Lone Survivor (2013) User Reviews

Lone Survivor - Brutal and touching piece

[Palidan400 · 8/10 · 21 November 2013]

Based on a true story - that is the most haunting part of this film. From the title and story itself, audiences already know what the inevitable ending will be, but through the determination of the four brothers, you can't help but hope for a change in their fates.

At its core, Lone Survivor is an American war film. The team members are heroes, the Taliban are enemies, and the heroes are able to fight on like in video games or movies. For the opening 40 minutes, it is a somewhat cheesy show of soldiers bravado and training, but it works. Incorporating real footage of the Navy Seals mixed with the actors lets viewers feel for the real life persons and their portrayed characters in the film. Soon after though, they are dropped into enemy territory on an operation to take out a Taliban leader. The mission goes awry when they encounter a small group of locals there, and they are faced with the decision of killing them and letting go. From here, the intensity begins to climb. What is the right thing to do? What would you do? Faced with that moral situation, they decide to cut them loose - soon after, Taliban forces are hot on their tail.

The next 40 minutes or so are an action-packed, non-stop brutal war scene. Tension builds as a scope lines up with an enemy head. The shot is fired, blood flies, and the chase begins. With an abundance of slow- mo shots, clear close-ups of kills and wounds, the excellent direction and cinematography provide a painful journey that makes you cringe or tear up the same as the four soldiers. And all of these men in the film play their roles greatly. Just listing them off - Walhberg tough as usual, Hirsch strong and vulnerable, Kitsch pulling off the difficult decisions as leader, and Foster frighteningly embodying cold but caring.

These forty minutes of intensity must be attributed to the whole team and crew though. Beyond the camera work and editing, much of the scenes work well because of the locations, the costuming, the painful makeup and design for all the wounds, the typical and tacky war-epic music. The writing and delivery of lines keep the pacing quick and engaging.

Regardless of the how the majority of the movie is taken, the conclusion of the film is a nice touch and shows - even with the bloody action and cheesiness - what the film's really about: giving the story of these men who served the country. Lone Survivor, while it can be perceived as more American propaganda, still gives a brutal yet touching look at this journey of four brothers through war. Yes, there were tears. RATING: [8/10]

Brutal and realistic, it opens eyes

[siderite · 8/10 · 1 January 2014]

If there is one thing that this film will accomplish is to make you feel something. I assure you you will not get bored watching it. Now, what you will feel will no doubt be up to you.

For myself, I felt mostly rage against a botched mission in an ineffective war. Raytheon should be annoyed that a movie about a mission failed primarily because of communication issues showed their red flashy brand on the comms equipment.

I wanted the characters to succeed, to survive, but I could not ignore the fact that they were soldiers being there only to kill an enemy commander. Having all Americans die in slow motion while scores of Taliban died instantly and kind of stupidly didn't help with the empathy. Also showing pictures of dead soldiers with their families with a pathetic American remake of Bowie's Heroes singing in the background at the end of the movie just fueled more rage. People in the field try to carry out their mission and survive, while their deaths become political and mediatic material. I didn't enjoy that.

On the other hand, the fights were realistic, the subject based on real events and, outside the pathetism described above, I did not detect a bias towards one side or the other. You will witness two hours of low tech war in all of its horror and stupidity. The actors also play well, although I like Mark Wahlberg in almost everything he does.

The story, while showing the preparation, courage and resilience of four soldiers in enemy territory, also showed other things, like the logistical blunders that lead to stupid deaths, over-reliance on technology that doesn't really work as you expect and how choices have consequences on the ground that are beyond the ability of normal courts to understand, whether looking from the legal or moral angle.

I liked a lot about the movie how it made you think long after it was over. What would have happened if they just killed the herders? What would have happened if they tied them up, went a bit down, risked a sniper shot at the enemy commander, then just ran? What would have happened if the Pashtuni would have ignored the wounded American or would have killed the Taliban scout force when they came to them? How would the mission have gone if the four guys would have known from the get go that they would be completely alone, with no support or hope for extraction?

Overall, a very emotional movie, two hours long, that shows more a general type of heroism than one with a specific purpose. Nicely directed and acted. A bit over dramatic, but then that's to be expected. Worth watching.

Pure intensity, action, death, and bravery

[secondtake · 7/10 · 22 October 2014]

Lone Survivor (2013)

A more-or-less accurate depiction of four highly capable SEAL soldiers dropped into enemy territory in Afghanistan. They were then discovered and attacked by dozens of area Taliban. The recreation is riveting, disturbing in its intensity, and eye-opening. Whatever you feel about the war there, or even about soldiers killing other soldiers, you end up admiring the sheer abilities of these fit, smart, determined men.

