अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंAn experienced journalist risks returning to Afghanistan in pursuit of a sensational story.An experienced journalist risks returning to Afghanistan in pursuit of a sensational story.An experienced journalist risks returning to Afghanistan in pursuit of a sensational story.
- पुरस्कार
- 3 जीत और कुल 1 नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Good story at the start but more boring at the end
I had dream a bigger scene for Colin Cunningham he is so great he can do a better character there
Is this movie worth seeing? It might be. It helps us to understand what our people are going through in a war that doesn't meet any of the traditional definitions. Mateen gives Luke an important quote which essentially means "There are no enemies. Only future allies." The reverse is also true.
And the people are poor and have to do what it takes to get by. Someone is making billions from the drugs, but not these people, and they resent being told what to do by outsiders.
This isn't a comedy, but for those who prefer comedy, there's just enough to make the movie tolerable. The quirky characters are enjoyable. Mateen, who is mostly comic relief, has a chance to be more than that when he experiences a tragedy.
It's not exactly family friendly, with numerous instances of the sound going out and a character's mouth blurred, middle fingers blurred (I assume), and the reality of war. For a movie about war, though, this is not that violent. I actually saw the fourth "Rambo" movie the day I saw this, and that was far worse.
It's not a classic, but maybe if you like war, it's something worth seeing.
And the people are poor and have to do what it takes to get by. Someone is making billions from the drugs, but not these people, and they resent being told what to do by outsiders.
This isn't a comedy, but for those who prefer comedy, there's just enough to make the movie tolerable. The quirky characters are enjoyable. Mateen, who is mostly comic relief, has a chance to be more than that when he experiences a tragedy.
It's not exactly family friendly, with numerous instances of the sound going out and a character's mouth blurred, middle fingers blurred (I assume), and the reality of war. For a movie about war, though, this is not that violent. I actually saw the fourth "Rambo" movie the day I saw this, and that was far worse.
It's not a classic, but maybe if you like war, it's something worth seeing.
There is something in this film that brings out a visceral negative reaction from some reviewers. Perhaps it was not quite PC enough, or it offends a nationality or group. What is certain is this film is much better than the detractors portray.
The story follows Luke, a photojournalist, who thinks he's stumbled upon war atrocities committed by a Canadian sniper team. When his story is buried by his news service, he is compelled to return to Afghanistan with his friend Tom, who has other ambitions, to find out the truth. Luke soon finds out that the truth is hard to come by. As Elita (Pascale Hutton) tells him, "you try to make sense of this place, a place that makes no sense."
Just as in war there are parts in the story where nothing much is happening, then crazy people and crazy things happen, then all hell breaks loose. Bombs explode, people die, and you're left with many questions but not everything is answered. This is very much a war film, but it's no "action movie." It's no Battleship or G.I. Joe: Retaliation. You never know for sure who is a friend or who is the enemy. As Luke says "it's hard to tell the good guys from the bad guys, until they try to kill you." This is the essence of any insurgency, like Afghanistan.
The negative reviewers fault the film for some technical errors, like having four man sniper teams when they're usually two man teams, and then giving it 1 star. That's like slamming Apocalypse Now for having surf boards on Army helicopters or having Russian roulette in The Deer Hunter. Sure, there are no strip clubs on the Army bases in Afghanistan, but these few lapses can easily be overlooked for the true theme of the film. That war is nuts, and you have to be kind of nuts to be there.
The acting was very good, both the westerners and the Afghans. The movie was shot in Canada with excellent cinematography on a low budget, but it's easy to believe that this was shot on location. The country looks just as bleak and barren and occasionally beautiful as you've seen on the news reports. The action sequences are well done, it definitely feels like you're in the middle of a firefight when the bullets start flying.
What is certain is this movie deserves more serious consideration than it received. Maybe it's too soon, or maybe some object to a negative story about Canadian soldiers. It is definitely worth seeing and it's much better than the less than 5 out of 10 stars rating it has received on IMDb. See it for yourself, and there's a good chance you'll agree.
