|
Based on actual events that took place in Mogadishu, Somalia in October 1993, the film depicts a
Vietnamlike debacle suffered by U.S. soldiers. As a result of this tragic incident, President Bill Clinton withdrew the U.S. humanitarian mission to Somalia where hundreds of
thousands were dying of starvation.
The U.S. contingent is in Somalia to help the United Nations deliver food supplies, but these hardly reach
the people. The most powerful renegade warlord, Mohammed Farrah Aidid forcibly takes the food. When U.S. General William Garrison (Sam Shepard) gets an intelligence report on
the forthcoming meeting of Aidid's lieutenants, he decides to conduct a raid to capture them all. The plan sounds simple. However, the opposition turns out to be better armed
and positioned. The place being Aidid's stronghold, the Americans are quickly surrounded; a support convoy cannot reach them because of road blocks. Their helicopters ("Black
Hawk") are shot down by rockets. In this war of attrition, would the superior training of the U.S. forces help them defend their desperate position?
Told from the point of view of the soldiers in the frontlines, the film graphically shows the
horror and ugliness of war. The fine script of Nolan and Zaillian based on the book by Mark Bowden, tells the story so efficiently that the viewer is brought right in the
middle of the firefights and almost experiences the fear, the deprivations, the suffering and the pain of the soldiers. The film does not glamorize war for there are no heroic
forefront figures. The leading characters, though played by known stars like Josh Harnett, Ewan McGregor and Tom Sizemore, are hard to tell apart. Ensemble acting is good. It
has no love interest, no romance, and no sex. Neither does the movie pander to the audience through sentimentality. It is a straightforward action picture. Whenever the
fighting degenerates into chaos, Ridley Scott's fine directing makes the movie comprehensible. The dialogue is not clear but the visuals (with the ground shots interspersed
with the aerial images) are effective. The dull gray, dusty, drab and dark cinematography contributes to the grimness of the situation depicted.
This is a story of courage and heroism in the face of insurmountable odds. Unlike other war pictures which
trivialize war experiences for entertainment, this movie arouses our sympathy for, and understanding of, combat troops. It also makes us verbalize some questions. Since we
sometimes send our soldiers, social workers or medical personnel as peacekeeping forces or on humanitarian missions to war zones, are we not exposing them to too much danger?
Are enough measures taken for their safety? Are their functions clearly delineated so that they do not overstep the mark yet remain efficient? Answers may be important because
cultural values differ in different countries or in regions of the same country, and well meaning efforts could be misconstrued.
(Date reviewed: February 1, 2002)
|