And only one survives (this is told in the title). So you go into it knowing it will end badly, and also that one of them (probably Mark Wahlberg, the biggest name here) will make it. If the fighting, which makes up most of the movie in the center core of it, is seemingly endless, that's part of the point. But when it shifts to a local village near the end the tale has another kind of intensity, and a welcome change.

This is straight up action material. It lacks even the layers that other movies with similar settings add (see "The Hurt Locker" for one example). But in a way that makes this distinctive. It moves in linear fashion through time, through the events, and so you barrel along without mental complication to the end. It forces everything on the action, and the realistic portrayal of the unbelievable hardship and pain, and death, that comes along the way.

Check out the overly-long Wikipedia page on this movie for lots of facts about production, and about the liberties they took with the facts. Or just watch the movie knowing that there are the usual permitted changes that dramatization requires. Even as pure fiction the movie has enough kinetic and heroic acts to succeed on its own terms.

Easily the best War Movie since "Saving Private Ryan" only an actual story.

[s-klose · 10/10 · 13 June 2014]

If you read the book and heard the interviews with the actual "lone survivor" you know that this movie got as close to the real events as possible. The 4 actors really gave it their all. Beginning long before shooting when they started their training so they would look realistic. This movie is also the most visceral experience since "Saving Private Ryan". There were falls in this movie that actually hurt more just watching than when I broke my foot 2 years ago. And in the making of you see that crazy stunt people actually did those falls, supposedly without dying. It's of course impossible to spoil this movie given it's title but it's important to note that the guy who helped him risked his whole village for "The Americans" Safety. And he didn't think twice about it. Sometimes we forget that not all of them are Taliban. After all is said and done this is a must see if there ever was one.

Tour de Force

[kosmasp · 9/10 · 8 August 2014]

The movie is not easy to watch. Right at the beginning you'll some training "videos" (more like footage) from the real people that are depicted in this movie. But it will be apparent a couple of moments later, that there is a lot of Death to follow. It's almost a case of what can go wrong will go wrong. And while there are a lot of other outcomes that this could've taken, decisions had been made, consequences had to be taken (upon).

What really gets you though are not some clichés about soldiers (and I think this stays as much as possible away from them), but the fact, that this feels as real as it can be, without you actually being in a war. Mark Wahlberg and the other actors have to go through a lot, when ... well you know what hits the fence. And it does hit pretty hard. Not for anyone squeamish, this is fraught with tension ...

Great story

[0U · 22 February 2020]

A truly brutal and gripping cinematic experience, Lone Survivor may be brazenly gung-ho and jingoistic, not to mention somewhat anti-climactic, but it delivers a metric tonne of thrills and contains one of the most intense and bloodiest gun fights I've ever seen in a film. It might stretch the suspension of disbelief a little too much at times, with our heroes surviving not 1 but fatal-looking cliff falls, but the excitement comes from the fact that it puts you right in the action, and you feel everything. Every bullet, every kick, every punch and every single thing the protagonist crash into. It's a bleak as Hell depiction of the savagery of war and just how strong the will to survive truly is. It's not a masterpiece, and many movies have been made with a more complex and compelling message on war, but for its sheer amount of heart-pounding action, scenes, it's definitely worth at least one watch.

Lies, Lies and More Lies

[TotallyNotBixy · 6/10 · 28 March 2021]

The whole movie is fiction, not a single bullet was fired from Marcus Luttrell, he was found with all 11 mags full of ammo, he abandoned his squad mates and fleed then lied and make money off the deaths of his fallen squadmates. Only one of them had combat experience.

A realistic high quality action flick with a lack of depth

[JaydoDre · 9/10 · 7 June 2014]

Holy sh*t......

You get so many action movies nowadays following familiar formulas that when you watch one of them you know that just when the good guy is about to get overcome by the enemy, the backup arrives and helps him. The formula desensitizes you.

But when a movie is based on a real story, the good guys sometimes do not come. They do not come in an hour; they do not come in a day; and if they come, they are not invincible. Real problems do not follow formulas. Real life is sobering in its beauty and its horror.

Lone Survivor does not have a very original or interesting premise for an action movie. A squad of US navy SEALs is dispatched on an assassination mission. Things do not go as planned.

However, the quality of the cinematography, solid acting and good action is what makes this such a great film.

Out of all the actors getting to play a part not one is bad. Not one fakes it. It feels that everyone is trying to do their best.

The film is also gorgeous. It didn't have to be. It is. The Afghanistan these guys are in is fake because the entire movie was shot in the United States, but it looks authentic and breathtaking.

The action is raw and graphic. Not in a guts-on-the-floor kind of way, but falling-down-a-cliff-side kind of way. Again, you can feel that the people have tried to do a good job. You know how just much they tried? Broken ribs and punctured lungs were involved in the making of this movie.