The story follows Luke, a photojournalist, who thinks he's stumbled upon war atrocities committed by a Canadian sniper team. When his story is buried by his news service, he is compelled to return to Afghanistan with his friend Tom, who has other ambitions, to find out the truth. Luke soon finds out that the truth is hard to come by. As Elita (Pascale Hutton) tells him, "you try to make sense of this place, a place that makes no sense."
Just as in war there are parts in the story where nothing much is happening, then crazy people and crazy things happen, then all hell breaks loose. Bombs explode, people die, and you're left with many questions but not everything is answered. This is very much a war film, but it's no "action movie." It's no Battleship or G.I. Joe: Retaliation. You never know for sure who is a friend or who is the enemy. As Luke says "it's hard to tell the good guys from the bad guys, until they try to kill you." This is the essence of any insurgency, like Afghanistan.
The negative reviewers fault the film for some technical errors, like having four man sniper teams when they're usually two man teams, and then giving it 1 star. That's like slamming Apocalypse Now for having surf boards on Army helicopters or having Russian roulette in The Deer Hunter. Sure, there are no strip clubs on the Army bases in Afghanistan, but these few lapses can easily be overlooked for the true theme of the film. That war is nuts, and you have to be kind of nuts to be there.
The acting was very good, both the westerners and the Afghans. The movie was shot in Canada with excellent cinematography on a low budget, but it's easy to believe that this was shot on location. The country looks just as bleak and barren and occasionally beautiful as you've seen on the news reports. The action sequences are well done, it definitely feels like you're in the middle of a firefight when the bullets start flying.
What is certain is this movie deserves more serious consideration than it received. Maybe it's too soon, or maybe some object to a negative story about Canadian soldiers. It is definitely worth seeing and it's much better than the less than 5 out of 10 stars rating it has received on IMDb. See it for yourself, and there's a good chance you'll agree.
This movie was a ton of fun to watch, yet still does an excellent job of pointing out how complex and confusing the situation in Afghanistan is. I was shocked to discover this movie was shot in BC as it gave the feeling of the dusty, wide open spaces of Afghanistan. The plot twists and turns in a haphazard way which the professional critics disliked, yet I feel that it matches the nature of a country in turmoil, where humour and horror are combined in unexpected ways. Even though it is difficult to see a solution to the current situation in Afghanistan, I found it encouraging to see the characters grow as the country affects them.
I know this is fiction, but if you're going to have a movie embedded within an historical context, at least attempt to make that context somewhat accurate, or at least believable to anyone with even a limited knowledge of the event/events. I had to turn this off after 15 minutes there were so many inaccuracies.
The two things that did seem accurate.
1. It looked like it could be Afghanistan.
2. His guide was getting high.
Not accurate;
1. Snipers are not in four-man teams firing from moving vehicles. 2. There are no tent-bars in Afghanistan, much less those with dancing white women. Alcohol is against the law, and while I am sure that alcohol is smuggled in, it's abuse is not flaunted because it is illegal. 3. What newspaper has ever suppressed a story that denigrates soldiers?
Answer... none. The typical tact is to exaggerate every infraction and try to instigate it into some Muslim outrage and retaliation.
The two things that did seem accurate.
1. It looked like it could be Afghanistan.
2. His guide was getting high.
Not accurate;
1. Snipers are not in four-man teams firing from moving vehicles. 2. There are no tent-bars in Afghanistan, much less those with dancing white women. Alcohol is against the law, and while I am sure that alcohol is smuggled in, it's abuse is not flaunted because it is illegal. 3. What newspaper has ever suppressed a story that denigrates soldiers?
Answer... none. The typical tact is to exaggerate every infraction and try to instigate it into some Muslim outrage and retaliation.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाDebut theatrical feature film of actress Katarina Mueller who portrayed a small Afghan girl.
- कनेक्शनReferences Don't Give Up the Sheep (1953)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Afghan Luke?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- CA$50,00,000(अनुमानित)
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 40 मि(100 min)
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.35 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें