Relevant, necessary, and well-done among war movies

Rating: 10/10 (3 March 2002)

Oh boy, where do I begin?
I guess the place to start is to talk war. War movies have been quite a "fad" lately, though I hope the reason for them is deeper than the word "fad" suggests. Still, the movies have for the most part been about World War II, a war in which there was at least a good sense of duty and of good versus evil. (The one major exception in recent war movies is Black Hawk Down, but even in Desert Storm, there was a fair sense of purpose.)
Vietnam, however, was a whole different ballgame. The war was poorly justified, patriotism was all but extinct, and the only thing possibly more horrid than the bloody massacres of battle was the treatment of soldiers upon their return. In terms of cultural effect, Vietnam was quite the antithesis of those other wars.
"We Were Soldiers" does justice in describing this war, particularly in its earlier stages, better than any other film I've seen. It makes no bones about the fact that the entire situation was ill-advised, yet instead of pointing fingers in blame, it points out the heroes, the few whose characters shone through despite the situations, and it remembers the fallen. Though it takes place early in the war, before the counterculture and its so-called "peace movements" had been well-established, it still touches on the societal mistreatments that America was soon to bestow upon the very men it called to duty.
I really don't feel I can describe the film in enough detail. Perhaps its ambiguity in areas are what make it such a strong testimony of our most ambiguous war. Still, I think I can safely say that the film contains many of the best points of other recent war movies. It tells a true story with as much reverence as Black Hawk Down. It relates the men at war to the people they left at home as well... rather, far better than Pearl Harbor (and without any Michael-Bay Camp, either). Perhaps most significantly, it prods at the questions of war itself as good as Saving Private Ryan.
As for the cast... Mel continues to amaze with the same vein of acting as in Braveheart and The Patriot. He plays a man of many parts, and does so well... There's not a moment at home that you forget he's a soldier, nor a moment in the field you forget he's a husband and father. C'mon, it's Mel at his best, need I say more?
Greg Kinnear again proves what an underrated actor he is. (I'm still mad that he didn't get an Oscar nod for his role in As Good As It Gets, though he was better IMO than Helen Hunt and ol' Jack, both of whom won trophies for their parts.) The guy could be an actor with body language alone. He can give a million lines of speech by a single stare, and when he does speak, he makes it count. I only wish he'd had more screen time.
Chris Klein is never the greatest of actor, but one that can hold his own, and this is probably his best role yet.
Sam Elliot played the tough guy, the man of few words who only takes orders from men who give good ones. It was a bit too much of the stereotypical old, grizzled soldier IMO, but he pulls it off great. Reminded me so much of Lee Marvin (a la Dirty Dozen) in this flick. (BTW, Hulk fans, I am now looking quite forward to his portrayal as Thunderbolt Ross.)
The rest of the cast, Barry Pepper, the wives, the other soldiers, were also well cast. There were no holes in the performances. Really, the film was seamless as a whole. If there are any major points for complaint, I didn't catch them. A warning, though: Bring kleenex if you're often brought to tears by a film, and be quick to turn your head in some parts if you've got a soft stomach.
Thumbs up. An eleven on a scale of ten. Go see it.