff side of the human race, it is Mel Gibson being enveloped by Helen Hunt at the end. Before we reach that conclusion we are all treated to Mel dancing, Mel making love, and Mel enduring the rigors of pantyhose. A genie could not have brought three better wishes.

Don't expect to learn what women want (as if anyone could tell you that!) The movie offers more entertainment than insight. But it sure depicts what most women will enjoy. Men, too.

I viewed The Patriot eight times on the big screen, and it was the first DVD I ever bought. For me, it is a great, satisfying movie-- exceptional in its depiction of colonial South Carolina upcountry family life and of 18th century warfare, not so successful in its minor ventures into romance and child psychology. It is a big movie with beautiful cinematography, the kind of movie that you can move into. Performances were overall very good, with Mel Gibson's portrayal of the farmer/father Benjamin Martin, who one day discovers the American Revolution on his front lawn, of Academy Award nomination caliber.

The Patriot makes no claims to be entirely historically accurate, but I can attest to the fact that it does capture the kind of fighting they did in the South during the Revolution. The British did attempt to discourage partisan activity by a campaign of terrorism-- threats, hangings and houseburnings. Jason Isaacs' Colonel Tavington is based on Col. Banastre Tarleton who lost a couple of fingers in a minor skirmish in 1781 two miles from my home. His name is still a hissing and a byword in this community. There IS a lot of flag waving in the film (were they thinking of the Olympics?), but that is no reason why this movie should be held to a higher standard of historical accuracy than any other studio product. Just lean back, imagine how you would react if a War suddenly descended upon you and your family, and enjoy this movie. I did (and do) very much.

I avoided this movie when it was first released because the trailer looked too violent. Recently I rented the DVD and discovered, while the violence was there, none of it was gratuitous or lingered over. Instead I found an excellent film noir with (and this is exceptional for this genre) a plot that pretty much made sense. Porter [Mel Gibson] wants to recover "his" $70,000. and he practically comes back from the grave to do so. I thought the opening scene where Porter is having the bullets extracted from his back really set the tone for the whole show. This movie does very well viewed at home where you can stop the tape or DVD when you want since there are no restroom breaks built into this movie. It is suspenseful and exciting all the way.