De Palma's Vietnam

Rating: 8/10 (11 March 2005)

De Palma's "Casualties of War" is a pleasant surprise for two main reasons: 1) it almost entirely refuses to compromise the story it tells to appeal to plebeian morality and 2) it features one hell of a performance by Michael J. Fox.
"Casualties of War" does its best not to cheat and when it succeeds, it does extremely well. I'm not a huge fan of De Palma movies save "Scarface" simply because of its almost cartoonish, spoof style, but this particular film is serious through and through. There are very few De Palma'isms, camera trickery, logical jumps in psychological development, etc. The film is restrained, well-structured and the way it sets up its primary conflict is much like the gait of creeping blackness across the sky before rain. In a word, the story is very believable, as it should be, since it is true.
It details the story of a platoon which, under surprise attack, loses one of its members. "Casualties of War" treats this as a set-up to its much darker intentions - namely the revenge that is exacted and the psychological dynamics that lead to it being carried out.
And, as much as I like Sean Penn as an actor, it was Michael J. Fox who stole the show in my opinion. I mean, this is an actor I know from "Doc Hollywood" and the "Back to the Future" trilogy and here he does drama. That can be fatal - I am of those who found Charlie Sheen's performance in "Platoon" somewhat jarring with the otherwise excellent cast. Michael J. Fox doesn't jar with anything - he takes us from somewhat incompetent, fresh soldier's innocence to dubious outsider, to straight-out protester, traitor, obstructor and hero (in the noble sense of the words). He shows range and sensitivity to the subject matter presented - and I think he does an admirable job.
The subject matter is tough. This film, like other great Vietnam War films, tackles a whole spectrum of themes, ideas, psychologies and questions. "Casualties of War" asks us about the existence of moral boundaries in entirely amoral (NOT immoral) situations, the dynamics of group mentality versus individual mentality, the complexity of politics and the bureaucratic structure that supports it, the threat of complete dehumanization and madness. It summarizes many of the lessons that should have been drawn from our involvement in the Vietnam War in scenes so quick and effective that one could get goosebumps. And it usually doesn't offer easy answers. The revenge committed by the soldiers in and of itself is horrid, but we can at the same time understand how hard it is for Michael J. Fox's character to isolate himself from the context of the war to make that judgement. Especially after losing one of his fellow soldiers in a shoot-out, in a village where all the seemingly friendly villagers were aware of VC presence and impending attack. Suddenly, it becomes clear how the a lot of soldiers viewed the Vietnamese - as one entity because it was so difficult to distinguish between allies and foes.
The film insists that despite the circumstances it *is* important to do so, to make moral judgement calls despite the insanity of the context. That is what I really liked about it. I did, however, find a few problems with the film - minor really, but problems nonetheless. I do think that De Palma characterizes the platoon minus Michael J. Fox as a bunch of animals, instead of people who became animals because, as Joseph Conrad suggested, they were seduced by the heart of an immense darkness. Essentially it boils down to a problem with psychological transitions, but De Palma does his best and while it sometimes doesn't work, most of the time it does splendidly.
*Possible Spoiler* I also think that the end of the film is a minor cheat - the resolution simply does not work for me as well as I'd like it to. There are so many people who were crippled by the horrors of the Vietnam War and so many who struggled to keep on top of them - the final scene is almost too little to end or resolve what comes before it. It feels like it didn't happen - but if it did, then I'm wrong and I'm prepared to live with that. The movie, while I don't think it's of "Apocalypse Now" caliber, is a very good movie nonetheless.