Home of the Brave

source: Home of the Brave

The War Inside, November 6, 2007 By Grady Harp (Los Angeles, CA United States) - See all my reviews (TOP 10 REVIEWER) (REAL NAME) HOME OF THE BRAVE is one of those films that is difficult to critique: the message of how war permanently alters the minds and bodies of soldiers and their families is a meaningful one and one about which we need to be reminded. Irwin Winkler has made some good films (DeLovely, Life as a House, Guilty by Suspicion), but in this film he seems to be working against the script by Mark Friedman which has a tendency to oversimplify emotions and thus loses its impact. The film begins in Iraq where each of the main characters is at least tangentially connected. Dr. Will Marsh (Samuel L. Jackson) is in a truck driven by Vanessa (Jessica Biel) and accompanied by soldiers Tommy (Brian Presley) and Jamal (50 Cent AKA Curtis Jackson) when a roadside bomb explodes, maiming the hand of Vanessa, killing Tommy's best friend, making Jamal witness unnecessary civilian deaths, and placing Will in an impotent position as a doctor. Flash forward to Spokane, Washington where each of these four wounded people try to piece their lives together in a world that loathes the Iraq war (not at all unlike the treatment of soldiers returning from the unpopular Vietnam debacle), trying to make sense of it all. The problem with the good idea for a movie lies in the too traditional plot lines. The actors (especially Presley and Biel) give it their all, but credibility enters and the smoke rises and we are left with a misplaced patriotism. The message is strong: the delivery of it is shaky. Grady Harp

I probably have a different point of view than most reviews, being an actual Iraq War veteran. This movie is quite terrible from the start. A bizarrely organized Washington National Guard unit is caught an ambush. Unfortunately, it's so patently obviously they're being herded into a kill zone, and they do absolutely nothing to prevent it, that it's difficult to feel sympathy for anyone dumb enough to allow themselves to get trapped that easily. It gets even more absurd as a fire team of four guys decides to abandon their vehicles and run blindly into a numerically superior force with overwhelming firepower. Again, my response was "serves you idiots right" when someone gets killed. The three main characters are Lt. Col. Marsh, a medical officer; Sgt Price, a female mechanic; and two enlisted infantrymen, Yates and Jamal. Yes, they all ended up in the same ambush. Don't ask. Marsh hits the bottle and clashes with his rebellious anti-war son, culminating in an unintentionally hilarious drunken Thanksgiving scene. Price loses a hand to an IED, and she becomes a bitter and angry at the world. Jamal is just angry, and his mumbling is nearly unintelligible. He flips out at a group therapy session, complete with a random appearance by a grizzled Vietnam veteran. Don't ask. Yates is supposed to be the emotional center of this film, but between his limited acting ability and the poorly written script, you just want him to stop whining. His civilian employer blatantly violates the federal USERRA law, and his response is to do nothing. He even gives the cheesy "YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE OVER THERE, MAN!" speech. What little suspension of disbelief is frequently broken by the poor production values, lack of research, and training. None of the actors look remotely comfortable holding a weapon, wearing a uniform (the berets in particular look ridiculous), or doing anything even remotely military-related. Random military jargon is thrown into the dialogue, even if it is completely out of place, or totally nonsensical in context. The main problem is none of the characters have a realistic character arc. They go from damaged to whole again for little or no reason. It's like going from A to C with no B.

this movie is total pap. the dialogue is stilted and poorly delivered by all. all the actors seem to be emailing their performances in. Despite strong actors in Biel and Jackson there is very little acting going on here, seems like a badly made episode of outer-limits if they let a lobotomised martian make a gulf war 2 movie. The direction and pacing with the dialogue is so painful and achingly unreal its ridiculous all the lines are spoken as if by robots rather than people and written by a robot too now that i think about it, a robot Aibo. the plot is just disgusting and unrealistic, the depiction of the Iraq war borders on WMD untruthfulness. All in all a movie bush would enjoy, as its probably showing in the fairy world he resides in.

i wonder why people don't like this movie? Obviously, they have never lived a war. All they stick to, is the heroism and patriotism, as seen in Hollywood. Well, i'm telling you this: i'm from lebanon, and i lived all the wars possible. So, i guess i know what i'm talking about, more then someone who's just seen too much TV. war is business: you just do it to get your hands on oil, sell weapons and arms, even sell plastic hands and legs . SELL HUMAN SPARE PARTS!!!! in the movie, they suggested she could buy a plastic hand for 21 000 $. Funny thing is that soldiers are dying just to defend the business of their leaders. And what's more hypocrite is that everything is apparently done in the name of democracy and freedom. Great movie. 10/10

