Rating: 
Summary: Great, Great, Great....
Review: I thought this movie was absolutley amazing. And this is coming from someone that does not like war movies. And believe it or not, I come from a military family. I love my troops to death but I have trouble watching war movies because they all seem to show all the gore, but none of the emotional depth behind those deaths. My father fought in Vietnam and didn't like to talk about it. However, this film made him talk to me about it. He felt the emotional and physical pain of the soldiers when they felt completely hopeless. Going into battle knowing you were completely surrounded but still wanting to fght for your country... that's what my father felt and that's what I felt. People can complain and complain until the day that they die that this war was useless, but the young boys that went to war knew that they were fighting for their country... for their right to live. Regardless of what they felt at the time, living in the USA meant more to them. So they fought for their lives, even though their backs were against the wall. Maybe I liked this movie more, because my dad went through the same situation... but regardless...I thought this movie showed the courage and bravery that our soldiers had. Mel Gibson was incredible, as always. Chris Klein was someone that I thought that I could never take serious, but this movie proved otherwise. He showed me human interest, which I honestly thought I couldn't feel with him in it. If you want to see a movie with honesty and raw courage, I recommend "We were Soldiers". And if you hate this movie simply because you hate the fact that the Vietnam War existed.... then you didn't really watch this movie. I do not think that war is always the answer, but... sometimes if you love the USA, then you've got to be willing to fight for it.
Rating: 
Summary: Good contemporary Vietnam film
Review: "We Were Soldiers" is the true story of the 7th Airborne Cavalry as they landed in Vietnam lowlands at only regiment size...and found themselves under attack by four North Vietnamese divisions! It was the first moment the American military went at the North Vietnamese, mono y mono. It is told as a good, exciting narrative. The battle scenes are fairly well done and you get a glimpse of front line hell, especially for the "lost platoon" that was stranded early in the battle. Also, contrary to what some of the other reviewers have said, you get a better side of the North Vietnamese than you do in some films. The book "We Were Soldiers, Once and Young" was written by the American colonel himself and he portrayed or spoke of the enemy in a well meaning tone, and while its hard to have compassion for the North Vietnamese (they are shooting at American soldiers, after all) you get a tiny glimpse at their lives and thoughts, centering around one particular soldier who writes love letters back home (Mel Gibson's character would later personally deliver his diary and letter to his wife after the war). The only thing I didn't like about this movie was the scene with the military wives getting their letters back. Now...it wasn't the fact that they had the scenes at all, in fact I was perfectly fine with it - it showed what wives go through and what the time period then was like - however I guess the real problem I had was the pacing. It seemed to slow things down. But it didn't really affect my thought for the movie too much. I still liked the battle scenes and the characters - in fact, Mel Gibson's character was almost a near mirror of my father. The scene where he explains war to his daughter was almost word for word how my father explained war to me when I was young. They also get military life down fairly well, and I think its good that at least ONE movie out there shows what life is like with a father in the military, and does it in a realistic manner. On a final, unrelated note, I believed "Sgt. McKenzie" was a fitting theme for this movie for its lyrics and meaning. Overall, a good film about one of the most influential albeit underrated battles in American history.
Rating:
Summary: The Greatest War Movie Ever
Review: We Were Soldiers was the greatest war movie I have ever seen. It beats Platoon, Gettysburg, Full Metal Jacket, and Hamburger Hill. I think this was the best performance Mel Gibson has made since the Lethal Weapon Series. This movie has action and it also has a few funny parts in it too. This movie has got me so hooked that I am even reading the book. A must see movie!!!
