This movie was crap!
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Uncommon Valor
Hector Marroquin — 19 years ago(March 02, 2007 05:11 PM)
I watched this movie on cinemax a few months, and I laughed at the film's stupidity. Ridiculous fantasies, absurd running and shooting scenes, terrible acting. For me this was more conservative frustration unable to cope with the fact that the USA was defeated in Vietnam, like Rambo 2 and the Missing in Action films. The post 9/11 cartoons about killing Bin Laden bore the same mentality. As far as I know, the only one in this movie to serve in Vietnam was Tim Thomerson, and all he did in Vietnam was ask U.S soldiers whether they wanted their steaks medium rare or well done; he was just a cook. Funny to see him as a military man. Gene Hackman, must've either been bored or wanted a few extra bucks. I recently asked an acquantance of mine who's a Vietnam veteran what he thought of Uncommon Valor, Rambo 2 or the Missing in Action. He replied, "We would've really loved to have seen them try all that beep
-
m-arnall — 18 years ago(May 15, 2007 07:55 AM)
Hector
The movie was indeed bad, however, you seem to miss the point. The people playing the parts were actors, that is a-c-t-o-r-s. They do not need to have been in Vietnam. Going by your theory, Christopher Reeve would have had to be able to fly, prior to getting the part as Superman. God forbid that we should have to have ex-soldiers acting in every film about the army.
The movie was awful, because the screenplay was badly written, it was badly directed and the acting was dreadful. Finally and probably most important of all, at the end of the film one felt as if one had wasted an hour and a half of one's life. The only thing that could possibly have made it worse would be if they had hired soldiers to play the parts, instead of actors.
It's simple really isn't it. -
ediaz8 — 17 years ago(September 08, 2008 01:57 PM)
Actors are not meant to be "experts" in the roles that they play. For example, Daniel Craig is not a spy but he plays 007, etc. This movie was great and underrated. This was made at a time when MIA/POW movies were popular action pieces, established by the success of "First Blood" a year earlier. You can't compare this to the "one man army" type like Rambo or Braddock. This was more realistic than that. This was a tale of seasoned veterans who have long retired from active duty and agreed to go back to combat. of course, they're all out of shape and out of touch with the military life but their bond was what made them a strong unit, not muscles or martial arts.
-
sullylou42 — 17 years ago(September 09, 2008 07:01 PM)
And it was entertianment.
Some people think every movie needs to be like a documentary. There a movies about war (Saving Private Ryan, Black Hawk Down, Letter From Iwo Jima, etc) and then there are war movies (Uncommon Valor, Rambo, MIA 1-3,ETC). The latter is made for entertainment only.
"Playin' it cool." -
Baltar65 — 17 years ago(November 06, 2008 10:07 AM)
Hey Hector.."Just a cook"??? As long as he served in Vietnam, who gives a damn what he did? Because he cooked for his comrades, that makes him less of a soldier? Grow up! Not every hero carried a gun.
"Again we see, there is nothing you can possess which I cannot take away" -
billymac72 — 17 years ago(November 14, 2008 09:21 AM)
I think it is indeed a total conservative fantasy.and it's awesome!! I love John Milius. Are liberals the only ones entitled to fantasy? After all, guys like Oliver Stone have made a science out of it.although he doesn't seem to know where reality ends and fantasy begins.
-
American1 — 17 years ago(November 22, 2008 09:09 PM)
Hector, you made a completely moronic posting. Hackman was a Marine for six years by the way. If you want actors to have credibility for their parts by having been in the military, law enforcement, etc., there would be no movies. Clooney, Damon, and others like them are a disgrace to the uniform but they play the parts of military heroes. What have they really ever done besides play real people? They could not shine the shoes of our heroes but they play them. The days of those that really served like Charlton Heston, Jimmy Stewart, Lee Marvin, et al are over. Please.
-
maceek — 17 years ago(March 12, 2009 09:24 PM)
This movie, for what it is, was surprising well-done. I didn't serve in Vietnam (I'm only 37) but I did spend 11 years in the military as an infantryman and combat engineer. I can tell you that a lot of the technical advisement is pretty spot-on. Sure some of it borders corny at best, but overall it was pretty well-done. I thought the acting was decent. You just can't look at this as a "realistic" military film because that's not what it was intended to be at all.
The quip about Thomerson only being a cookwell, at least he served. And it's those echelons that keep the machine running. Believe me, it's nice to get a nice hot meal after eating rations in the field for weeks on end
