simplistic but powerful war film

Rating: Null/10 (16 March 2002)

World War II has been tagged by some with the rather oxymoronic appellation `the last good war.' What this means is that the `heroes' and `villains' in this epic conflict were so clear-cut and obvious - and the goals so straightforward and crucial - that filmmakers approaching the subject haven't needed to bother much with exploring the moral complexities that lie at the root of all war, that most inhumane of human endeavors. Films set in World War II have almost invariably reflected a sense of moral certitude, with the Allied nations seen as the forces of Good locked in a life-and-death struggle with the forces of Evil represented by the Axis powers.
This is not, of course, the way Americans came, for the most part, to view the Vietnam War. Faced with no clearly defined enemy or menace, many Americans began to question their country's involvement in what seemed from a distance to be a civil war between two alien nations and cultures. Thus, when it finally came time for filmmakers to address this issue, their films naturally reflected much of the moral ambiguity that defined the nation as a whole. Films like `The Deer Hunter,' `Platoon,' `Apocalypse Now' etc. not only questioned the moral rightness of our involvement and actions in that conflict, but actually made us question whether heroism - on the scale of the common soldier caught in the conflict - was even a valid possibility.
The new film, `We Were Soldiers' attempts to rectify that skepticism, trying to counterbalance the films like those listed above, while at the same time serving as a long overdue and honorable tribute to the brave young men who fought and died doing their duty on that strange foreign soil. The film, thereby, endeavors to bring the WWII war film sensibility to one set in Vietnam. In order to focus our attention on the individual heroism of the men involved, the film first has had to drain the narrative of its entire sociopolitical context. Since this is the story of the first major battle between the Americans and the Viet Cong (which took place in November 1965) one would naturally expect to hear quite a bit of discourse - both among the military leaders and the rank-and-file combat soldiers - as to the why and wherefore of both the conflict and the Americans' reason for taking part in it. Yet, we get none of this. All the soldiers involved simply do their duty without question, an attitude which becomes, in effect, the film's operative definition of the word `heroism.' This is what separates `We Were Soldiers' from those previous Vietnam War films. The characters in those other movies were also dying bravely, but they always seemed to be questioning the powers-that-be that got them into the situation in the first place. In `We Were Soldiers,' no one ever questions. The need to follow orders is simply accepted as a given - and thus heroism becomes a matter of doing one's duty and of helping one's comrade regardless of any overarching justification for the slaughter. Without having to wade through all the moral murkiness of the conflict itself, we are thus freed up to admire the sheer courage and determination of the men. In fact, the film even makes a few good willed nods in the direction of equanimity by showing that even the Viet Cong fighters, who are attempting to kill all these fine young American men, also have girlfriends and families they love back home.

Given this self-imposed myopia, `We Were Soldiers,' nevertheless, does an admirable job honoring these men. Like most war movies, so much time is spent on the pyrotechnics of battle that little time is left to engage in any real character development. `We Were Soldiers' attempts to flesh out its characters in the opening stretch when we see several of the men with their wives and families before embarking on their mission. But once they hit the ground in Vietnam, all hell breaks loose and most of the men become lost in the chaos of this seemingly interminable battle. The film does a terrific job recreating the horror of the fighting, never flinching from the grim reality that is war. The carnage is appropriately gruesome and the filmmakers make sure that we see every last bit of the grotesquerie that the act of unbridled human butchery has to offer. The special effects team has done an extraordinary job bringing all this to life on the screen.
Although a few of the early family scenes seem treacly at best, some of the film's most profoundly moving moments occur back home, when Julia Moore (Madeleine Stowe), the wife of the film's protagonist, Lt. Colonel Hal Moore (Mel Gibson), takes it upon herself to deliver the `death telegrams' to the other wives on the base.
Gibson does an admirable job as the man in charge of the mission, displaying both a rugged strength and a compassionate love for his men that makes him a well-rounded character. One appreciates the fact that the writers, Joseph L. Galloway and Harold G. Moore himself (upon whose life and book this true story is based) don't require Moore to indulge in the kind of cheap theatrical heroics common to characters of this type. He is a man whose level-headedness and grace under fire help lead his men on to victory in an almost impossible situation. This is also a rare instance in which a character is allowed to have a religious dimension without being made into a fool in the process.
Randall Wallace, as the film's director, seems equally at home in the battle sequences and in the quieter moments of subtle sadness that permeate the scenes at home.
`We Were Soldiers,' for all its simplicity of theme, manages to be a moving tribute to the young men who found the personal courage to put their lives on the line, with or without a cause that made any sense.