4/10
Disconnected by the use of fake sound effects and cheap thrills
28 November 2014
I would have to wholeheartedly agree with the most popular reviews here such as "tmiller163" and "jmcfrancis." The entire story feels very contrived and almost like I am watching those ubiquitous reality TV shows most Americans can't get enough of.

Being an avid combat-footage junkie, I would say I have a pretty good idea of what to expect when it comes to watching an authentic firefight. I know what a whizzing bullet would sound like, and ESPECIALLY what one wouldn't sound like. In this film, I was completely disconnected from any verisimilitude by the use of cheap bullet sound effects. The whole thing seemed forcefully done for the purpose of sensationalism.

It even felt as if Mike was in on the hype by using cheap editing tricks to make certain shots seem WAY more dramatic than they actually were. Again, I felt like I was watching "World's Wildest Firefights Caught on Camera" instead of genuine raw combat footage. Which is a shame because the real story here should've focused on the soldiers and the high price they pay fighting America's wars.

I didn't dislike the film entirely, the last 20 minutes made up for what the film was lacking in.

But if you guys really want to see what The War in Afghanistan looks like, I would stick to films such as "Restrepo" or "Armadillo." No cheap sound-effects used there, just pure-unadulterated storytelling.
14 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed