Basic

Rating:
Summary: The movie does not play fair--
Review: Basic is a good concept of a movie. The 100 minutes you get are entertaining and suspenseful. The cast is excellent- John Travolta, Samuel L Jackson, Connie Neilson, Giovanni Ribisi, and other very recognizable names make this an A list group of actors. Plus, the execution of the storyline is superb and holds the interest of the viewer well.

The storyline is rather simple. On a routine training mission, a group of rangers encounter some problems and some of them get killed, including their leader, West (Jackson). Travolta, a former ranger and current DEA agent, is brought in because it is assumed he will get more answers than Neilson. There are two survivors of the incident, who of course, give completely differing versions of the events. This film has been compared to the Kurasawa classic Rashomon because of the differing versions of the events not lining up but it seems more Usual Suspects to me. We have just a couple of eyewitnesses who are telling us some truth and some lies when it will serve them well. Just about all the soldiers present are blamed at some point in the story for the death of West.

Fine and good, but Basic is way too concerned with messing with your mind and twisting the story beyond comprehension. Not long into the movie, what seemed relevent is no longer as important, and then another twist changes our previous perceptions, until finally, at the end, we are given the whole truth, that nothing we have seen really matters and that it was all a lie.

This would be ok, if the movie gave us some clues to figure out what was going on. Movies I have loved recently, like Identity or the Sixth Sense had massive twist endings as well, but they played fair throughout the course of the film. When you went through the movie a second time, you could see where the clues were given. The twist in this film is so far out there, it is impossible, and I call that not good storytelling, rather not fair and uninteresting. In that way, it also parallels the Usual Suspects, because that movie also was practically impossible to figure out, but the ending of that film was also more interesting. The ending of Basic is difficult to even care about.

Honestly, the film was well made, not dull at all, and the characters were interesting. But the movie tries too hard to lead us astray, and as a result, we are left out in left field, with no chance to care about anything that happens at the end.

Rating:
Summary: Implausable and ridiculous. But at least I wasn't bored!
Review: This 2003 film is supposed to be a military thriller. But in order to be a thriller the plot has to make at least a little sense. This does not happen in "Basic". Sure, there's some good photography and a pretty good cast. And sure, the military situation in Panama is unique and tied up with drug trafficking and a jungle setting. But the plot is ridiculous.

John Travolta is the star. He's cast as a former ranger who now works for the DEA. We learn that Samuel L. Jackson, cast as a hard driving sergeant has supposedly been murdered in the jungle, presumably by his own men. Connie Neilson is cast as the military officer who is supposed to question the suspects. She's inept at a her job. That's why they bring in John Travolta. He's macho and disrespectful and naturally there is a romantic connection.

Everyone who is questioned about the murder gives a different story and the audience sees each of these stories in flashbacks. It's hard to figure out what is real and what is unreal. Did I say "hard to figure out"? I should have said "impossible". That's because the film writer plays a trick on the audience and the film winds up in a way that is a complete turnaround from what was being presented. The whole story is implausible and silly.

O.K. - it wasn't boring. But that's about all I can say for this mess of a film.

Rating:
Summary: One twist too many
Review: John Travolta stars in this slick film about the death of an unpopular sergeant while on training maneuvers in Panama. Nothing is as it seems in this film, as Travolta and a female sidekick interrogate survivors of a massacre and each person they talk to gives a different story. The action is almost impossible to follow and I'm still not sure what the final twist really signified. Film makers were really too clever in this movie and their attempts at twists and turns really spoiled it.

Rating:
Summary: Too Gimmicky But Entertaining
Review: I enjoyed this movie even though the plot twists and turns were mind-boggling and gimmicky. The action is fast-paced and the mystery is tantalizing even though the way it is worked out is pretty hokey and very confusing. I watched this movie four times before I finally had it (mostly) put together and then some of it is still contradictory . Having said all that, I would still recommend it because it is fun being surprised (even with bogus and non-sensical surprises) and the performances are pretty good. Travolta's character suited him, Connie Nielsen was adequate but boring, Samuel L. Jackson was his usual very loud self, Giovanni Ribisi (a really interesting actor usually) hammed it up., Tim Daly and Harry Connick, Jr. were there mainly for recognition purposes, and the lesser stars were more than able to hold their own with the luminaries. However, if you want a good Travolta movie, I'd recommend Domestic Disturbance.

Rating:
Summary: Saved by the ending
Review: The beginning starts off great - John Travolta & some woman (sorry, don't know her name) on a military base questioning two soldiers who were the only witnesses to the other soldiers murders from their platoon. But the movie takes so many twists and turns that it was really starting to lose me. I even contemplated turning it off. Until the final twist of the end, which made the entire movie make sense and completely saved the entire script. It isn't exactly John Travolta's or Samuel L Jackson's best role, but it is a fairly good movie. One definitely worth watching.

Rating:
Summary: Twisted or not it lost it self
Review: The beggining of the movie promises a suspense and mistery in military enviroment, and I go OK - a con movie with some mistery I like it already, even if I did not see much that is going to stick me by the chair till the end. In about the midlle of the movie I realize it is not a military movie at all. What the heck is going on ? I'm hoping the story is not going down the road... The story gets twisted so much, and flashbacks are keeping you more wondering then boring. The reason why investigation started is not good enough and not explained good untill you see the end of the movie. Why there was a need for more then two versions of the story ? Obviously not reasonable since only two people survived from the begging of the movie. I might say that I liked to see it twisted since I was expecting more spectacular revival of the story at the end . I also expected each side to get streighten up by one true version, but it comes to the end that the movie tries to make fools out person watching it. What was the reson to create so much confusion and so much twists ? Certanly by the way that it was filmed it loks like story is getting investingated and you belive that is true untill you see the uterly ridiculus ending that tells you: hey we knew what is going on... WHY DIDN'T YOU ??? Was that the expectation out of this movie.. I am still out of words to explain how messed this movie is.
For the way that story is twisted I gave it 3 stars, even if there is no reson to twist it so much, which is clear at the end of the movie. I would say the movie started excelent, it continued to keep that rating but at the end you see it lost its story that was not worthed to begin with.