Rating:
Summary: Hard to connect to depiction of early Vietnam War combat
Review: "We Were Soldiers" is an good-but-not-great post-"Private Ryan" Vietnam War film. I had read the excellent book by retired General Moore, which describes his experience in leading a battalion into the Ia Drang Valley in 1965, and nearly getting overrun in a day-and-night battle. The Ia Drang battle took place when the news from Vietnam wasn't quite the nightly dinner-table companion, and when helicopter assaults were still new. Mel Gibson is good as Moore, but lots of people could have played this part. The movie doesn't let us get to know most other characters, so it feels more like a high-octane A&E documentary than a theatrical drama. I don't know why I had trouble completely connecting with the movie. Perhaps the main reason is after so many movies dealing with the late-war period like "Apocalypse Now", and "Platoon", it's a bit of a culture shock seeing earnest, crew-cut soldiers that look like they stepped off of "Sands of Iwo Jima." We're used to seeing our average Vietnam grunt as a stoned-out disaffected short-timer. This isn't the director's fault - the Oliver Stone version of the war was four years in the future, but in might as well have been forty. So what remains is a conventional war story which could have just as well taken place on Okinawa or in Korea. The political and spiritual upheaval caused by the war was just a glimmer, and the film can't really address it. The brief scenes of Colonel Moore's Vietnamese officer counterpart are interesting but far too short. The North Vietnamese soldiers, at least, are humans, we see them as individuals with histories and feelings, and rather than mindless insects or worse, sadists ("Deerhunter"). Recommended reading: Moore's book, "We Were Soldiers", is better than the movie. Another account of the battle is Larry Gwin's book, "Baptism" which follows a different battalion which, while walking back from the Ia Drang, was ambushed and nearly wiped out.
Rating: 
Summary: "heroes"
Review: "American Heroes" ... guess that sums it up. this movie tries to celebrate the blood spilled in this pointless struggle. I see the war as a wound we refused to let close. How many NVA soldiers died horrible, slow, bloody painful deaths? How many of them had families? In this film, they mostly all die offscreen. When they're on screen, they usually perish while jumping from a huge explosion. The Vietnamese commander is about as distant and trivial as possible. More time is spent trying to establish an emotional connection with the CO's Wife. What? And that's where this movie goes wrong. It conveys chaos, maybe panic, but not fear. The Thin Red Line, despite it's long running time (similar to this film) is much more effective in letting the audience develop a connection with the main characters and in showing why they act. We Were Soldiers simply shows men getting slaughtered and trying to remain patriotic/hopeful until the end of the flick. and what a TERRIBLE score.
Rating:
Summary: It was alright I guess
Review: When making movies based on actual events, such as this movie is, there's a fine line between accurate portrayal and cliched heroic praise. On the one hand, everyone that fought and died in Vietnam, on both sides, deserves to be remembered. On the other, not everybody who's fought is a "hero". Even though we live in an age where every soldier is a hero, and anyone who dies for a cause is a hero, this is just people trying their best to show respect and admiration. I'm sorry, but being drafted and being sent to a war that I never even wanted to fight in, and then managing to get out alive, does not make me a hero. This movie follows the same pattern as Blackhawk Down (which I thought was a real snoozer). Some may call me un-American. I like to think that I keep a level head. So anyway, the soldiers who fought and survived, as well as the ones who fought and died, should all be remembered. Should they all be represented as Herculian demi-gods? Not exactly. This movie takes a step in the wrong direction, in my opinion. I believe that if you want a real, unbiased, objective approach to soldiers in war, watch Band of Brothers. While it does try to impress you with heroism, it does it in a way much less cliched, and a whole lot more realistic. Watching this movie, you'd never know that these soldiers were ever afraid, or that anyone wished they weren't fighting. The battle scenes are over-the-top and not very believable (I never knew single-prop airplanes dropped napalm while flying 20 feet off the ground). Too cheesy for my tastes. If you liked Blackhawk Down, you'll like this, I suppose.
Rating: 
Summary: Tired, mawkish and stupid
Review: Oh my god: is there a single battlefield / home-front cliche that is not hammily thrown into the mix of this atrociously simplistic portrayal of the early, and increasing US involvement in Vietnam in the wake of the French fiasco? Let's count a few. You have the leather-necked Gibson, heroically giving his best John Wayne, non-stop, without a single let-up, barely drawing breath between one OTT-tough mouthing off and another (probably setting a celluloid record for not appearing like a recognisable human being, let alone the soldier who wrote the original book). You have the air-cav soldier heroically dying after being caught in an ambush, smilingly gasping out in his heroic last words that "at least I got to die for my country!" You have the guy heroically throwing himself onto the grenade in order to heroically save his buddies. You have the cut-off squad, heroically waiting to be rescued by their heroic buddies, deep in enemy territory. You have the heroically gung-ho helicopter pilot with the stupid nickname who carries on and on heroically flying to save and supply the heroic guys on the ground. You have the heroic talkover. You have the prayers and the speeches and the swelling music and the doe-eyed wives and fellow GIs and marines and whatever cheering on the boys as they nobly (and heroically) head off to battle to fight for their buddies and freedom... ...oh, puh-leez, pass me another sick-bag. I could go on, but why bother. Suffice to sat that this moronic movie declares itself at the beginning as a tribute to the men who fought and died on both sides of the conflict -- and sorry, but it's not. It's a patronising insult to their professionalism and sacrifice and about as stupid and narrow-mindedly jingoistic as "Pearl Harbor". It's unworthy of their memory. Enjoy the big bangs and the helicopters, people, just remember to fast-forward through the talkie-bits if you want to hold your dinner down, and do NOT regard this as anything truer than another step in Mel Gibson's self-advancement as the next John Wayne.
