I wanted to like this more than I did. It's such a great story - a real old fashioned siege epic, a bunch of guys (and a few girls) fighting off massed hordes - and there's plenty of good things about it: the photography, production design; the action sequences were well done; some of it is engrossing.
But it's tonally off. There's a lot of whingeing and posturing - the heroes, whom I think we're meant to think are awesome, strut around, heave their manly chests, posture, and complain. The head of the CIA is dumb, the CIA agents are dumb, the Libyan allies range from comically in-manly to inept. There's too many beards, scenes of men introducing themselves to each other and worrying about their families (the families that they consistently, regularly leave to go work overseas even though they don't have to).
As in Black Hawk Down the locals barely feature - faceless killers, wailing women; even the people who saved the Americans at the end are hardly in it. But unlike Black Hawk Down our heroes aren't understated professionals, they feel like NRA members on a weekend shoot out. And the movie overly panders to the Red State audience prejudices - loving shots of ammunition, dialogue like "Americans are dying", whingeing about the lack of air support during the siege, preference given to "saving lives" over actual work that could help stabilise the region which could save more lives.
The acting doesn't help. Pablo Schreiber's posturing makes it seem like he's sending up the whole thing. So does Toby Stephens. John Krasinki (presumably trying for a Chris Pratt style career evolution) is annoying. Max Martini impresses as the most understated mercenary.
Look, to be fair - the movie is told form the point of view of the contractors, and thus has its own integrity in terms of point of view: they considered their jobs the most important out there, and that's the attitude the film takes. It has plenty of pace and action and I did enjoy watching it - I just wanted it to be a classic.
No comments:
Post a Comment