Nous étions soldats

I for one am someone who was inspired to read the book "We were Soldiers Once and Young" after seeing this movie. WWS is about a distinct event that actually happened. SGM Plumley was a soldier's soldier, with five combat jumps in three wars and an astounding three combat infantry badges. LTC Moore was the sort of leader who could keep his head and lead his troops through the worst of battle. People who complain of clichés in this movie might as well complain that people in 18th century movies wear three-cornered hats.

To those looking for an anti-war message, it is there. When Moore goes to Division headquarters and gets his mission, he asks about projected enemy in his area of operations. The staff officer standing next to the general says "a manageable number." To this Moore responds with words to the effect of "which means you have no idea." It turns out that Moore's battalion gets dropped on top of a vastly larger enemy force (if I remember correctly, they get dropped right next to an NVA brigade). Ordinarily, it order to assure success in attack, you want to have three times the numbers of your enemy. In this case, the ratio was 4:1 going the other way. Then the battle is about how artillery and air support makes up the difference in numbers.

The obvious criticism here is that the command was fumbling around in the dark. At the end of the movie, the names of the 70+ men who died are prominently displayed on the screen. A military mind is not treasonous and will not disrespect its superiors, but it will let facts speak for themselves.

The next comment is only tangentially related to this movie. However, many voices here have taken the opportunity to vent their views on Vietnam, so I feel compelled to put things in a broader historical context.

There was a war that did not take place between 1945 and the fall of the Berlin wall. It would have been called WWIII. The Soviet Union and the US stood eye-to-eye for 40+ years, but did not blink. It was an ideological conflict with an evil that meant death to 50+ million people in communist countries in this century. It was conflict with a system that vastly constrained freedom. Fortunately for the world, the US finally prevailed. The struggle fought between communism and the west was fought in a variety of ways: in public relations, in sports, in propaganda, and in a series of proxy wars. In Korea, Greece, Vietnam, Afghanistan and a variety of smaller stages, East contested with West. To the people caught up in these local conflicts, these wars were absolute tragedies. However, in the grand scheme of things, these conflicts pale to insignificance when compared to the 500,000,000 who would have died in WWIII.

I should never be surprised that people, who wouldn't recognize Principle, much less Honor, Duty, or Country if it introduced itself, see virtue as vice. As one who served in that war, I found the movie to be factual to the point of pain. Those who call this movie racist, lack vocabulary. or an understanding of racism. I don't know which is sadder. This movie tells a part of a soldier's story very well. Soldiers march to a different drummer, how tragic that so many, today, still refuse to honor those who protected them.

The millions in Indo-China murdered at the hands of the Communist cry that our "racism" was so poorly lead at the highest civilian levels that we abandon them. Their blood is not on my hands or on the hands of my fellow soldiers. It is on the hands of those who are so blind they refuse to see. A valid case could be made that that there are errors in the story, certainly it doesn't tell the rest of the story, or of the next part of this battle where US casualties were 40%. What it does tell it tells very well. Those men were volunteers, and their nobility shows in this movie. I recommend it, especially for any who would want to understand those who served at that time.

This film is so different from the traditionally cynical (and rightly so) Vietnam War movies. While it goes without question that this film depicts the bloody and gruesome horrors of the tragedy of the first major conflict of the war, it does so while juxtaposing the story with that of stories of the home front and the enemy. The enemy in this film is not the animalistic, silent enemy we are used to. We hear this enemy speak, we see his love for his family and his devotion to his cause. While being bombarded with images of death and destruction on the battlefield, we are brought back home to see the wives as they face the death themselves.

While of course not a flawless movie, it was without a doubt moving, and I highly recommend it.

We Were Soldiers is not for the squeamish. It ranks up there with Saving Private Ryan for realistically showing the brutality of war. I was moved almost beyond description by the ordeal these 390-odd US Army Air Cav soldiers endured at the hands of thousands of Viet Cong troops. It is as close to Hell as one could get on earth--a charnel house of horrors, where death is sudden and swift. Mel Gibson and Sam Elliot lead a group of green recruits into the Valley Of Death on an impossible mission in the early days of our involvement in Vietnam.

Based on actual events in 1965, this was the first major involvement of US troops and North Vietnamese regulars. The writing, directing, and acting are first rate, and the battle scenes are too real for comfort. What really makes the mind reel is that after the slaughter depicted in this film, Mel's character Lt. Col. Hal Moore goes back to the valley of death for more than 200 days. The American dead are listed on 3 East of the Vietnam Memorial Wall. I stood at attention and cried when the names of the fallen were listed at the end of the film. You will, too.

"We Were Soldiers" is based on a real life battle of the Viet Nam war that took place in 1965 in a remote part of Viet Nam. It is based on a book by Harold G. Moore and Joseph L. Galloway who are portrayed in the film by Mel Gibson and Barry Pepper respectively.

The film opens with a depiction of the 1954 slaughter of French troops by the Vietnamese army. Twenty one years later Lt. Col Moore (Gibson) and his battalion of 395 men are thrust unknowingly into the same hornet's nest consisting of some 4,000 battle hardened Viet Nam regulars who have been fighting their enemies for many years.

Director Randall Wallace tells the story from three perspectives. Firstly from the viewpoint of the Americans. Outnumbered ten to one they face impossible odds. How Col. Moore rallies his troops and gets them to pull together as a team is a central theme of the picture. Secondly, the story is told from the viewpoint of the wives and families left behind and the problems they have to deal with. Lastly, the Vietnamese army is shown not as unfeeling monsters, but as a professional army defending their beliefs and territory.

The battle scenes are as realistic and convincing as any war movie that you will ever see. We suffer through the casualties both on the battlefield and at home along with the participants. The special effects are seamless and exciting.

Mel Gibson gives a convincing performance as Moore and if you watch the DVD, you can see the amazing similarities between the two men. Madeleine Stowe plays Julie Moore and Keri Russell plays Barbara Geoghegan two of the wives who take on the unenviable task of delivering those dreaded telegrams to the widows from the War Department. Chris Klein plays Russell's husband Jack a new officer and father. His scene with Gibson in the base chapel is memorable. Greg Kinnear plays Captain Crandall the head of Moore's helicopter fleet. Don Duong is very effective as the Vietnamese commander. But acting cudos go to veteran Sam Elliot as the crusty Sgt. Major Plumley.

"We Were Soldiers" is a gripping Viet Nam war drama told in a way that reflects ALL of the participants in an impartially realistic way. As Hank Moore says on the DVD, They finally got it right.