13 heures: Le secret des soldats de Benghazi

Benghazi.

In this age of bitter rhetoric, the name conjures all manner of furor and blame. A small stinging wound to honor and prestige - a name to carry hate and zealotry.

Michael Bay, OF ALL PEOPLE, was able to peer into the 2012 attack on US diplomatic and intelligence resources, and capture one hell of a war story. Going into this movie, I expected a number of things. Among them were gratuitous explosions, jingoistic flag waving, and tough-guy tired clichés. I did not get what I was expecting.

Instead, Bay, his cast, and his filmmaking team have brought out a solid, technically informed, faithfully rendered account of those who were caught in the conflagration - how they found themselves there, how they fought for their lives, and how they made it out...or didn't. There's no political agenda here. The only agenda is to show warriors (who are also real people, with cares, and hopes and flaws) engaged in struggle, with all the courage, and luck, horror, and terrible splendor that is timeless.

And in the end, there's no war worship - only somber reflection on the nature of struggle, and what it does to these warriors. This is a clear and worthy work for that. Bravo.

"Things change fast here in Benghazi." Jack Silva (Krasinski) has just been reassigned as a guard for the US diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya. What starts off as a routine assignment changes on September 11, 2012. When a group of insurgents breach the Embassy and attempt to kill the US Ambassador, Jack and his group of 6 have to make a decision. Follow orders and stay away, or disobey their commander and go help their fellow soldiers. I was looking forward to watching this, but I was also a little worried at the same time. The story is interesting and somewhat controversial and is a perfect idea for a movie, but it was directed by Michael Bay. For that reason I was expecting a lot of special effects and explosions and didn't think he was the director that should be in charge of this story. I'm not ashamed to admit that I was wrong. This is a realistic war movie that doesn't embellish the drama or actions, mainly because the story didn't need it. The movie is not political at all and mainly focus on the soldiers decisions. I liked it more than I expected to. Overall, not just a surprisingly good Michael Bay movie, a good movie period. I give this a high B+.

I first saw this film when it opened back in January, 2012. While it's not a "great" film by any stretch, it is a solidly good one. It is also Michael Bay's most *RESTRAINED* film (which isn't saying much, but it's a FAR cry better than the last four Transformers films).

But, getting to the title of my comment, when I went back and watched this film for the second time (today, February 16, 2019), I felt compelled to pull up IMDb on my phone during the viewing and I checked out some of the user reviews. I found one thing shockingly in common among all of the one-star "reviews":

Not a single one of them had any knowledge of the events of the true incident! And it was painfully obvious that they could not have been bothered to do a little research before making their inane comments public. Many did not know the name of the militant group that attacked the compound (Ansar al-Sharia), and just randomly decided that it must be ISIS. Some felt that it was a condemnation on Hillary Clinton and her actions/lack of actions as the events unfolded (there was not a single mention of Secretary Clinton throughout the entire film, good or bad). One did not even understand why the name of the film is "13 Hours" (seriously, did they even bother to actually WATCH the film before adding their "thoughts" in a blatant effort to only try to bring down the rating percentage?)!

Is the film accurate? Of course not. When a movie is based on a true event, dramatic license is and ALWAYS has been used to make the film more compelling to viewers. And say what you will about Michael Bay's films, but the guy can masterfully direct action set pieces; each one expertly realized to get the viewer's heart pumping. Here, he does it again and again. Or, more accurately, two straight hours after the first bullets start flying to the bitter end.

It's not a definitive history lesson on what actually happened, but it is decidedly riveting and Bay's most mature film to date. One can only hope that now he's left the directorial duties of the abyssmally and increasingly brainless "Transformers" franchise to other people, maybe we can start getting more films like this from him so people can remember what he is actually capable of when he gets material to work with that he takes seriously and treats it as such.

It is honestly hard to believe that the guy behind all that transformers crap made a solid, almost flawless war movie with an amazing cast. I have no idea why this is rated so low, acting is on point, pacing is great and the build-up keeps you engaged even on the second viewing.

I have seen this film twice. Both times I was disturbed by it for the next few days after not sleeping the nights I watched it. I fought in Afghanistan 2004-05 and Iraq 2006-07, and for me, this film nails it. The night vision green, the sound of the AK's, the streets and allys, the mentality and sense of duty, all of it is too realistic for me to watch again. But I respect that. This is the only film I can think of that really rattles my cage. Well done.

I wouldn't say it's the best war film I've ever seen, but for my experiences, it accurately portrays them, despite me never having been to Libya. It's accurate of my personal experiences to a large degree.