Excellent war sequences.

Rating: Null/10 (4 June 2004)

Black Hawk Down depicts how things went wrong in Mogadishu, but doesn't dwell on its history. The director Ridley Scott makes his intentions clear at the beginning of the movie that he's not interested in this events genesis; a few minutes of text on the screen gives a brief background of what has gripped Mogadishu; of warlord Aidid looting all the food and money meant for starving people.
BHD scores when re-producing the terrors of war on screen - the same depicted so realistically in Saving Private Ryan. Both movies walk hand-in-hand when it comes to conveying what war is all about: of pain, blood, and death. But the similarity ends here. SPR had plenty of room for character development, while BHD apparently did not. Or, Ridley Scott was too focused on war itself with the some male bonding instances that seemed to be reluctantly sprinkled around in the movie. Josh Harnett looked lost, and it looked like the character of SFC 'Hoot' Gibson had little time on screen. Tom Sizemore at his best as usual, but one gets a feeling that he's getting stereotyped in such war movie roles.
But it is unfair to put down BHD comparing it with SPR. BHD stand on its merit with tense and well shot war sequences. Exploding debris, dismembered limbs, a major medical procedure being performed on a soldier without even local anesthesia - all reinforcing the horrors of war. With some documentary style filming thrown in, BHD takes us right into the battlefield. But BHD could have been 20 minutes shorter. Towards the end, the continual images of war are taxing on the viewer.
Go for this if you are war movie fan. Avoid if you are allergic to blood, gore, and war.