Rating: 
Summary: I'm no Charlie Sheen fan, but he deserved better than this
Review: 1990 wasn't a good year for Charlie Sheen. As if "Navy Seals" wasn't bad enough, he followed it with "The Rookie", another brainless action flick that both he and director/co-star Clint Eastwood would like to forget. But of the two, I'd have to say that "Navy Seals" is worse. Overflowing with cornball dialogue, stupid action scenes and MTV filler (remember that golf-cart chase set to music?), this movie was made for a twelve-year-old. Watch "Black Hawk Down" and see how a real modern war film sould be made.
Rating:
Summary: I'm no Charlie Sheen fan, but he deserved better than this
Review: 1990 wasn't a good year for Charlie Sheen. As if "Navy Seals" wasn't bad enough, he followed it with "The Rookie", another brainless action flick that both he and director/co-star Clint Eastwood would like to forget. But of the two, I'd have to say that "Navy Seals" is worse. Overflowing with cornball dialogue, stupid action scenes and MTV filler (remember that golf-cart chase set to music?), this movie was made for a twelve-year-old. Watch "Black Hawk Down" and see how a real modern war film sould be made.
Rating: 
Summary: Oooooo...Naaavy Seals!
Review: Amazing...simply amazing. This film deserves 5 stars simply becase it is the first movie I've ever seen that I just couldn't finish watching. Maybe it was the playfully fun "Boys Are Back In Town" golfing scene (which may be THE most realistic scene in the film, mind you!) or maybe it was just the originality of Charlie Sheen's maverick hot-dogging character(what a charmer!). You tell me.I put this right up there with Clint Eastwood's "Heartbreak Ridge" for realism, fun, and good characters. This is just a great time no matter which way you slice it. Get it now before it sells out!
Rating:
Summary: Navy SEALS
Review: An awful movie, filled with all the worst sterotypes of SEALS as disobeident loners. If I were a SEAL, I would be offended. Unless you want to see this for the shooting and explosions, forget it.
Rating: 
Summary: JUST ENTERTAINMENT!
Review: Any movie [almost] that gives an idea of what our guys go through should be appreciated.
As to characters, Michael Biehn and Charlie Sheen did very well - if you object to some of it, go back to the writer and director.
Sorry but I missed recognizing Bill Paxton but loved the action [am I mistaken or was the DVD missing some parts that were in the video?]
Charlie Sheen's character - well there is almost one in every movie to provide conflict. A character that must learn by his mistakes - a bit of a smart aleck.
If it does nothing more that encourage you to pray for our guys in combat, then the movie was a sucess. At the very least it is just entertainment if you don't take it too personally.
Hopefully another one just like it will be that much better as we get into better tech. Enjoy, it is not that bad.
Rating:
Summary: Military Movies are Boring.
Review: At least this one is, as the movie depends more on endless gun fights and explosions to make up for the non-existent acting and zero screen play. A movie best lef forgotten.
Rating:
Summary: I don't remember it being this bad
Review: But then, my tastes in movies have improved since I was fifteen. The plot is see through, and the dialogue seems to have been stolen from every Navy SEAL book they can find (more SEAL cliches than WWII movies). Sheen is as transparent as usual in the over-the-top 'badboy' SEAL, who any commander worth anything would have kicked off the Teams. Micheal Biehn and Bill Paxton (who only had a small part) are both excellent actors who just picked a bad movie (Biehn's SEAL role in The Rock is a much better portrayal). This movie came about after the SEALs came to the attention of the world, but a poor script, bad acting, and bad directing make this movie just horrible.
Rating:
Summary: COMIC BOOK IS BETTER
Review: Can ANYONE out there make a GOOD movie about this elite service of professionals?? I guess not. Don't waste your time or money with this dog!
Rating:
Summary: Interesting video...
Review: Charlie Sheen done an excellent job in this movie. I have watched this movie several times, since I was in the 1st grade, because it is such a great movie. I love the part when they are on the large ship and one of the terrorist holds a person hostage, and Sheen shoots him right in the fore head with out aiming. Although some of the scenes such as that one are pretty unbelievable then movie is still a very great Navy SEAL video. Also check out "The Platoon" with Charlie Sheen, and "Apocalyps now" with his father. HOO-YAH! Thank all War veterans.
Rating: 
Summary: Good but not Great
Review: Charlie Sheen was not as passionate in this as he was in Platoon, which by the way, was intense. Biehn was decent, but he could've had better writing. The producer was definitely thinking you throw a couple names together, along with some two-bit typical Hollywood writing, and you'll get a blockbuster. That's not the way it works, and it showed. It was, however, good for action and mild gore. As an Military Officer myself, I can say that the scenes of Navy tactics are midly accurate, albeit modified slightly for TV. The action, as said earlier, is pretty good, especially given the era in which it was produced. The plot was pretty ridiculous, not true to life in any aspect. The idea of a SEALs unit operating indepedent and autonomous of the Navy Chain of Command is downright unheard of and the plot offers no consolation to the hackneyed Hollywood writing. Navy SEALs has the repuation for being a "shoot 'em up" movie, with little to offer in any other department. This is pretty much true. There are good gunfights, lots of explosions, bad guys who hit everything but their targets and consequently die, BADLY, but nothing to stimulate the intellectual modern barbarian. Basically, if you like shoot 'em up movies and don't care about too much of a plot, this is for you. If you want to be stimulated, go buy some sappy chick flick.
|
