We Were Trying Too Hard To Be Different

Rating: 1/10 (8 September 2002)

I consider We Were Soldiers an okay film at best. It conveys a simple message, and we understand the gist of the first major battle between the U.S. and North Vietnam. However, as it goes into details, that's when things start to go awry and near borderline tedium and boredom. My main problem lies with Randall Wallace's approach into making this film. Aside some shoddy directing, the script was mediocre. Unlike previous Vietnam War movie attempts, Wallace gets rid of all the negative aspects of the war (refreshing change), and fills the movie with good Christians and loving fathers versus a determined enemy composed of mostly cannon fodder. I liked how he portrayed the NV leader as a strategist, and a bit of human emotion (he is defending his homeland from the American invasion) but can Wallace do better than letting the NV soldiers run mindlessly towards blazing M-16s? Another question, what's the deal with the tacked on fictitious scenes towards the finale? Is this supposed to be more patriotic and dramatic? Hardly. The acting was average at best. It's difficult to deliver good characters with solid development, and recount the events of a major battle all under 2 hours, but it CAN be done. See Glory for a prime example. We Were Soldiers, falls a couple of steps short however. BUT, I can pardon that because like Black Hawk Down, this movie was made to only tell you about the La Drang battle and not provide characters to remember.
Of course, all of these questions are a matter of personal preference with war movies. You either feel moved by tear-jerking scenes, or you can be joes like me that simply don't buy it (especially those who've read the novel). For me, I say again that this movie was okay, but certainly not great and certainly no Oscar contender.
7/10