If there is one problem I have with the film is that it has a self-imposing limit to how big or interesting it can be. It is a story about one military operation and nothing else. No background stories for the characters, no side events, and barely any relationship development. I remember as a kid I was really fascinated by the military ops and wrote a story, as good as I could, about an imaginary mission. Even as I was writing it, I realised that it can never be truly interesting to read because the range of the story is too small. And this film is like that. What's worse, the title of this film gives away the ending. It is basically a giant spoiler.

But it is a testament to the movie's quality that, even though the movie gives almost no background information to the characters, it still managed to really make me care about them. Even with weights on its legs, the film still manages to make such an interesting run.

A Hollow War Film

[burger1124 · 6/10 · 31 January 2014]

Something just doesn't click with Peter Berg's Lone Survivor.

It seems empty, a hollow movie that should have been filled in with care and concern for its main characters. Instead, more time is devoted to combat sequences—which are admittedly well done—than to any sort of character development.

Lone Survivor tells the true story of Marcus Luttrell, the sole survivor of a failed Navy SEAL mission, "Operation Red Wings" in the mountains of Afghanistan in 2008. Mark Wahlberg plays Luttrell convincingly, but his character isn't given much to work with. He has no solid back story, so the audience can't really connect with a familial side of him. Instead, all we know of Marcus is his love for his fellow soldiers, and we can cheer him on as a leader and warrior.

Berg (who directed and co-wrote) takes his time getting to the actual battle, which comes as the result of a bungled covert surveillance/capture-or-kill mission. Luttrell and three other SEALs have their location given away and are soon surrounded by Taliban fighters. This is where Lone Survivor is at its best: the action sequences are well-staged, compelling, and easy to follow, despite a rapidly moving camera and tricky terrain. Once the action begins, it rarely lets up.

However, the film's first forty-five minutes or so are combat-free, and one would think Berg would invest this time into developing characters and making the audience really feel the sense that these men have something at home worth fighting for. However, he chooses to attempt this through forced dialog (one character explains to his significant other back home that he has to "make that money" or something of the sort) and rather bland situations. By the time the combat begins, we really only care about the bond forged between our four heroes, and we can only care as much as for anyone we just met a half hour before.

By titling the film Lone Survivor, we expect casualties. We know that only one man is making it out of this mission alive, and Berg could have framed the looming sense of dread a bit better. Instead, he prefers long, drawn-out deaths, which seem somewhat sadistic at times. I understand that war is all hell, and that in a real-life setting, there's no cut-away from the harsh brutalities of death. But one SEAL's death in particular seems like cinematic overkill. In other cases, Berg eschews the generally gritty look of the film for fog-filtered, picturesque, slow-motion deaths which come across as stagy and shallow.

Lone Survivor is a well-made war movie, albeit one without a clear message. It is a simple retelling of facts, too true to them at points and too dramatized at others. It is no Black Hawk Down, or even The Hurt Locker. Nonetheless, its actors turn in realistic performances in their depictions of soldiers (Ben Foster and Emile Hirsch are especially good) in a film that ultimately keeps its audience at arm's length from them, emotionally speaking.

The most powerful aspects of Lone Survivor are its bookend montages of footage of the real SEALs involved in Operation Red Wings. I wonder if it would have been a better decision to have simply produced a documentary with the real Marcus Luttrell chronicling his amazing journey. It may have paid better tribute to the brave men involved in the battle than Peter Berg's Lone Survivor.

Good, but not great.

[851222 · 8/10 · 24 March 2014]

Greetings from Lithuania.

I read some reviews about "Lone Survivor" where it was mentioned alongside to a "Saving Private Ryan" - you can throw a rock at me if this comes close to "Saving Private Ryan" which is beyond many moons and seas compared to "Lone Survivor".

"Lone Survivor" is good action movie, with some heroic stuff (they definitely couldn't avoid that...), and i know that it's based on real events, thats why i'm giving it 8, because many of things displayed in picture were sadly true, many, but definitely not all. When someone is being killed in this movie (exept for bad guys from Taliban), it's shown in a similar way as Jim Caviezel aka.Jesus was suffering in "The Passion of the Christ" - only true American heroes die like that, not afghans who are more or less just a meat between bullets and Americans in this movie.

Overall, i liked this action picture, the sound design and sound editing were really top notch (no wonder it got 2 Oscar nominations) - you can hear every detail in the forest, every breaking bone (ye, the fall from cliffs scene was gripping). Actors were just OK, nothing special. The gunfight was terrific at least in the beginning of battle, truly terrific sound design and camera work. Later, well, when bad guys were shooting with RPG's every 2 min to our heroes, and they were suffering real good but still were able to do some heroic stuff, the tension was kinda lost.

