But if he did order the massacre then the things he'd been through must have been progressively leading him to this time and place, but we don't see any of that in the film beyond a short dialogue about him having frightening dreams. The marines took it upon themselves to throw grenades and fire indiscriminately into the rooms. For example, in the film Ramirez didn't order the executions - he ordered his teams to clear the houses which is a normal action when in contact with insurgents. However, the continuity and story left a lot to be desired. I can't fault the acting and I think this is the only thing which saves this film. I assume these were errors because if they reflect the current tactics and drills of the US Marines then the quality has really deteriorated seriously since I served alongside them in Vietnam. And as for anyone standing directly in front of a metal gate and firing a burst into the lock in order to gain entrance, well if he hadn't shot himself or his team with ricochets the first time he did it he certainly would have on subsequent occasions. 50 Cal machine guns that are never loaded, the extras who appear at the IED site with weapons but no webbing, the Humvees parked in nice little rows along the side of the road with no protection, armour or weapons. But the following were the most obvious and, for all serving and former military personnel, quite laughable: The casual way the soldiers patrolled both in vehicles and on foot, the. I won't list all of the technical errors I spotted because after a career in the military which spans more than 40 years and three major conflicts I spotted quite a lot. On top of this, the suddenness of the atrocity which I assume was the core of the film, beggars belief. The way the story was presented made it unbelievable and for a war film there were way too many technical errors to believe the director even consulted the military before or during filming. I'm afraid I can't agree with all the gushing praise being heaped onto this film.
0 kommentar(er)
