“Courage
Under Fire” is a film by Edward Zwick (“Glory”) that uses a “Rashoman”
structure to explore the fog of war, friendly fire, and post-traumatic stress
disorder. The movie reteams Zwick with
his “Glory” star, Denzel Washington. The
script is by Patrick Sheane Duncan (“84 Charlie Mopic”). It was released in 1996 and is one of two
major motion pictures that are set in the Persian Gulf War. The other being “Three Kings”. Both films are what I simply call “modern war
movies”.
Serling: "Get some!" |
Washington plays Lt. Col. Nathan
Serling. Serling is suffering from PTSD
due to a friendly fire incident during the Persian Gulf War. While leading a tank assault on the opening
night of the ground war (with burning oil wells in the background), he fires on
a tank commanded by his friend Capt. Boylar.
The Army awards him a Silver Star for that night and covers up the
incident. He is put in a desk job, but he
is haunted by the accident. He is
drinking and is separated from his family.
His commanding officer Brigadier General Hershberg (Michael
Moriarity) gives him an assignment to
help him recover. He is to investigate
the possible awarding of the Medal of Honor to a female soldier. The Army expects him to give the green light
to this publicity bonanza, but Capt. Karen Walden’s (Meg Ryan) story is
complicated.
"Don't shoot till you see the men" |
The official story is Walden
flew her medevac Huey to rescue a downed Black Hawk crew. Taking fire from an Iraqi tank, Walden’s crew
dropped a fuel cell on the tank and set it afire with a flare gun. They still went down, however. One of the crew (Rady) was badly
wounded. They held out under fire
through the night. The next day they
were rescued, but Walden was killed and left behind. She’s a heroine, right? Or was she actually a typically cowardly
female?
the brave version of Ilario |
Cobras versus Iraqis. Spoiler alert: we kick ass! |
Herschberg pressures Serling to
issue a rubber-stamped report. When he
refuses, he is taken off the case. Would
you believe he decides to pursue the truth on his own? (You’ve seen movies before, haven’t
you?) He is aided by, you guessed it, an
investigative reporter named Gardner (Scott Glenn) who is actually
investigating the friendly fire incident.
The subplots intersect.
I won’t give away the rest. There are some interesting twists. We get to see what actually happened in
reenactments of both the Walden scenario and the Serling friendly fire incident. Everything is tied up in a nice, tearjerking
ball.
This is a multi-layered
movie. It juggles several themes and two
major plots. The themes include: shit happens in war (friendly fire), the
military likes to cover up shit that happened, the authorities want heroes (or
heroines) for the masses, PTSD can effect even the strongest
personalities. The plots of Serling
dealing with his trauma and investigating the Walden case weave together
effectively. Duncan’s script is
strong. There are some cool twists. The “Rashoman” elements are well done and
entertaining. It is not obvious which
recreations are the truth It gets a bit
hammy in the end, but remember this film was made for a mass audience, not for
hard core war movie nuts. It is not a
cynical movie. This is part of what I
mean by a “modern war movie”.
Monfriez: "Say you hate women soldiers" |
The movie is technically
sound. The cinematography is
outstanding. The combat scenes are
visceral, if a little too pristine. The
soundtrack is restrained and does not push emotional buttons too much. The acting is top notch. No surprise that Washington is amazing. He does tormented like no other. His scenes with his wife (Regina Taylor) are
powerful. She holds her own, by the way. If you want to see a master at work, watch
his visit to Boylar’s parents to tell them the truth about their son’s
death. The rest of the cast is
excellent. You can see Damon’s promise
as he portrays the drug-addled Ilario.
He lost forty pounds for the later scenes. An example of method acting that damaged his
health for a while. Phillips is
surprisingly good as the macho Monfriez.
He gets a great death. Moriarity
portrays the general as compassionate, but part of the establishment. Glenn is appropriately rumpled as the news
hound. Kudos must go to Ryan. She has to play too totally different
characters in the flashbacks. She pulls
it off without looking silly. No small
feat.
a Centurion playing an Abrams |
As far as accuracy, the movie is
not based on a true story. You can see a
seed of inspiration from the incident in the Battle of Mogadishu ("Black Hawk Down") involving the snipers
(Shughart and Gordon) that rescued Durant.
But, intentionally or not, I found the tale of Jessica Lynch to be
another possible inspiration. Lynch was
captured during the war and the early press reports had her as a female
warrior. The truth turned out to be a
lot tamer and less heroine-worthy. The
movie is a bit unrealistic on two accounts.
The tank tactics in the friendly fire incident has the M1A1 Abrams
(actually disguised British Centurions due to DOD withdrawal of support for the
film) virtually hub-to-hub in formation.
This isn’t the Napoleonic Wars, Zwick.
The medevac Huey is too well-armed for a chopper with a red cross on
it. These dudes were hardly
noncombatants, but the movie does not make the case that the tank should not
have fired on them and I can see where medevac crews might arm themselves
beyond the Geneva Convention rules. The
dropping of the fuel cell is clearly ridiculous, but Hollywood has to have its
explosions.
“Courage Under Fire” got some
love from the critics and did acceptable box office, but I am obviously a
bigger fan than most. I have read
criticism of the conclusion, in particular.
However, if a movie can draw a tear from me, I’ll man up to it and say
kudos. Any other criticism of the plot
is perplexing. Some of it may be critics
being critics and not reacting well to anyone attempting to copy
“Rashoman”. Boy, are they protective of
those classics! But since most people
don’t have a clue about “Rashoman”, chill out.
Sadly (and shamefully) I read a
review by a war movie expert who I respect and he disliked the movie partly
because he could not see a female soldier behaving bravely in combat. That is bull shit! Let’s face it, it may be against the law, but
we have had females in combat since the Gulf War. It’s just the nature of the “war with no
front lines” that we have faced in Iraq and Afghanistan (and future
locales). I have read nothing to
indicate that our female soldiers have become sniveling cowards when the
bullets are flying around. The Walden
character is believeable and in the not too distant future we will have our
first female Medal of Honor awardee for combat action. You go, girls!
grade = A
Since I wrote this review, the Pentagon has announced plans to allow females to become combatants beyond fighter pilots. Looks like we will see that female Medal of Honor winner sooner than I expected.