An Audio/Visual Triumph

Rating: 8/10 (16 February 2002)

Ridley Scott does a superb job of bringing Mark Bowden's piece to life. Scott is the elite of the manipulators of sound and sight. He not only takes you to the battle, he places you there. Complimented by todays surround sound theaters, one becomes immersed in his angles and bytes, woven magnificently into a well-told tale.
Devoid of flag waving patriotism, Scott nonetheless evokes emotion from the complicated nature of modern war. He holds true to the book, delving almost immediately into the battle after brief introductions of the principals. Though many, he does a nice job of rolling multiple folks into composite characters. After all, this is a movie, not a documentary.

Politics and patriotism are almost absent (despite the claims of many of this site's messengers); the focus is on the battle: an operation that was supposed to take one half hour but became an twelve-hour-plus marathon.
Criticism of the one-sided nature of the fight is unwarranted. The movie, like the book/articles are told from the American point of view for a reason: it was nearly impossible to find the Somali viewpoint. If anything, Scott is PC in his handling of the Somali tactics. The movie leaves out (probably due to time constraints) several damning incidents from the book such as children being used as spotters; Somali gunmen, knowing the American aversion for civilian casualties, using women as shields, and Somali females brandishing weapons while holding infants. Additionally, rumor has it that captions at the end of the flick suggesting that the results of the Battle of Mogadishu impacted American policy in Rwanda and the Balkans were pulled at the eleventh hour.
One feels the immediacy of the moment, the spinning-out-of control nature of the fight, and we are dragged along for the ride. While it is easy to pick apart the decisions of the combatants afterward, Scott appropriately reminds us that life and death decisions tend to be made on the fly, without the benefit of omniscience. Though we view the actions much like the Joint Operations Center (JOC) did, we are similarly helpless to avoid the tragedies that occur. And this is the strength of the movie: it merely tells and does not judge. There are no "aww shucks" or "we shoulda" moments only a retelling of the actions -and inactions, that influenced a small composite unit of America's fighting elite.
It is worth noting that Scott has done his homework in bringing this authenticity of "today's" military to light. Minus some theatrical "necessities" such as using name tapes on the helmet and names on the radio, the lingo, technical and tactical proficiency, and actions of the characters are militarily very accurate. The sounds of (most) of the weapons, the uniforms, and even the jargon and lingo (such as the rank sergeant being pronounced "sar'nt" rather than WWII-era "sarge") give an authentic feel to the film. Also, the macho nature of the forces involved is accurately depicted. Keep in mind we are recounting the actions of America's elite warriors, the Rangers and Delta force, not the Girl Scouts.
This movie won't get best picture for a few reasons. There are too many characters to get you too involved in any one of them and the pace of the book and movie preclude the typical highs and lows found in mainstream movie; the flick is an adrenaline-filled roller coaster only going down. If you are looking for melodrama, two-sided politics, or hokey action adventure, look elsewhere. If you want to see a pure retelling, symbolic and painstakingly told account of modern war, than don't miss Black Hawk Down.