Overall, 8/10 for me because of good production values and for that it is based on real events.

Bravo Two Zero - Big budget US remake

[kevinmorice · 6/10 · 8 February 2014]

It is very big, and full of pretty American movie stars with bad beards, but it is just a remake of Bravo Two Zero. Right down to them getting spotted by a goatherd and arguing about their options, and then still not coming up with the more obvious ones.

Try:

Option 4. Cuff them together before you let them go. Still safe for them but means they take much longer to get help.

Option 5. Take them with you for an hour before you let them go. That means you are 3 hours further away by the time they raise the alarm.

From there it all gets a bit Hollywood. I can ignore the seemingly infinite ammunition, because at least you see them changing magazines, it just seems they are carrying about 20 magazines each. Every time a taliban gets shot by an American, it is instantly fatal. Every time an American gets shot, or blown up, or hit by shrapnel or falls down a 50 foot cliff into a tree/rock, he just gets up and carries on as if nothing happened. One of them even gets shot in the head and carries on! This gets even more ridiculous near the end when this skill becomes transferable to the helpful Afghani, who is able to win a fist fight with the taliban leader despite being shot in the arm.

An emotional powerhouse film

[trublu215 · 10/10 · 9 January 2014]

Lone Survivor depicts the failed Operation Red Wings mission in 2005 in which 18 members of the US Armed Forces were killed in action. The film delivers a heavy handed patriotic look inside what happened during those fateful hours. Right off the bat, the film starts with honoring the men and women who serve the United States in the military via a very powerful, if not, melodramatic montage. We then are introduced to Navy SEALs, Marcus, Mike, Axe, and Danny, all played brilliantly by Mark Wahlberg, Taylor Kitsch, Emile Hirsch, and Ben Foster. The actors in this film exude the necessary chemistry for the audience to really feel these characters as not just characters in the film, but in real life as well. From Wahlberg to Foster, all four leads play their roles very carefully and it pays off especially when we see each of them in peril. With such a connection made in the first slow building hour, we are then dropped into a forty five minute, pulse pounding shootout between a huge Taliban force and four trained Navy SEALs. As the title suggest, the shootout does not end pretty and never even comes close to sugar coating the brutal nature of war. The entire shootout sequence is filled with hard edged moments of brutality, gore and truly gut wrenching scenes. It is by far one of the most heart racing moments in recent cinema and considering the end results, it is very heart wrenching that by the end of it, you feel as if the wind has been knocked out of you. By the end of the film, Lone Survivor makes you really appreciate the freedom you have, a feat that has not yet been achieved in film up until now. This film is as good as Black Hawk Down and Saving Private Ryan, it is absolutely worth seeing on the big screen and I highly recommend it.

Realistic, but ...

[tajenli · 7/10 · 12 April 2017]

Is this based on a true story? If yes, then I think the 4 mariners are purely insane. Info is the key in a war. If you don't want to kill those non-armed people and let them go free. At least leave their hands tied up. Make a little cut on their legs so they can only walk slowly. Or simply throw away their shoes. Why you put yourselves in such a trouble!?

Well meaning but self-conscious post-9/11 war film

[Kurtz9791 · 5/10 · 22 January 2014]

I really don't wish to offend anyone with this, but whenever you have a film like "Lone Survivor" that resonates so strongly with the movie going public, it's easy to be labeled a certain way if you don't follow the film's attitude. I respect director Peter Berg's intentions; he wanted to make a film about this group of soldiers performing their duty, what they are trained to do and what so few are capable of, and the consequences of that job. However, I feel like real life soldiers are more humble than this film is subtle.

The film's opening credits feature archive footage of actual Navy SEAL training rituals, which enables the first portion of the film to feel like an extended commercial for the branch, only with movie stars. I wasn't surprised afterward to discover that Berg and his team were given unprecedented access to military resources while making the movie. You have clichéd narration by Mark Wahlberg in the beginning along with some pretty cheesy opening segments that establish our characters. Despite the star power, Ben Foster is the only one that comes off with a lived-in presence, mainly due to his acting ability with not much help from the narrowly minded patriotic script. Once the four man team lands for their mission in the Afghan mountains, the film gets slightly better.

"Lone Survivor" doesn't attempt to answer any big questions, like, what were the soldiers doing there in the first place, or why is the longest war in American history a failure? However, you can't fault the film for this; that is not its aim. Instead, Berg and company boldly attempt to show what it is like to be a Navy SEAL in the field. He creates a visceral portrait that at times really puts you in their shoes and can be hard to watch. There are two separate sequences of the soldiers literally falling off a cliff that made me wince multiple times. But these battle scenes are undermined by too much shaky hand-held camera shots with quick cuts and zooms that can make it hard to understand what's going on.

