Rating: 
Summary: Hart's War or Farrell's Folly
Review: I have conducted extensive research of POW camps in WWII, Germany as well as have documented my father's experiences as a POW in Germany. While this movie's sourronding senery was excellent, it lack in other areas. The conditions of the clothing is just one example (the clothing was in to good of shape). The treatment and view of the Russian POWs by the German soldiers was correct. I think that this movie would have been better off to focus on 1-2 items and not as much broad stoke as it did. The scenes with the POW train were very good as well...
Rating: 
Summary: Anemic.
Review: Hart's War (Gregory Hoblit, 2002)Gregory Hoblit (Primal Fear, Fallen) gives us the latest film in his inconsistent career with Hart's War. Hollywood has a storied history of trying, and failing in spectacular fashion, to adapt John Katzenbach novels to the big screen effectively. While Hart's War isn't as stellar a failure as Mean Season, it's not much to write home about, either. It's not so much that there are many bad things to say about Hart's War. In fact, there's very little bad to say about it. The main characters are all played by capable actors, the pace is solid if pedestrian, the plot twists at all the usual places. Most everything about the movie is done well. The problem is that there's nothing to distinguish it; there's a difference between doing something well and doing it well enough that it will be talked about in reverent tones half a century from now. One thing very much worth noting, though: it's been a very, very long time since any movie to come out of Hollywood has bucked the trend of political correctness and dared not to cast a single woman in a main role (in fact, the only women to be seen anywhere in the movie are extras with less than thirty seconds of screen time). Last time I saw that was in John Carpenter's 1982 masterpiece The Thing. Kudos to Hoblit and co. for not trying to add a female lead. What few things there are to say about Hart's War that can be categorized negatively are mostly opinions of style. Bruce Willis, who gets top billing, should have gotten second billing to Colin Farrell (of Ballykissangel fame), who actually plays Tom Hart. Willis, who's been quietly turning himself into one of Hollywood's most respected actors in the last five years, actually comes off here as a little too restrained. He seems more like a monk at a Zen monastery than he does the ranking POW in a Nazi stalag. And those plot twists are a bit too predictable; once you've got all the pieces to the puzzle, putting it together is child's play. You'll get it done a lot faster than the movie's hapless characters. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does tend to make the movie's closing scenes seem somewhat anticlimactic. All in all, it's a good way to kill a couple of hours. At least it's not "_Victory_ without the soccer," as the trailers would have you believe. ** ½
Rating:
Summary: Hart's fizzle
Review: After viewing this film, I was disappointed. The plot was flawed.I couldn't tell if Hart(the main character) was a good guy or bad guy, I don't think the writer and director knew either.
It was about what was wrong with America, which is not really what Americans want to see at this time. If I want to see a movie about the evils of segregation, I'll watch "Mississippi Burning." There is time and place for films about these subjects, but I think the timing is wrong and the plot was mixed up. Americans love to hate Nazi's, but this movie spends too much time trying to compare America to Nazism.
The plot was confusing. I couldn't stomach Hart's smerks and conversations with the Nazi officer. I didn't really like Bruce Willis's character either. It was fuzzy.
Rent this movie when you get bored.
Rating: 
Summary: Good movie if your stomach can take it!
Review: I am not much for war movies like my husband is, but I have to admit this one was pretty good. Wasn't sure if I was going to make it pass the first twenty minutes with the gory part when the soldier was shot in the head, to detailed for me. Thought the movie was stuck to much in one spot but then again, that was what it was about! Being Captured. Have to give the guy that stared in the picture a big 5 star, he was quit good.
Would I recommend it to anyone. Yes!