Some people in the movie business make movies they don't have to be proud of. They may do it for the paycheck, because it's a fun movie, or sometimes even to poke a little fun at themselves. The best examples of these (Snakes on a Plane, Miss Congeniality, Jurassic Park, or the better part of William Shatner's career) are fun, lightweight popcorn flicks that are good quality escapist fare that nobody has to feel bad about. But then movies come along like Home of the Brave. Not only don't the minds behind this have a movie to be proud of, they owe an apology to the people they're trying to portray. If the movie's about alien mutant dinosaurs from Pluto coming to steal our rabbits, then a lot can be forgiven. If the movie is about the challenges that soldiers face coming home from a very real war, a more careful hand is required. Sadly, those careful hands weren't involved in this project. It's a pretty compelling premise, and there is a lot of talent in the cast. Samuel L. Jackson tones it down a bit and (in a rare occurrence) underplays his role a bit. I never saw him as one to embody the "slow boil." 50 cent, for the few scenes he's in, is strong. Jessica Biel will probably get panned for her performance, in much the same way Christina Ricci was in Monster, because her character was *supposed* to be awkward, out of place, and painful to watch. Despite the fact it may be faint praise, I'd say it's probably the best work of her career. Brian Presley shows that he's been wasting his time on soaps and TV for far too long. That's where the niceties stop. All this talent in front of the camera is wasted by a bad script, a worse directing job, and a story that was just fundamentally a bad idea. ***SPOILERS BEGIN*** We'll ignore the number of scenes that were totally blown by horribly clichéd dialogue and worse direction. Let's focus on the theme of the movie -- all soldiers who come back from Iraq are mentally unstable time bombs who are unable to re-integrate into society, at least at first. The white ones eventually find their way, and the black ones go for their guns and resort to violence. I kid you not -- that really is what this movie is saying. The total lack of attention to detail is splashed across the closing frames in a quote from Machiavelli. "Wars begin where you will, but they do not end where you please." Nice quote, but this is from the same guy who said "Before all else, be armed," "It is better to be feared than loved," and "the end justifies the means." It sounds like I'm making a petty point, but it's illustrative of the lack of depth that this movie has. ***SPOILERS END*** I know enough people who have been to Iraq and back (or who are still over there) to feel insulted on their behalf. A subject like this deserves to be treated with respect, and this movie just doesn't do it.

Powerful & moving film. This is not entertainment but education. I pity you America, the pain you inflict on your own is the same as you treat you enemy. Shame on you. The actors are not upbeat as the story is not upbeat. The negative comments are from people whom like fun, not reality. The film is made in a very proactive way, i hope people will learn from this movie, the pain, of all whom live, die and suffer from war. I feel for the families on both sides, it's a pity their story is not also shown as they also suffer. PEACE PEOPLE.

I am glad that I had the opportunity to go to an advanced screening of this film. It was a good show overall. Some folks have complained about overacting, but people coping with trauma/post trauma in real life overact. They do not not behave like society expects in that little box that is deemed 'normal.' It also allowed for the movie to not have a tidy Hollywood ending where everyone lives happily ever after. I felt that the characters were much more believable that way. Samuel L. Jackson's performance was particularly strong when his character arrived late to thanksgiving dinner with his guests. Victoria Rowell was a solid counterbalance to his character throughout the entire piece as well. It would have been nice to see the roles by 50 Cent and Brian Presley switched as it would have gone against typecasting. The biggest weakness I felt the film had was such a strong reliance on flashbacks, but they make sense for the way that the story is structured. I also found it humorous that a Judith Krantz or was it a Susan Brown book is in a doctor's office where medical reference books should be. This appears later in the movie. This film does not try to tackle whether the Iraqi war is right or wrong. It only asks the question as it shows viewers the aftermath of its impact on an individual level.

Don't believe anything more you hear from friends or the news, until you see this. This is a a a rare opportunity to truly commiserate with the US soldiers who have served in Iraq. It is the most responsible work of art in US cinema, I've seen in a long time. This is the reason I registered to do a review. This is a ten out of ten. It shows the soldiers difficulties in Iraq and at home dealing with their communities that don't really understand, yet think its enough to have a yellow ribbon sticker on their car. I'm recommending this very highly to the people who will never have to face these hardships and should be able to thank our soldiers for what they gave. Sometimes its their sanity, sometimes a limb, sometimes their life...

A better title would be "Home of the Made-for-TV Movie"--You'd have to be from the "home of the brave film critics" to sit trough this laundry list of post-traumatic syndrome clichés. Three Iraq veterans return to face a civilian world that doesn't understand and personal demons that won't let them forget the ungodly carnage they lived through. But nothing is new or unique, no dialogue is incisive, no action is memorable. The film does remind us about how unfair the whole Iraq invasion is to the soldier, who not only must suffer the damages to limb, life, and psyche but must also face a hostile electorate which carries little of the respect and patriotism that welcomed soldiers back from WWII. In this way, director Irwin Winkler achieved a success: He catalogued the suffering of the returning soldier, be he a surgeon experiencing the horror of failure to heal or a female grunt losing a hand and learning to live with the clumsiness. A work of art should be unique in some way, often in its vision of its subject. Home of the Brave says nothing new to a populace awaiting insights into a war that still makes no sense. In that regard both fictional soldiers and real audiences remain largely clueless about the Iraq dilemma. Perhaps President Bush could help—I don't think so.