My biggest problem with the film is the post-rock band Explosions in the Sky doing the musical score. Their instrumental, contemplative and profound music is at odds with the gritty approach the filmmakers take, giving the action a sentimental and over-the-top quality. You only need a few slow motion sequences with their music to understand why people are so taken by the film. Berg used the band to score his 2004 film "Friday Night Lights", which with their score, made high school football look like a matter of life and death. Here, it can almost be played for laughs.

At the end of the day, "Lone Survivor" comes off more like "Act of Valor" in an extended celebration of the branch it depicts, rather than the cold, clinical and procedural approach of a film like "Zero Dark Thirty". The final act of the story is very different from the real life event. My theater erupted in applause when the Taliban villain who loves to behead people gets killed. In real life, there was no such threat on our main character's life once he was taken in by the villagers. With exaggerations like these, and lines like, "You can die for your country, I'm gonna live for mine," the film really doesn't do a good job at being anything other than a feel good and proud patriotic product. And don't get me started on the closing credits, with Peter Gabriel's slow and over-the-top rendition of David Bowie's song "Heroes". Not that there's anything wrong with such a film, but let's not pretend that this is the greatest war film ever made.

Accurate, schmaccurate

[amatrimonials · 10/10 · 29 March 2014]

Some have cast doubts on the verisimilitude of parts of this picture. Of course, those who impugn whether some events really happened or whether they happened the way they are depicted in the movie neither underwent the kind of training Navy S.E.A.Ls do nor did they ever find themselves in circumstances remotely approaching those of the four comrades. We do not know what punishment the human body is truly capable of withstanding until we are put to an extreme test, gods forbid.

All I can say is that, regardless of whether this movie is accurate 100%, 0% or anything in between, it brought me to tears. I can honestly not remember the last time a Hollywood movie did that.

Very moving, very poignant, very touching. For that alone, as well as for keeping me riveted for the whole of two hours (which is quite a feat given my cynical and jaded nature), it deserves unalloyed plaudits.

Lone Survivor- A Brutally Authentic and Nonpartisan Portrayal of the War Time Experience Told Through Peter Berg's Respectful Direction and Honest Screenplay

[generationfilm · 8/10 · 15 November 2013]

An undeniable aspect of war, whether or not you make rationalizations on its regrettable purpose or demonize its existence entirely, is that it's an utter hell that tries the mentality and physicality of the courageous men and women who fight in the conflict. Most war films have captured the hellish and nonsensical brutality of war through challenging cinematic portraits, either through the allegorical heart of darkness showcased in Francis Ford Coppola's Apocalypse Now, the apathetic political influences in Stanley Kubrick's Paths of Glory, and even in cinema's first triumphant reflections with the adaptation of All Quiet on the Western Front. But while all wars impact people there aren't enough films that showcase true examples of wartime heroism which neglects a chance to embrace the humanity in the soldiers who are put into these tumultuous and life threatening circumstances. This is where Peter Berg's ominously titled latest film Lone Survivor differs from the a vast majority of the war film experience because rather than postulating on the reasons or criticisms for war it only seeks to depict the strong links of brotherhood involved in our armed forces ranks through an effective nonpartisan slant. Returning to his attention to detail roots showcased in The Kingdom and leaving behind an unfortunate deviation into the ridiculous with Battleship, Berg has concocted a relatively solid film in Lone Survivor that follows the real life events that happened in 2005 to Navy SEAL Mark Luttrell and his team in the Afghanistan Mountains when a secret operation is compromised. Though the film could have had deeper character development and interaction in the first quarter of the film, an aspect that slightly detriments the overall impact of the picture, its solid and intimate middle core of brutally authentic wartime conflict captured in real time is a technically astounding, emotionally engaging, and definite pulse pounding experience. To the film's creative credit in staying true to the events that transpired it demonstrates that the relentless pummeling of war doesn't always come with the Hollywood convention that is graceful relief giving the film a true experience of modern warfare. Lone Survivor might have its storytelling flaws, mainly due to a conventional structure and some fairly assumed character involvement, but when it erupts into the focused intimacy of soldier bonding amidst the chaotic brutality of battle in the middle of the film it becomes a relatively involving homage to the relentless dedication of spirit within our soldiers.

More on this review: http://wp.me/py8op-Cx; Other reviews: generationfilm.net

A Mere Propaganda Film. Nothing More. Nothing Less.

[CinemaClown · 15 January 2014]

Based on the nonfiction book of the same name & set during the War in Afghanistan, Lone Survivor tries to recreate the US Navy SEALs' Operation Red Wings, a failed mission in which a survey team of 4 soldiers were tasked to locate the Taliban leader, Ahmad Shah. And even though it impresses in parts & has a lot in it to evoke the patriotic response from its target audience (which is American viewers obviously), Lone Survivor ends up going completely overboard in dramatizing the true events & suffers from the very clichés that most films of its genre find themselves trapped in.