Rating: 
Summary: The imminent end of WWII doesn't bring happiness to everyone
Review: World War II is rapidly winding down. Soldiers on both sides realize that Germany will surrender in the near future. Lt. Thomas Hart (Colin Farrell) has the misfortune to be captured by the Germans and sent to Stalig 17. He is greeted by Col. William McNamara (Bruce Willis), a third generation West Point career
officer. The latter is not pleased at sitting out the remaining time of the war as a P.O.W. Col. McNamara has a family tradition to uphold, and the gods of the universe are not cooperating. Someone with a more prudent disposition might decide to patiently wait to be liberated. The Colonel, though, is not so inclined and has every intention to rebel at every chance he gets. Marcel Iures is splendidly cast as the German P.O.W. commandant, Col. Werner Wisser, who loves American Jazz, and seems totally disinterested in Nazi ideology. He has a job to do, and merely desires to stay out of harm's way. There is no sense in needlessly irritating the inevitable winners of the war. The German officer is more than willing to cut the Americans some slack as long as they sufficiently abide by the camp's rules. Iure's character is indispensable to the plot, and his performance should be remember when it's time for the Oscar nominations. The addition of two Afro-American pilots disrupts the harmony of the camp. The racist attitudes of a few white prisoners threatens to endanger the safety of everyone. One of these racists is murdered and this is when the story really takes off. Terrence Dashon Howard admirably portrays the black pilot suspected of the
crime. It is Lt. Hart's duty to defend him in less than ideal circumstances. Is the black officer guilty? If not, why is he being framed, and by whom? Director Gregory Hoblit puts together an intelligent movie highlighting the racism of that period. Some viewers may be surprised to learn that Nazis were often better treated by white Americans than the blacks who served in their own military. The film has some weaknesses, but still is worth seeing. There's enough here to give it four and a half stars.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting Movie
Review: Just don't expect it be a war movie or a movie about an escape from the POW camp. That's what I thought it was going to be, but that's not how it turned out. Colin Farrell played his role very well, he's quite an actor for being so young. Bruce Willis also did a great job with his character, but I get the impression that he was pretty much playing the same role he always does. The plot was good, but the movie was a bit slow, and slightly confusing at first. There are some gory scenes for the action fiends, but the story kept me intrigued. A few times I wanted to jump up and wring the Germans' necks. The twists in the plot were great and kept me interested. I will most likely buy this movie when it comes out on DVD.
Rating:
Summary: Intrigue, Heroism and Black Fighter Pilots
Review: This is a tale of American prisoners of war in a German POW camp near the end of World War II. Racial violence breaks out when two P-51 Mustang pilots, both members of the famous "Tuskegee Airmen," a group of black fighter pilots, are captured and added to the camp's prisoner population. An especially bigoted white soldier is found murdered, and one of the black pilots is blamed, leading to a trial by his own fellow prisoners. One young lieutenant is picked to represent the accused, in what seems a hopeless effort before a kangaroo court. So, we have a plot where racial prejudice and justice can be explored and vicariously excoriated -- but alas, that's not the real issue at all as the plot takes an unexpected turn near the end. The plot is a bit complex and the ending somewhat abrupt. I enjoyed the film, but it won't resonate in my memory as anything special or great. However, I did enjoy the realism of the POW camp in wintry, war-battered Germany, the German Commandant who seems like he might be an honorable man under better circumstances, the machismo of Bruce Willis as the American Colonel who longs to escape and rejoin the war, and the P-51 Mustang fighters who shoot up the German forces with wild abandon. Great acting and realism! A better plot would have made this film a real winner.
Rating:
Summary: A prisoner of its own war to stay alive.
