I watched this movie thinking this would be an action war movie, between 2 different factions of the USA, but ultimately it is mostly a character driven movie and somehow i found it simply ... boring.
I am not really well in the known when it comes to war journalism but i found it kinda weird civilians would be allowed so close to the battleground, sometimes litterally following the soldier. Looks like a diaster waiting to happen in my opinion.
Even tough they use the pictures in a stylish way in the movie, i kinda fail to understand why so much pictures would be important or worth the risk instead of using actual video cameras. The movie in my opinion has 2 major issues.
The first one is i didn't really care much for the characters or what could happen to them. Kirsten Dunst character feel so wooden and inexpressive. Its part of the character trait i guess (she saw it all so it does not affect her anymore) but it just made for an uninteresting character. Neither of the other ones really catched my eyes either.
Then there is the fact that you never been given much background on why this war is going on. Who are the "good guys" or bad guys? Sometimes the "press crew" tag along soldiers and you not really sure who they are and why follow "them" per say. I guess it may be a stylistic choice for the movie just to show that war is ugly and sometimes there is no right or wrong, But for me it just meant less investment in the movie.
Ultimately when there is action scenes, they are well done. Good effects, well filmed, and movie don't hold on the blood to fill a lower rating wich is good.
But as its really more a character drama than an action movie, ultimately for me it felt short. I took a few beers just expecting to have a good time with my action war movie, and i didn't got this. Eventually i turned it off after 1 hour to play some online war video games. I finished it the next day so i could judge the entirety of it.
I am not really well in the known when it comes to war journalism but i found it kinda weird civilians would be allowed so close to the battleground, sometimes litterally following the soldier. Looks like a diaster waiting to happen in my opinion.
Even tough they use the pictures in a stylish way in the movie, i kinda fail to understand why so much pictures would be important or worth the risk instead of using actual video cameras. The movie in my opinion has 2 major issues.
The first one is i didn't really care much for the characters or what could happen to them. Kirsten Dunst character feel so wooden and inexpressive. Its part of the character trait i guess (she saw it all so it does not affect her anymore) but it just made for an uninteresting character. Neither of the other ones really catched my eyes either.
Then there is the fact that you never been given much background on why this war is going on. Who are the "good guys" or bad guys? Sometimes the "press crew" tag along soldiers and you not really sure who they are and why follow "them" per say. I guess it may be a stylistic choice for the movie just to show that war is ugly and sometimes there is no right or wrong, But for me it just meant less investment in the movie.
Ultimately when there is action scenes, they are well done. Good effects, well filmed, and movie don't hold on the blood to fill a lower rating wich is good.
But as its really more a character drama than an action movie, ultimately for me it felt short. I took a few beers just expecting to have a good time with my action war movie, and i didn't got this. Eventually i turned it off after 1 hour to play some online war video games. I finished it the next day so i could judge the entirety of it.
Tell Your Friends