Rating:
Summary: Great war movie with anti-war undertones
Review: This film is honest and unflinching in it's portrayal of war. Set in the country of Vietnam during the first U.S. led battle, Gibson stars as Lt. Col. Hal Moore. Based on the novel "We Were Soliders Once, And Young" written by Hal Moore, this is in my opinion a great adaptation that was slammed by critics, but I assure any fan of war movies...you will put this right up there with the greatest war films of all time. The DVD has a lot going for it and is highly suggested for any fan of war films.
Rating:
Summary: Changing of the guard
Review: WWS succeeds on several levels. To lambast the movie because it is not "accurate" is pointless since there is yet to be made a movie ever anywhere that was "accurate". This is especially funny in light of reviews written for other Vietnam War movies like Apocalypse Now. Most of those movies are sheer fantasy. Most are attempts to revise history to suit the personally ground axes of political activists. But since WWS refuses to go down the path of depicting US soldiers as druggies and war criminals it will naturally attract the ire of the culture of draft resister types who have dominated the film industry. Thus movies that depict US troops as decent people are rejected by the Old Guard and ones that depict them as scum are lauded. WWS was made by one of a rising newer generation of filmmakers. These new filmmakers are too young to have been draft resisters and are thus not subject to the uncontrollable urge to justify their cowardice by degrading those who didn't hide behind deferrments or self-inflicted wounds and thus avoid military service. After all, those who refused to serve seldom ever want to discuss the subject and those who did serve are generally though well of by the average American today. Just try asking for a show of hands at any public gathering. Ask any large group how many dodged the draft and none will admit so willingly. It is funny, sort of like finding out after WWII that Germany was full of people who were against Hitler, you will find how many people "support the troops" but when their turn came they ran. This shifting of filmmaking to a younger generation is something that should engender optimism. Without the personal necessity to justify their own previous discreditable acts these filmmakers have the potential to finally show the Vietnam War in a more accurate light. The reason WWS was treated badly by so many critics boils down to the reviewer's personal political views. Too many are of the culture that foolishly believes that people can remain free without having to fight for it. Even if the Vietnam War was a horrid mistake one must remember that none of these draft resisters new these facts at the time. It was amazing how almost overnight the big protest rallies stopped when the draft lottery started and all those college students were no longer personally threatened. Apparently, absent the threat of the draft, college students find that shooting beers is far more important than trying to "bring the boys home". The Vietnam War occurred at a time when Soviet communism was working as hard as it could to turn the entire world into a totalitarian slave state. The namby-pamby refusal to confront reality that is prevalent amongst too many westerners doesn't change the fact that our civilization was under attack by murderous and ruthless people (Lenin, Stalin, Mao, etc). These thugs had murdered some 100 million people while trying to create their "workers' paradises". This fact must never be forgotten when dealing with the time period of the Vietnam War. Vietnam may have been a mistake, but had Soviet Communism prevailed there would be no freedom of speech today for mealyminded intellectuals to insult those who fough to preserve our freedoms. There would be no Internet or Amazon.com for people to engage in political argument on at all. There would only be one big slave camp. WWS deserves 5 stars for attempting to show that the Americans who fought there were mostly decent people only doing what they saw as their duty to their country. The soldiers deserve a far better break than they've gotten in the past and WWS gives it to them.
Rating:
Summary: This movie packs a wallop... sort of.
Review: this movie is awesome! its my favorite! its so undescribably cool! i know youll love it so just buy it!!! nO!O!O!O!O!O!O!O!O!O!O!O!O!O!O! buy like 15. youll need 15 because youll wear out the other 14 from watching them like a billion trillion like fahsjlbgsillion times!!!!!!!!!!! woowowowowowowowaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhh. thats like how cool it is. .. . . . . . . ... .. .. . . .. . .
| 