Review: As the latest in a long string of war-oriented dramas and action thrillers to come along after the success of "Saving Private Ryan," "Hart's War" is a mixed bag of different genre venues, dabbling in such elements as racism, the issue of skin color and uniform, patriotism, a soldier's sense of duty, and, of course, some pyrotechnics thrown in for good measure. As a war movie, I will admit that it stays true to formula; as a powerful, effective piece with something to say, this one's a prisoner of its own war to stay alive. Even the film's promotional trailer, hyped up with super-charged intensity as many previews are, can be faulted for its false impression and its revelations of many key plot twists. We know that a murder has taken place in a German P.O.W. camp, the suspect being African-American Lieutenant Lincoln Scott (Terrence Dashon Howard). As the camp prepares for a trial, Lieutenant Tommy Hart (Colin Farrell) is appointed to defend Scott by his superior, Colonel William McNamara (Bruce Willis), who is using the trial as a diversion for an escape operation. This much we already know; the only catch is, what appeared to be an exciting, energetic war drama is actually an extensively lengthy, undeniably tedious exercise in subtle suspense that lacks the intensity it needs to fully take flight. What's more, what little is left to surprise is surprisingly dull. The opening act of the film, which begins with Lt. Hart's capture and interrogation, is meant to set up his future confrontation with Col. McNamara, while scenes of racial angst among the prisoners when the two African American soldiers arrive isn't quite as hard-hitting as it should be. Director Gregory Hoblit's ("Frequency") handling of the material plays by the rules of war movies, but never merits much emotional connection to its characters or their plight. There's the standard themes of courage, honor, and heroism, evident in Hart's struggle to provide justice for Scott, and in the film's ending, a cap-off of forced patriotic sentiment. The few sequences involving gunfire, explosions, and combat, come at the film's beginning, and are dazzling but never energetic. Even the characters themselves hold little interest, despite credible actors filling the roles. Lt. Hart, as played by Farrell, is the film's most complex, with a real sense of duty and solidarity in his actions. Col. McNamara undergoes an identity crisis of sorts: we come to admire his brutish appeal, but it later becomes despicable once we know his real intentions. There is some nice tension between McNamara and German officer Col. Visser (Marcel Iures), but even that is short-lived. One could say that "Hart's War" is this year's "Behind Enemy Lines," but at least that movie had the good sense to at least try and mask its lifeless story with some exciting, well-choreographed action and firepower. Here, we are subjected to long periods of boredom and listless wanderings through war movie cliché and predictability, due in equal parts to revealing promotional material and Hoblit's strenuously disinteresting direction; despite a promising premise, this "War" is about as exciting as a thumb-war match.
Rating:
Summary: Hart¿s War Not Katzenbach¿s Book
Review: "Hart's War", by Jeffrey Katzenbach was a very good book. The same cannot be said for the movie, for the movie is a very long distance from the novel that shares the name. I certainly understand the desire an author may have to see what he has visualized in his mind brought to the screen. What baffles me is why the same author would evidently allow those who eventually made the film, to tell a story, even if the story is not his. The author went to great length to explain the catalyst for his book, which were the experiences his father had as a prisoner of war during World War II. The book he wrote was not a documentary, rather he used his father's story to act as a basis for a novel. The book was very well done, and its reception by those who read and commented upon it bear this out. So if you plan to see his book brought to the screen, you will be sorely disappointed from the moment the film begins. The beginning of the book was very important to Hart as a character, it was probably changed because the movie's version saved money. If the studio did not have faith in the film, why bother at all? The most offensive racist commentary in the book was left to the Nazi administrators of the prison camp. Racism is hardly confined to Nazi Germany but there was no reason to transfer all the racism and its attendant ignorance to the Americans. The author created characters based on their prejudices and they drove the book. The movie exchanges the author's characters and their personalities as though they were interchangeable. The film is tiresome to look at, for visually it borders on monochromatic. Black and white would have been more interesting to watch. The washed out viewing the audience is offered is tedious. A variety of aerials are shown of the POW trains with the POW markings visible from the air. Evidently the movie portrays US Pilots who either need glasses or are illiterate, to justify scenes that contradict what the audience has previously been shown. For remember the planes are flying very near the ground, and if they could not read POW on the roofs of the railway cars they probably would have hit them, by crashing into them. There is a great film playing that dramatizes a military conflict that happened in Somalia several years ago. That is the movie to see if the genre appeals to you.
Rating:
Summary: Average WWII POW movie
Review: Hart's War is based on the recent bestselling book by John Katzenbach. I didn't read the book, but was looking forward to the movie because of the cast - Bruce Willis and Colin Farell. The movie starts off terrific, with several tense scenes showing how Colin Farell's character (who is the son of a US Senator) gets captured, interrogated, and sent to a POW camp. However, the film begins to lose focus and tackles too many themes, including racism, identification with the enemy, and heroism. At times, it's derivative of the "Great Escape" and other POW movies. It has a pretty good plot, with Colin Farrel's character forced to defend a POW who is suspected of murdering another POW. This plot, though, gets lost beneath all of the posturing. Bruce Willis was just ok, and at times his voice is so strained that its irritating to listen to him. Colin Farell lives up to the promise he showed in Tigerland, although his part was underdeveloped. Overall, an average movie that could have been much better.
|