What's right with this film is Peter Berg's dynamic direction, tense atmosphere, superb pacing, intense battle sequences, precision use of sound, music & relatively fine performances from its star cast who were actually capable of delivering more than what ended up being in the final print. What's wrong with it, however, is its lack of emotional depth or character development, sometimes going overly dramatic than required and too much reliance on action to push its story forward which ultimately crosses the fine line between exploration & exploitation to revel in the latter.

On an overall scale, Lone Survivor has nothing new to offer compared to what other films of this genre have already given us so far. Yes, it's brutal. Yes, it looks realistic to some extent. Yes, the battle sequences are disturbing, graphic &, in my opinion, explosively entertaining as well. But, there is also no denying that its characters remain hollow throughout its runtime, the story or characters aren't explored enough for us to invest our emotions in & all in all, this war drama is nothing less or more than a mere propaganda film, unfortunately.

Hard to call this the next Saving Private Ryan in the previews

[allenspark · 6/10 · 10 January 2014]

The expectations where set to high with that line, it's a good film, great acting. I read the book prior to seeing the move, perhaps that was my biggest problem with this show. More character development would have made the movie more interesting. Narrative dialog would have helped fill in the blanks. The movie see end like a long 2 hour action sequence. There is more to operation read wings then was described here. This story could have been in the same class as Saving Private Ryan but it had none of the elements that made that show great. The action scenes where fantastic. The realism was top notch. The acting was a 10 star performance. The story was empty.

Brutal and Realistic

[Floated2 · 8/10 · 7 January 2015]

As many war films have surfaced along the years, Lone Survivor is one of the better depictions of true events. Lone Survivor stands as an outstanding account of bravery and comradeship under fire, with acts of selflessness abounding. And director Berg (Friday Night Lights) could not have presented it more humanistically, or with more compassion for those who gave their lives on a mission that was doomed from the start. As it observes one of the four SEALS originally dropped onto Sawtalo Sar, the rugged mountain near Asadabad where insurgent leader Ahmad Shah was believed to be commanding a large band of Taliban fighters. "No curse," Luttrell replies, "just Afghanistan." But cursed they were, as Luttrell (Mark Wahlberg) and fellow SEALs Danny Dietz (Emile Hirsch), Matthew Axelson (Ben Foster) and their leader, Michael Murphy (Taylor Kitsch), encounter nothing but horrible luck after confirming Shah's presence. As a rewatch 06/18/20' this film remains an entertaining and thought provoking true based war drama. Lone Survivor is up there with Patriots Day among Peter Berg's top films.

What Are We Doing in Afghanistan?

[Danusha_Goska · 6/10 · 12 January 2014]

"Lone Survivor" is a brutal, graphic, combat movie. It depicts US Navy SEALs fighting against Taliban in Afghanistan in 2007. It is based on Marcus Luttrell's book of the same title. There is very little plot. The movie opens with scenes of Navy SEALs undergoing rigorous training. Trainees are shown lying down under oncoming ocean waves, being dunked in water so that they cannot breathe, doing pushups, etc.

After this brief segment, the film sets up each SEAL team member. They are shown to be lovable guys who have families back home whom they cherish and who cherish them. One SEAL wants to buy his fiancée an Arabian horse. Another is concerned about his wife's redecorating in a color called "honeydew." Given Marcus Luttrell's fame and the title of the movie, most people will know how this movie ends. That knowledge gives these scenes that much more poignancy, but also a sense of the director manipulating the audience. We know what's coming, and we know why the director included these scenes.

The SEALs are assigned to assassinate Taliban commander Ahmad Shah. They are shown with all their gear, penetrating a steep mountain covered with pines and strewn with boulders. They see their target, and are ready to carry out their mission. They are discovered by three Afghan goat herders. They consider killing the goat herders, but Luttrell advises against it. If they kill the goat herders, they will be condemned on CNN as bestial Americans who assassinate Afghan civilians. Immediately after the soldiers release the goat herders, the goat herders inform the Taliban of their location. They Taliban quickly surround, outnumber, and begin firing on the four SEALs.

The firefight is depicted in graphic, brutal, realistic images. A SEAL is shown aiming his weapon, firing, and a Taliban's turbaned head explodes into a squirting fountain of red liquid. Bullets penetrate flesh and blood and gore ooze out. This gunfight is lengthy and tense. I have to ask how it will affect viewers. Will viewers want to get a gun and make someone's head explode? Yes, our media is saturated with violence. Is that a good thing? Have we given up even asking this question?

