Yet Another War Flick. ♦ 46%

Rating: 5/10 (13 January 2014)

The use of word "flick" in the summary instead of "film" seriously shows how Lone Survivor depends solely on the clichéd war elements coupled with sympathetic emotions. Well, I respect the original fighters behind the failed mission, but I still cannot understand why it had to be brought to celluloid in the first place. Too damn terrible!
Letting us know the happenings through a book is a fine thing to do. But, as a film, Lone Survivor fails because: the plot heavily showcases the action scene, rather than focusing on 2 main things, characterization & the dot to dot fact file as to what went wrong. Yes, the screenplay tried hard to give us the reasons, but they either seemed ridiculous or foolish, thus giving us another reason to doubt the whole plot line-up. Unless I read the book, I might never believe this film.
Next, the characters die so fast, the story gasps for life. And as the title so dramatically proposes the climax, I had no specific adrenalin rush throughout the 2 hour period. "Pushtanwali," a code of honor for wise Afghanistanis is something new I learned of and it is because of this, the soundtrack, make-up and Wahlberg, why I rate it 5/10.
Cinematography is below average and I am not happy with the direction even. The guns are good, the action sequences jaw-dropping, but performances aren't that great and BTW, what was Eric Bana doing in this preposterously inappropriate role?
BOTTOM LINE: Easily forgettable, a very cold flick. Read the happenings instead somewhere than watching this typical Hollywood money-raker. Not Recommended!
Gore/Violence: Very Critical | Sex/Nudity: No