Black Hawk Down
Essay Preview: Black Hawk Down
Report this essay
If only time travel were possible. That way we could go back to 1993 and hopefully correct the mistakes involved in the tragedy-laden raid in Somalia. The media could be prevented from turning this incident into a tentpole for the government to get squeamish about sending our boys in to kick a little ass. Someone could even send The Terminator back to kill Michael Bay, Final Countdown-style, thus preventing the cinematic catastrophe that was Pearl Harbor from ever materializing. All good reasons to get Doc Brown moving on a new DeLorean. However Id like to hitch a ride on the original timeline of this film, to gauge both the critical reaction and its success, because while Black Hawk Down is certainly, at times, an entertaining action picture, those touting it as an Oscar-worthy contender seemed more influenced by its timing than its quality.
To even lump Black Hawk into a category of action/adventure, may certainly appear insulting to those aware and close to the true story on which it is based. The year is 1993 and warlords are seizing food and supplies from the citizens of Somalia (a situation poetically explained once by the late Phil Hartman, stealing bites from McDonalds customers as Bill Clinton.) Aware of the locations of two key figures in the army of Mohamed Farrah Aidid, American forces were sent in to capture them as part of the grand plan to stop the Civil War. When two of their inpenetrable Black Hawk helicopters were shot down, our guys were trapped and surrounded by men, women and children (dubbed “skinnies”) who were armed to the teeth.
Based on the non-fiction book by Mark Bowden, this film is the relentless account of that mission gone awry. And I use relentless because producer Jerry Bruckheimer has finally found a way to stretch Steven Spielbergs horrifying and masterful recreation of the Normandy beachstorming in Saving Private Ryan into an entire film. He upped the ante (in time, if not quality) in Pearl Harbor to 40 minutes and here, into about 100. Director Ridley Scott has managed to bring a little more respect back to the plight of the soldiers in harms way here, but shies away from just about everything else from character to politics.
Press notes and interviews with the cast and crew have been very adamant about their attempts to avoid all the cliches of the war movie. No undue heroics or perfectly timed quips. But even a cast of characters based on real-life heroes still find their way lumped into the colorful collection of war hero cliches. Theres the newly-appointed leader whose never led troops before, the gruff commander veterans, the desk jockey getting his first stench of battle and the quirky but tough, brooding yet tells-it-like-it-is at the right moment guy who also gets to conveniently have his Rambo moment by blowing away a single guy on a jeep with an RPG missile.
To strip characters down to the bare essentials of a personality may effort Scott into creating the documentary-like feel he may have wanted to convey to audiences, but by casting the virtual whos-who of Bruckheimer regulars puts a familiar face to the pain, thus making us identify with the actual actors rather than the real fallen. Josh Hartnett (Pearl Harbor), Ewan McGregor (Moulin Rouge), Tom Sizemore (Pearl Harbor, Enemy of the State, Saving Private Ryan), Eric Bana (Chopper, the upcoming Hulk), William Fichtner (Pearl Harbor, Armageddon), Ewen Bremner (Pearl Harbor), Sam Shepard (The Right Stuff), Kim Coates (Pearl Harbor), Ron Eldard (Deep Impact), Jason Isaacs (Armageddon, The Patriot), Zeljko Ivanek (Hannibal), Jeremy Piven (Serendipity), Richard Tyson (Three OClock High) and Brendan Sexton III (Boys Dont Cry) are those faces. Sure, Hartnett squints again and Sizemore shouts a lot, but an impressive cast to be sure, but one more deserving of a well-rounded script than a cowboys-and-indians-like reunion party with Bruckheimer.
I never thought Id see the day when I said a movie had too much action. Black Hawk Down has action to spare. It just doesnt spare the audience. The final 100 minutes of the film rarely slows down for more than a few minutes of quiet time that isnt very well spent. Even a one-sided debate on the politics of our involvement in this situation would be something to think about,