The film never addresses the larger questions at play, and by not addressing them, they become all the louder. What are we doing in Afghanistan? How do we win in Afghanistan? Are we wasting the lives of fine, patriotic Americans and other allied men and women in uniform? Not to mention the polio workers, doctors and other aid workers the Taliban murders in Afghanistan?

How about the rules of engagement? If we are at war in Afghanistan, then why aren't we acting as if we are at war? Should the goat herders not have been immediately killed, thus possibly saving many soldiers' lives and leading to a successful mission – the death or capture of Ahmad Shah? If soldiers are forced to conduct a war while wearing kid gloves, how can they be expected to win? What if we had imposed these rules of engagement on our soldiers during WW II? Would they have been able to win that war? Would the swastika not still be flying in Europe as we engaged in endless talks with our "partners for peace"?

Again, none of this is discussed in the film, making the discussion all the louder inside the viewer's head. In fact there was some controversy when CNN's Jake Tapper asked Marcus Luttrell about the "Senseless" deaths depicted in the film. Marcus Luttrell asserted that no, the deaths depicted in the film were not senseless. Americans are asking this, though. What are we doing in Afghanistan?

A movie that will be SEAL-d in your Minds for a long long time

[arjepoch22 · 10/10 · 7 January 2014]

First things first, all those other commercial movies have some learning to do , Although this might make some business, at least Peter Berg , justifies the characters with utmost respect .

This movie makes you live the atrocious week in the life of Chosen SEAL members , You think along with them , when they have to make the toughest decision which will eventually decide whether they live / die.

As Marcus mentioned in one of the interviews , Sitting in front of a screen , enjoying the pleasures of life, its easier to comment on what had to be done, But what these guys did, is just IMPOSSIBLE,

F*** everything else, these guys are Real Heroes, I wish I could shake hands with Marcus just once in my lifetime, ( I am from India BTW ) ,

Do not miss this one , this movie moved me .

Solid, effective war drama

[adamonIMDb · 7/10 · 22 July 2017]

'Lone Survivor' provides an accurate and effective portrayal of a group of soldiers on a mission to kill the leader of the Taliban. It makes for fascinating and, as you would expect, highly suspenseful viewing. The stripped back approach works to the films benefit, with the minimalistic editing and special effects contributing to the film's raw and real feeling.

Mark Wahlberg suits his character well and delivers a solid performance throughout, though I do think so more character development was necessary as very little is known of any of the characters we follow in the film. Having said that, 'Lone Survivor' is successful in doing what it sets out to do - telling a fascinating true story in the most accurate and effective way.

As a seal, there is no such thing as an easy day. You got to be ready to lead, ready to follow, and never quit. Lone Survivor shows that. You're never out of the fight.

[ironhorse_iv · 8/10 · 2 August 2015]

Based on true event, Lone Survivor dramatizes a United States Navy SEALs counter-insurgent mission call "Operation Red Wings", during the Afghanistan War. Set in 2005, the team of four Navy SEAL, was task to take out a high-ranking Taliban leader, who is hiding somewhere in an Afghanistan mountain range. Unfortunately for the members of Seals Team 10 -- Lieutenant Michael P. Murphy (Taylor Kitsch), Marcus Luttrell (Mark Wahlberg), Matthew Axelson (Ben Foster), and Danny Dietz (Emile Hirsch), the mission turn sour, as the team are left to fight on their own, in one of the most brutal last stand battles in the history of modern warfare. Without spoiling the movie too much, I have to say, this movie will make some people, feel the patriotism, sacrifice, and heart the soldiers display incredibly moving; while others might feel, concerned that war and the military appears in this film, is too positive a light, and might come off like a recruitment movie. I can understand, where these people are coming from. While, I like the film, it does seem, like a powerful enlistment video. The film starts off with some cool intense Navy SEAL training footage, follow up, with a powerful Warrior Creed scene and then, a lot of badass, purely visceral, gut- pounding visceral action. If the fully immersive action wasn't enough, the movie ends it off, with over-dramatic martyrdom deaths. While, it feels shallow propaganda. In my opinion, the movie wasn't too jingoistic or overly patriotic. The movie made it very clear that there were some really bad people in Afghanistan that had to be stopped. Still, it does question and criticize the war for its failures, without painting the American soldiers in a bad-light. Director Peter Berg manages, so well to avoid high-minded moral debate of the war, while still respecting the source material, 'Lone Survivor' by author Marcus Luttrell. While, the movie is mostly historic accurate, there were a number of historical inaccuracies in the film that have to be noted. While, I'll not here to name all of them; some of the big ones, were, how the film deviates from Marcus Luttrell's account of the voting decision, his account to his injuries, and finally how certain characters die. The one decision, that bug me, is how they changed, how long, the fire fight lasted. In real life, the fire fight Marcus Luttrell and company engaged in with the Taliban for five days compared to the three depicted here. Another thing, the whole scene where the Pashtun villagers fight off a Taliban attack in a firefight, never actually happened. So, I don't know, why they added it. I think the movie had enough action. Peter Berg manage to film, those scenes, very well. I like that he avoids too much camera- shaking in his depictions of the bloody battle. He builds adrenaline without tipping too far into either extreme gore or shock value. The movie pacing needs some work. The movie starts out, very slow, but toward the end, it does pick up. One thing, that I kinda hate about the film is, how predictable, it is. The movie kinda spoils, who the Last Survivor is, with the opening shot. Despite that, the movie does work. The ending is genuinely touching, and genuinely earned. You can't look away, when the photos of the real participants, are shown. Still, I wish the movie more concerned with telling us who these fallen heroes really were, rather than, focusing too much on the military-style action scenes. Yes, the movie did show, some character development, during the beginning, but it was far too little to remember. It's even harder to tell the men, apart, when they look nearly the same; all of them, having bushy facial hair, and all, being in the same height range. Still, I have to give the actors, some credit. The acting was pretty alright. Mark Wahlberg as the lead, was somewhat there, playing a Texan. I just wish, Mark Wahlberg at least, try to do a southern accent. His signature Boston accent was getting a little too silly, at times. The whole yelling scene with the grenade is prove of that. The supporting actors were decent. By far, this is Taylor Kitsch's best role, as of yet. I love Emile Hirsch and Ben Foster, but I wish, there were more scenes with them. I like that the actors build genuine chemistry and warmth with each other. They really do, seem like brothers. Before filming began, the cast also underwent training from real Navy SEALs. They really did look the part. I really believe, they were soldiers. Still, I love the movie for using actual military veterans were used in the film to fulfill extra and acting roles. Even the real-life Marcus Luttrell got a cameo in the film. Overall: This powerhouse movie does have flaws, but it's still a smart, yet brutal intense film that need to be seen. So check it out, when you can!

