This film's relatively low IMDb rating of 6.6 as I write this baffles me. I thought it was a compelling story centering on parallel narratives involving Colonel Nat Serling (Denzel Washington), himself conflicted over a friendly fire incident in which his best friend was killed, while investigating the merit of awarding the country's first Medal of Honor to a woman who died in combat. Meg Ryan portrays female Captain Karen Walden in the story, and I do have to say that her presence in a dramatic role seemed almost distracting considering the many romantic comedies she's appeared in. However she does comport herself well in the battle scenes that eventually lead to her character's death.
I've read some of the other user reviews making comparisons to "Roshomon", and although there are similarities, I would point out that in the Kurosawa film, there really is no resolution to the validity of any of the four characters telling their side of a story regarding the murder of a samurai and the rape of his wife. It's really left to the imagination of the viewer regarding who's story one believes is true, if any of them. In this one, it's left fairly certain that medic Ilario's (Matt Damon) final accounting to Colonel Serling is the definitive version that confirms Captain Walden's valor in the heat of battle. The one thing that isn't confirmed is the exact manner in which she died because it occurred after all of the soldiers under her command were evacuated from the scene of the battle at Al Kufan.
What the movie brilliantly conveys is the personal conflict undergone by Serling in his personal and professional life and how his search for the truth becomes a quest that almost tears him and his family apart. Turning to booze as many in his shoes undoubtedly would, I didn't get the sense that he ever really crossed the line into alcoholism as many viewers suggest, though his reliance on alcohol seemed to imply he became a plateau drinker with just the right amount of resolve to keep himself under control. He obviously walked a very fine line attempting to balance the duty he felt to uncover the truth of his investigation while maintaining a devotion to his wife and family. In another picture, his marriage might not have withstood the consequences of his loyalty to the military.
Courage Under Fire is the first major film about the first Gulf War, the one that the first President Bush presided over. It's about men and women in combat and how they handle it. In fact George H.W. Bush, himself a hero from World War II has a peripheral involvement in Courage Under Fire. He actually sets in motion some of the events of this film.
Bronson Pinchot has a small, but really great part as a bootlicking White House aide. The actions of a female army captain and helicopter pilot Meg Ryan saved the lives of several troops though her chopper went down and she died. Unsaid in the film, but no doubt the case, looking for the women's vote in the 1992 election, the White House has taken a personal interest in seeing this female soldier gets a really top drawer decoration, maybe the Congressional Medal of Honor. Pinchot's down at the Pentagon really pushing hard on this case with General Michael Moriarty.
Moriarty assigns Colonel Denzel Washington to investigate the incident with Ryan. Washington's in a bit of jackpot himself, he was involved in a friendly fire incident and though he was innocent, he's waiting to be cleared officially.
Ryan turns out to be as brave a combat soldier this country ever produced of any gender. In fact she was dealing with a whole lot more than anyone of the brass originally thought. In fact that's the story of Courage Under Fire.
Matt Damon got some good reviews on his way up the Hollywood ladder of success as the drug addicted medic from Ryan's team. Lou Diamond Phillips should have been given an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor as the chauvinistic sergeant who is quite reluctant to cooperate with Washington's investigation.
Above all this film belongs to Meg Ryan. She breaks type in Courage Under Fire, she becomes a feminist role model for all time in this film. It was quite a change from the romantic parts she usually is cast in. Meg's got the right stuff in abundance here.
Denzel's performance is moving as well. He's getting it from all sides, from the Pentagon who want him to sign off on the report, from his wife, Regina Taylor who sees the stress this and his own situation is putting him in and his own conscience because he wants the report to be honest, fair, and thorough.
Courage Under Fire joins the ranks of great war films and this review is now dedicated to all the women who now serve in combat for the USA to keep us safe and free.
Lt Col Serling (Denzel Washington) leads a squad of tanks in the first Gulf War. He accidentally destroys one of his own tanks in a friendly fire incident. Washington Post reporter Tony Gartner (Scott Glenn) is after the story. Serling is relegated to a desk job. He's assigned to determine if medical helicopter pilot Cpt Karen Emma Walden (Meg Ryan) should be the first woman to receive a Medal of Honor for combat. The White House is very eager. However, there is more than one version of the incident which resulted in her death.
I love several things about this movie. Denzel is perfect as always. He needs to hold the center while having a compelling emotional story. Meg Ryan does the hardest acting of her career by bringing different versions of her character to life. Lou Diamond Phillips is great. Matt Damon is unrecognizable. It also has the RashÃmon style of storytelling. I love that method. It feels more compelling than the straight forward way. It also feels more real with differing point of views.
This drama about loss and addiction hasn't a shred of irony or a sense of surprise, it doesn't even contain much of a connecting essence between its two parts. Halle Berry loses her husband in a freak occurrence, later turns to his boyhood pal--a heroin-addict struggling with recovery--to help fill the void of loneliness...but kicks him back out when he gets too close to her and her two kids. Screenwriter Allan Loeb and director Susanne Bier treat drug-withdrawal in shorthand, as if it were a 24-hour virus, while Bier keeps her camera fixated on photogenic Berry's elfin face and wet, tremulous eyes. This is a glossy, tony, yet indecisive piece of work about nearly-ruined lives, set in too-clean Seattle surroundings and featuring chummy, good-hearted people (we don't learn what happens to a murderer who figures in the story--that's too unattractive an angle for these filmmakers to take on). Loeb and Bier are alternately naÃve and unfocused, committed only to the most basic of movie clichÃs (such as a room the widow won't go into, or the bonding under the basketball hoop). The acting by Berry and Benicio Del Toro remains fairly strong despite the paint-by-numbers set-up, while the romantic undercurrent swirling about (yet kept at a safe distance) is enough to move some viewers. It's a peculiar film, however: one-part soap opera and another part compassionate character study. But, since the characters don't really emerge as living, breathing people, the results are often illogical and shallow. ** from ****
This is not a subtle film at all. You have the build up which comes on like an episode of Casualty with people casually tossing cigarettes left right and centre, faulty electrics blowing up and hand tools sparking everywhere. It feels a bit ott and very heavy handed.
When the fire starts the sequence of events jumps about a bit and there are some odd moments of 'light relief' that seem out of place. It is a very uneven film, and overlong too I would say. Which is perhaps why the ending feels sudden and rushed, it doesn't even tie up the loose ends the film has invented.
At times it wants to take itself seriously while at others its straight exploitation fayre. Some of the final fire scenes are very well filmed though and you could completely believe that it was taking place at the cathedral.
I think it probably does a disservice to a lot of those at the scene and some of it felt a little inappropriate, as well as inaccurate. I would highly recommend the film from a couple of years ago by the Naudet brothers as this had much more emotional depth(as well as actual facts).
Notre Dame BrÃle is a crying indictment to the entire system (or lack thereof) that was supposed to protect and preserve from the risk of fire one of the most ancient and beautiful monuments of the world.
How is it possible that the several tons of very old wood that made the roof of the cathedral were not equipped with an extensive state of the art anti fire system? Had any of the cathedral's curators ever took a stroll across what was called "the forest"? Had the idea of what a sparkle could do in such environment ever crossed their mind?
How is it possible that none of the curators ever felt the need to design and put in place a pre-defined plan of intervention that would allow an instantaneous deployment of the fire brigades in case of fire emergency?
How is it possible that no one ever thought it might be a good idea to invest into equipping the cathedral with a modern, reliable, pervasive fire alarm system?
How is it possible that so many of the cathedral's infrastructures, like the pipes supposed to carry the water to the roof, were completely decrepit and unusable?
All the polemics surrounding the crisis management after the fire were simply sterile: one hour after the roof caught fire, the cathedral was doomed, the fire was out of control. All was decided in those 60 minutes when all the outdated, failing systems in place did nothing to trigger a prompt response.
This is no hindsight: the hypothesis of a fire was (should have been) a very real one; but none of those in charge acted upon it.
If Notre Dame is still standing, despite the ineptness of its curators, it is thanks to the superior bravery of a bunch of fire brigades officers who put their lives at risk to go in and extinguish the fire in the left tower.
This incident however will remain a forever stain on France's credibility in its ability to protect its artistic patrimony.
38c6e68cf9