Rating: 
Summary: Trully a Masterpiece
Review: The US government through it's soldiers and armed forces are currently the balancing force of the planet. This film gives exactly what it says. Why not take these young people's places by "living" what they went through and understand how necessary they are to keep a just and fair planet for everybody. Thank God the balancing force in the planet is the US and not... many examples... Sorry for any spelling mistake if there is any. English is not my native language.
Rating:
Summary: Gritty, Raw, Stark and Brutal
Review: This movie does not pull any punches. This is war, in all it's horrific worst. Don't get me wrong, this is an incredible movie. But it isn't for everyone.
Centered around teams of Army Rangers and Delta Force soldiers, the film recounts events that took place in 1993 in Somalia. Sent in to capture a local warlord, the team is quickly surrounded by thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of well armed adversaries. When an RPG downs a blackhawk helicopter, the men fight their way to the crash site to save the survivors. Shortly after, a second blackhawk goes down some distance away. Eventually, the men are surrounded an fighting for their lives against a massive force bent on their destruction. Vastly outnumbered and running out of ammunition, the soldiers defend their position for more than 18 hours.
This is gritty, raw and unvarnished war. It is unsettling, disturbing and very tense. What makes this even more unnerving is that this is a true story, rendered as accurately as possible in the film medium by director Ridley Scott.
This is a great film, but certainly not for everyone.
I bought my copy at a local store, where one veteran told me he couldn't possibly watch this film. It simply was "too real for comfort".
After seeing the film, I had to agree.
Rating:
Summary: Confusion was basis for film
Review: I've read some people complaining about the clarity and overall movement of the film, but what needs to be understood is that confusion was inevitable and was supposed to be seen throughout the movie. War and combat is in itself confusing much of the time, and seeing as how this movie portrays nothing more than historically correct events, it just goes to show the horrors of combat those men went through. It was said but by General Garrison in the movie,"we just lost the iniative." That mission was to take no longer than 30 minutes, but over 12 hours later it still wasnt done. I believe Ridley Scott recognized this, and through directing techniques, he depicted what those soldiers went through and what everyone saw on CNN, confusion. Sometimes it takes crafty measures to get across the theme of an event such as the conflict in Somalia. Confusion was a device used to add depth to the film and give you the same frustration and confusion felt by the Army Rangers and Delta Force men. Overall, it was a well protrayed and excellent film.
Rating: 
Summary: Dodges the big questions, but it still has a heart
Review: Once again, Ridley Scott delivers a visual spectacle with enough gritty realism to please even the most dogged fans of the genre. Aiming to please a mass audience, this film wisely dodges the politics of America's involvement in Somalia, and focuses instead on the human toll (well, the American body count, at least). This will certainly irk viewers who would have preferred a more balanced rendering. But what can we really expect? This isn't an evening with Noam Chomsky, it's a Jerry Bruckheimer production. And in the end, the resolute focus on "our boys" kind of works. Sure, the main attractions here are still visual, but what you take away from this movie is quite a bit more than Jerry's films usually offer: a sense that war is awful, terrifying and quite often completely pointless and yet, when thrown into it, ordinary guys can be mightily heroic. That's something worth saying - even if we don't want to think too closely about how they got there.
Rating:
Summary: Pure senseless shooting
Review: This movie is good if you want to excite your five senses. great sound and nice setting. other than that, it is just pure senseless shooting. Many violent and gory scenes. not for the faint hearted. Overall, a war show that can be made better.
Rating:
Summary: One of the most memorable war movies ever
Review: Black Hawk Down is not a movie with a storyline, plot, or any real character development, for that matter. This I'll admit. The part of the movie that makes it so powerful is Ridley Scott's amazing recreations of battle sequences. I'd have no idea how close these recreations were to the truth, but the point is made blisteringly clear to the audience, these soldiers were put through hell. It's a difficult movie to go back and watch twice, as some of the scenes will leave even the strongest of men holding back tears. Highly recommended, for those that "enjoy" war movies this one simply can't be missed.
