Lots of potential but. . .

Rating: Null/10 (24 April 2000)

SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW!
The performances of most of the characters were pretty good - often you could tell they were doing their best with what they were given. Overall, however, the movie lacked any real direction. The Viet Nam sequence seemed like it was going to be important exposition for something but the punch at the end was pretty weak. Why didn't Tommy Lee Jones (who obviously knew the story) mention in court that Samuel Jackson actually kept his word during battle?
The problem was that the real conflict created by the characters was the NSA person withholding the evidence that would condemn a man for having to fall back on a last resort. The drama should have engaged us in this debate by showing us more of one of these but less of the other two: battle scenes, trial scenes or trial prep scenes (on both sides of the trial.) To have brought up that issue then skirted it was pretty silly.
The movie was also driven by events, not by characters (or even a balance of the two.) In fact, we barely feel we know the characters, the pieces of them which count are cardboard and paint, not the stuff war-heroes are made of. It's nice to see Samuel Jackson cry over the irony of being left out in the cold - why not focus more on what he went through? Why not focus more on the difference between S.J. and the national security advisor? why not show us what the marines, who's lives this decision ultimately effects, were feeling about this whole thing? and why not show us something of the justice of the security advisor after he was 'caught' instead of a couple words on the screen?
So all in all, lots of potential - it raised some good issues - the actors did their best with what they were given - but overall it was weak in delivery.