We Were Soldiers
We Were Soldiers (2002)
"We who have seen war, will never stop seeing it."
As I mentioned in the above sections, the story for We Were Soldiers is fairly unusual for a war film. The film was released in the early 2000s, a time during which many war movies shied away from the "Ra-ra! Go America!" type of film. Much like the previous year's Black Hawk Down, the film decides to focus more on the bond shared between soldiers, rather than the nationalism that so often frequents movies about armed conflict. To that end, director Randall Wallace shows the battle of Ia Drang from a number of different perspective, which was unique for the time.
The film opens with a title card briefly explaining the political situation in the region at the time and cuts to a scene depicting the slaughter of a French Army unit by the N.V.A. The purpose of this scene is to give the audience an idea of the N.V.A.'s motivations in the war. After this brief introduction, Wallace shows the troops of the 7th Cavalry training in, what was for the time, the revolutionary practice of using helicopters as troop transports. This is where we get to know Col. Moore and some of the men under his command. We also get introduced to the wives of many of these soldiers, including Col. Moore's better half, Julie (Stowe).
The second act brings us to Vietnam and to the battle itself. This is where Wallace goes outside the box a bit, which I think serves as both a great strength of the film and one of its major weaknesses. The first thing he does is intercuts Moore's strategy, with that of the N.V.A. commander, which I think works well. It puts a face on an enemy that has traditionally been depicted as "faceless" and more than a bit backwards. It also adds a modicum of tension, as we see each commander try to anticipate and outfox the other. It's an aspect of the film I really enjoyed and I wish there was more of it.
The other thing Wallace does is show the impact of the war back at home. Since the army was unprepared for the amount of casualties that occurred during the battle, it was forced to courier death notifications using taxi drivers. I like this idea because war never happens in a vacuum, but I think the execution was a bit tropey and could've used a bit more finesse. I think, overall this type of story would've worked better as a mini-series, rather than a feature film, only because the 138-minute run-time doesn't allow for a real exploration of everything going on.
Acting/Characters:
Mel Gibson's Hal Moore is the focal point of the film and I think he did alright overall. The special features on the DVD included interviews with Moore, who has a particular way of speaking, which Gibson tries to emulate with varying degrees of success. The character himself is also unique, in that traditionally officers in Vietnam movies are depicted as arrogant or incompetent, or both. Col. Moore is neither of these things and his primary concern is the welfare of his men. It's a refreshing take on this type of character.
The highlight of the film for me, though, was Sam Elliott's grumpy Sgt. Maj. Plumley, Moore's second in command. Elliott has always excelled at playing gruff and laconic characters, but he takes Plumley to a whole new level. The character never smiles and rarely has a nice thing to say about anybody. I particularly enjoyed his interactions with a young Sgt. Savage (Hurst), who throughout the first act tries to endear himself to the curmudgeonly Sgt. Major, meeting with failure each time. The character also provides the audience with a few laughs, which are much needed in a film like this.
The rest of the cast is pretty good, with notable performances from Greg Kinnear as Maj. Campbell, the commander of the Huey pilots. Barry Pepper also shows up as Joe Galloway, a reporter who wants a first hand look at the battle and gets more than he bargained for. Also keen eyed observers will notice a young Clark Greg and Jon Hamm as officers under Moore's command.
Visual/Special Effects:
There's a lot of VFX in this film and most of it is done pretty well. Since Vietnam was the war that gave us napalm, there is quite a few impressive pyrotechnics displays. There's also a fair bit of CGI to replicate some period-accurate aircraft, which all looks good. The film also makes heavy use of the makeup department to depict some of the horrifical wounds suffered by the soldiers. There's one scene (which I won't recount here) that still makes me wince even 20 years after seeing it for the first time.
One area of the visuals that took some heat, particularly when the film was released, was the depiction of the Ia Drang Valley itself. Most people associate Vietnam with swamps and jungles, while the valley shown in the film looked a lot like Southern California (mostly because it was shot there). I was dubious of this as well. However, upon doing some research, which included looking at pictures of the famed battle site, I realized that it was a fairly accurate representation of the Ia Drang, even though it doesn't conform to what is often portrayed in films.
Score/Music:
Nick Glennie-Smith wrote the musical score for the film and I thought it worked very well with the images on screen. Glennie-Smith makes heavy use of snare drums, like soldiers would use to keep time during a mark, to underscore the military focus of the film. The music also makes use of some 1960s-era pop hits, but the real musical triumph in this film was a rendition of Sgt. MacKenzie, a Scottish lament written to honor the death of the eponymous Sergeant during WWI. The song is just so haunting and melancholy and works tremendously well to underscore the horrors of war. If you've not heard the song, I recommend it. I tear up every time I hear it.
Action:
Being a war film there is plenty of action, but I've noticed something as I've gotten older. In my youth, these types of scenes is what I bought the ticket for. They're exciting and they get the blood pumping. Nowadays, though, I consider these scenes as a necessary evil and I no longer revel in their depictions but instead, use them to reflect on those that had to experience such trauma and be thankful that I never had to. Suffice to say, there is plenty of action (which I won't get into detail about) in We Were Soldiers, but it is depicted with the utmost respect and is designed for reflection, rather than excitement and for that it should be commended.
Final Verdict:
I still like this film and I appreciate what the filmmakers were trying to do. They didn't always hit the mark, but I think it's a valiant effort. They deserve props, though, for humanizing a war that is often demonized at the expense of those who fought in it. On that note, if you know someone who served during wartime (any war) give them a hug and thank them for their service.
Comments
Post a Comment