Rating:
Summary: no female rangers
Review: Not a bad movie, but once again, Hollywood strikes out again, in its portrayal of the military.

To educate the movie watchers out there who don't know much about the military: There are no female infantrymen OR Rangers in the US Army. There are no women in combat arms fields either. Watch the movie for its twists and suprise ending, but bare in mind, the babe in the jungle never could be a Ranger.

Rating:
Summary: Too Many Twist and Turns, and Film Goes Nowhere
Review: Yes, Sam Jackson and John Travolta co-star in the same movie again after their career-making turns in "Pulp Fiction" made 8 years before. And yes, they share some of the screen time, so don't worry the film might be something like "Heat" (in which Al and Bob didn't seem to have shared the same space even if they did). But, I tell you, in this film "Basic" they are no Jules and Vincent hotly discussiing the merit of hambergers. I mean there is nothing remarkable about their 'co-starring.'

The film is like "Courage Under Fire" in Panama with the slight tinge of "Rashomon." John Travolta is, as you expect, ex-ranger and DEA agent with shady past. He is called in to assist Connie Nielsen's official investigator to seek what really happened deep in the jungle of Panama, where the military troops were training under Sgt. Samuel L Jackson, stern and foul-mouthed chief. 8 members went into the forest during hurricane, and only three came back, one dead, one wounded, and one whose mouth is tightly shut. So what happened?

But what happened? I am still confused, because the story is given so many twists and turns that I couldn't follow it. The problem is, each flashback shot is too dark; each character is, except for Sam Jackson, very weak and one-dimentional; and most importantly, no version of 'truth' is interesting at all -- interesting in whatever meaning you might take. You see TRUTH Version A, and then Version B; none of them is intriguing as the basis of thriller, and then comes Version C and D and ... finally, I lost count. It is true that the ending is surprising (or meant to be so), but, frankly, it was jaw-droppingly incredible.

In short, "Basic" is trying to be too smart, and consequently it sacrifices a group of very talented actors. I didn't notice until much later that people like Taye Diggs or Giovanni Ribisi are included in the cast, perhaps because of poor lighting and his way of speech. Forgive me for saying so, but I really like these actors, and cannot overlook these outrageous use of them.

I see nothing wrong with Travolta's acting, but compared with Sam Jackson's acting as charismatic as ever, he seems to be in need of a bit of more polishing up. And as to Connie Nielsen, all I can say is she is more convincing than her turn as FBI investigator in "Hunted," but her haircut is as strange as Travolta's one in "Swordfish."

If it had been made with lesser known people, I would have given more stars to "Basic." As it is (and its director being John 'Die Hard' McTiernan), it remains there. If you get tired of following the story, try to spot John Travolta's elder sister Margaret as nurse. That may help you to keep interested.

Rating:
Summary: Interesting
Review: I originally had no interest in this film when I first heard about it. I thought it was going to be another military film with a lot of explosions and solidiers yelling at each other. Well, that's what I got with this film except there's a supposed murder mixed in there. I thought the flashback scenes were interesting because it gave different views of the same story. John Travolta plays and ex-Ranger who is now a DEA trying to solve the murder of Samuel L. Jackson's character while on a training mission in Panama. Only two people survive the training mission, so Travolta is asked to come in and get to the bottom of the murder and get the stories straight.

Sometimes you can get a little annoyed watching some of the same things over and over again, and possibly think to yourself, "can we just get to the end of this, please?" There are a lot of twists and turns to this film and the ending will leave you either disappointed or happy. I won't give away the ending, but you might want to watch it twice to catch everything.

All in all, I thought "Basic" was a pretty good film, but watch it for yourself and see what you think. As you can tell from other reviews, feelings have been mixed.

Rating:
Summary: PLOT-TWIST OVERKILL TAKES PANACHE..NONE HERE BUT DECENT FILM
Review: Some movies like "The Usual Suspects" or "Courage Under Fire" pull off about-turn twists and multiple reminiscences of characters with a certain pizzazz. "Basic" attempts the same but ends up in a sad sophomorish streak with one plot twist too many.

What this movie really has going for it is the atmosphere. The scenes of the squad in the hurricane (which, not to give anything away, is the plot of the movie all told in flashback) is very atmopheric, dreadful and appropriately mysterious. We are basically given a who-dunnit mystery told through the mouths of two survivors, each contradicting one another. Without giving much else away, the ending really did have me surprised though a little gypped.

What went wrong? Ambiguous information (which serves as a filler to the plot) and poor editing. It tries to up the ante with the plot twists over and over and over and over again but after about the 10th twist in the plot, it gets weary.

The story itself is quite alright but shouldn't have tried so hard to make the viewer feel like it had outsmarted them -- anyone can make a plot with an unexpected ending but it takes some panache to tie it all together, and have it flow smoothly. Basic seems very choppy.

Despite the negativity that I am trying not to hide, this film is definitely watchable and dont let the lame reviews convince you into skipping it.

Watch it. Just with somewhat low expectations.