Rating:
Summary: Good Idea, Bad Execution
Review: First off let me say this- PLATOON was crap, FULL METAL JACKET was a sleeper, APOCALYPSE NOW was a fantasy, and PEARL HARBOR was so terrible WWII vets walked out of it in the theater. Now that I have said my piece on "great war films," allow me to comment on this "great war film." It was ok. At best it was good. Yes, it had great action, lots of death, but it was a disgrace to the men of Task Force Ranger. The movie took TOO much creative license when it came to characters and certain events. I doubt very much that Shawn Nelson appreciates the way in which he was portrayed. I know for a fact that men of TFR feel the Pilla was poorly portrayed thus dishonoring his memory. Those are only a few of the problems facing this movie. Sure it was pretty to look at and had great camera angels and pretty shots of the pretty helicopters. In the end, though, this movie was just a work of fiction that used real men's names and a real event to push it. Bowden should never have allowed it to be made. One should know that the man who brought us ARMAGEDDON could never pull off a project such as this. For those of us who served in the Infantry it is just another Hollywood screw-up. It hits close to the mark, but it is just not quite there.Now onto the VERY disappointing DVD. This is the most bare-bones DVD you can buy. It has ONE special feature, which is an "On The Set" documentary that spends half of it's time rehashing the plot of the movie and not really telling us about how it was made. The DVD boasts that it has theatrical trailers, well I was hoping for the BHD trailers, but instead I got The One and Spiderman. Since the DVD included no deleted scenes the buyer is left to assume one of two things, either A) there ARE no deleted scenes, or B) we will be shelling over another $30 when Black Hawk Down: Special Edition DVD comes out. This DVD feels rushed, almost as if the suits just wanted to get it out quick and make the quick buck and will later follow it with a quality product. At least I hope they will follow it up with a quality product. All in all, the DVD was a real let down, just like the movie itself. If you are a military enthusiast then buy this DVD. If you want a decent depiction of modern Army tactics and weapons buy this DVD. If you want to know what happened at The Battle of the Black Sea, buy the book and read it. Lastly, if you want a GREAT WAR MOVIE, then be patient and wait and buy WE WERE SOLDIERS, it was the only respectful war film I have seen based on anything other than WWII, and the only good Vietnam film ever.
Rating:
Summary: Black Hawk Down
Review: When i saw this movie I was in Awe. the only problem is that they did draw out some scenes, but the overall movie was awesome.
Rating: 
Summary: Missing Something from Blackhawck? You Missed it all, Then.
Review: Quite apart from most of the reviewers, i concentrated on experiencing the film from within the confines of the participants of the events in Somalia. Other reviewers have faulted the film for not bringing "more" than this to the cinema for them. The book encourages an understanding of the events from a third-person omniscient view. It reads like a list of facts and occurrances. The book was so successfull in it's accurate rendition, that sections are required reading for the various Departments of Defense War Colleges. This underscores its public success in making recent historical events very accessible to the non-military reader as well. Several reviews have complained about the lack of personalization in the characters of the film. i thought some of the attempts at representing the characters' personal lives in the film irrelevant. when viewed from the perspective of a special forces unit on the streets of Mogadishu, you may know about the new wife of a fellow green beret, but you are quite busy avoiding the RPG round you've spotted rushing toward your hum-v window! the success or failure of this film should not be evauluated on wether the characters had "depth" or not; but rather on how it depicts the *actions*. i appreciated the room it left, indeed, suggested for such questions as "should we have been there at all?" which brings us to the next complaint several reviewers have mentioned: The other half of negative reviews for this film have faulted it for lacking an examination of "purpose" in american military policy and actions, such as the Somali events coverred in the film. Again, i found such diatribe as did exist in the cinematic version slightly intrusive. From the view of a special forces unit on the ground, "purpse" is not a question. you will fail if you concentrate on such matters. to represent the matters in any other way in a film based on such a book would be an injustice. the audience can and should form it's own critique of justice, of policy, of "bringing right by might". as the film suggested, american forces originally deployed there to bring food to the hungry, and and make sure donations from NGO's were being deliverred to the intended needy parties. the awkward few personal and political injections in the film may have made less clear that the audiencec should be responsible for such thoughts; not the film makers. indeed, everyone i have met with personal experience in the Somali aid attempt / conflict have agreed. the matters are much more complex than those who have faulted the film for seem able to understand. and the soldiers operating there did not ethically evaluate thier purpose when being fired upon by thousands of heavilly armed civilian thugs. So why expect the movie to help you make sense of the political and personal aspects of these events? i applaud that R.Scott represented the events as accurately as possible. -p d b Note: R.Scott is Brittish, and his influence on the political matters should be understood with this knowledge. he had neither pro- nor con- american axes to grind while making this film. he *did* recieve department of defense aid in filming (the millions of dollars worth of helicopters, advisors, etc...) but that is to be balanced against how the military viewed the text of the original book: a critique of the failures of our efforts in Somalia. what's more, most of the "special effects" shots involved real helicopter flying, by helicopter pilots involved in Somaila.
Rating:
Summary: Very good entertaining war movie
Review: Lots of blood, guts, shooting and bombs. A look into the reality of what our troops go thru when they are trying to help other countries while in the middle of their civil wars. Not as graphic as other war movies and not as stunning of camera angles as that of Saving Private Ryan, yet, still a movie i thought was very entertaining. Well put together and action throughout. Based on facts but spiced up a bit for Holleywood. Worth the rent!
|