Patriotic entertainment

[smactavish83 · 7/10 · 11 December 2013]

Movies should entertain, enlighten, or inspire. "Lone Survivor" does all three in measured doses. Special Forces (including Delta, Green Beret, UDT, LRRP et.al.) soldiers form a bond far stronger than even marriage-check. UDT Training is SO intense, many recruits actually have to be revived from near death-check. Special Ops must follow ROE, and not kill unless in imminent danger- check. Not ALL Afghans are bad-check. When surrounded, Navy Seals kill a lot of enemies-check. Not much new there. Gut-wrenching suspense- check. Lots of big explosions, check, check, CHECK! Entertaining-yes!

That the actors and director wanted this movie SO MUCH many took a pay cut to do so explains why it was made in the first place, when there have been so many similar films with more compelling story lines in recent years. I liked it, but I liked Back Hawn Down, and Zero Dark Thirty far more.

Lone Survivor entertains at an 8, enlightens at a 5, and inspires at a level that depends solely upon your individual patriotism. Wrap yourself in Old Glory and give it a 10, if you like.

Heavy Action Like a Sgt. Rock Comic Book - wait for cable

[HardToFindMovies · 4/10 · 12 January 2014]

I have already seen Lone Survivor and it was not to my liking unfortunately. I feel the film is completely absurd with 4 Americans shooting and killing about 100 Taliban who continue to attack in waves and are slaughtered while the Americans spend about half the film rolling down a mountain and slamming into rocks and trees...the film is based on a false premise of killing 3 goat herders or releasing them...the actual answer is you hold on to them until the exact moment you get safely into the rescue copter and then you let them go. If you have to march miles and miles you take the goat herders with you. If you can't march them any further you tie them to a tree. In addition, the 4 Americans hunker down on a mountain top and don't appear to have any clay-more mines with tripwires. These are normally set up around the perimeter of an area where Americans are hunkered down. The Americans also went into a combat mission with crappy phones...since their cellphones suck it makes the rest of their fancy equipment and diagram drawing of targets seem silly and pointless. The dialog in this film is poorly written but the acting in and of itself is decent with the best work done by Ben Foster. Mark Wahlberg plays it straight and does not try and over-act and gives a good performance overall. In this movie, the Taliban are brainless and have no problem with losing dozens of seasoned fighters in order to try and kill 3-4 Americans. This is a film where every single time the Americans fire a bullet there is a Taliban going down in a large blood splatter and it seems like it takes about 300 Taliban bullets to kill a single American. Yeah right. This film is a propaganda recruitment film for the US military which in and of itself is not such a bad thing. To be clear the US military is filled with heroes fighting for America's freedom everyday....but this film is more like a Sgt. Rock comic book....you have been warned...now go see the film and write your own review!