Not an "important" film.

Rating: Null/10 (13 November 1999)

This movie is not important. The violence is gratuitous. The plot is little more than an excuse for a movie based on body-count. The movie is a well-made exploitation film.
Important? War sucks. Getting shot sucks. Duh. A group of soldiers are tasked with getting the last living soldier-brother away from enemy lines, and he doesn't want to go. Simple, yes. Somewhat intriguing, yes. Important? Not even close.
Violent? The vast bulk of this movie is composed of scenes of people being shot in the head while we watch the blood spurt out, or of people getting blown in half and then dragging their torsos by their arms. The scene where the medic fixes the "bleeder" only to then have the soldier shot in the head is an example. Amateuristically ironic? Yes. Gratuitous? You betcha? Important? Hardly.
Realistic? Seems that way. But if I were to drive around with a video-camera and film in graphic detail all the car wrecks I came across I'd have a realistic movie too! Would I have an important film? No. If so, then driving films like "Blood on the Highway, or exploitation films like "Faces of Death" would be dubbed "important" and be up for Oscar nominations too!
Realism does not an important film make.
Veterans deserve all the love and honor we can give for being tasked to do things as noble as keep our country free and for being tasked to do things as stupid as enforcing inane political grand-standing. > .