Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie

Spoonatects Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

Baseshment I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Christopher McCabe I saw this film for the first time last night and loved it. I thought it might be a cheesy 80s Vietnam war action flick but boy was I wrong. There are some great performances here first off - Gene Hackman and Danny Glover are very convincing and totally into their roles here. I know the plot is very simple but this is based on a true story and I thought all involved measured up and did an honorable job of portraying the futility and tragic waste of life that was the Vietnam war. There are some subtle moments in the film, reviewed better by others, but suffice it to say they were touching and were metaphors for the war. I am sad that in real life, many didn't make it home, but this movie does that justice while also pointing out the brutality of war and its impact on civilians

stones78 I wouldn't call this one of my favorite films, or among my favorite war films for that matter, but I did enjoy this much more than when I first saw this many years ago. Gene Hackman is the main reason I would recommend this, and Danny Glover also puts in a solid performance. If you don't know the plot by now, I'll give a short synopsis: Col. Hambleton,(Hackman) who's a passenger in a plane flying over Vietnam, parachutes to safety, and is stuck there until "Birddog" Clark(Glover)figures out how to rescue him. Jerry Reed, who's not a country bumpkin this time, plays it straight as Col. Walker, who's Clark's superior and both men try to figure out how to rescue Hambleton. It takes some time for some action to kick in, although I wouldn't call this an action film per se, and I was pleasantly surprised at how well it held up over time. There are some disturbing moments, not that many, but it should satisfy the action fans in some of us. After some painful delays and a reference to golf(yes, golf) terminology, the man gets rescued while others trying to rescue him get killed, which left a bitter taste in my mouth, although this is a true but heartbreaking story.I had just a few gripes, the first being why was Hambleton the only man parachuting to safety, while the others perished? Perhaps it was the only seat rigged to eject, as I have no military expertise. Finally, during the ending credits, only Hambleton's story is revealed in paragraph form on the screen, which says that he currently resides near a golf course in Arizona and is retired. I thought perhaps a mention of Capt. Clark's present situation would've been appropriate.

nugroovecorp This movie is extremely underrated! Gene Hackman and Danny Glover are excellent (as usual), and an excellent supporting performance from Clayton Rohner! Some haters are posting that it doesn't follow the true story line...come on people, this is Hollywood... have you not learned yet? Cinematography is excellent and its unique in that it does not make war seem cool like so many other ridiculous movies. Danny Glover's best performance outside of the Royal Tenenbaums, i don't care what anyone says lethal weapons are utterly overrated. Gene Hackman has done so much good stuff that this is just a solid performance for him, but David Grant and Clayton Rohner are both great.

Randall Cameron I thoroughly enjoyed the first 3/4 of this film, and was disappointed by the "action- comedy" ending.The story begins true to the feeling if not the details of the actual incident, and revolves around the relationship between Ham, who discovers what war is really about, and Clark, the Forward Air Controller responsible for coordinating his rescue. Ham's confrontation with what happens on the other end of the bombing, his own foolishness that results in his killing a civilian (a bit unbelievable, but dramatically useful), and the ugliness of war, is well portrayed by Hackman. Danny Glover is excellent and sympathetic, in a film that probably boosted his track to stardom.The special effects were not where the money was spent; seems like they had gas to burn, but no explosives, and the F-5s did not really fit, but these details did not detract from a story well told, until...SPOILER AHEAD -- the last 20 minutes could have been from a cheesy Golan-Globus action movie. Did they change the director? He did well for 90 minutes or so.Instead of the true ending -- more narrow escapes from passing VC, lots of bugs, mud, cuts, anxiety and disappointment, until a SEAL in face paint and an ARVN Ranger appear out of nowhere to lead him to an under-fire rescue LZ, we get a lot of silliness. No way would the Green Giant pilot attempt the pickup under fire against orders when no one else is with him. And he should have been taken for proper interrogation. But that could have been just another disappointing detail.But to have a fixed wing pilot even attempt to fly a helicopter alone was just ridiculous. Stealing an aircraft is not only a career-ender, he would never be able to land (twice) without a Class-A mishap. The whole sequence was stupidly unnecessary. And the pitiful pyrotechnics (little Molotov cocktails) of the final "bombing" sequence looked silly. Having the whole forest go up in a huge bloom of flame (Apocalypse Now) would have been believable, or ripples of plain old explosives throwing mountains of earth in the air. Air strikes are sudden, and incredibly destructive. And the idea of a PBR heading upriver for extraction through a couple of divisions of VC and NVA was just too much.If this movie had finished like it started, it would of honored the memory of the heroes far better.