Violação de Conduta

Recalling what John Travolta did WELL as the dogged investigator in THE GENERAL'S DAUGHTER (1999), he reprises that role in BASIC (2003). This is a more fun and less full-of-itself film.

He starts slow as the alcoholic Don't-Tread-On-Me military misfit/drop-out but soon reveals both a lot of spit-and-polish, and a load of talent as an investigator/interrogator. And again he teams up with a female, although I'd rather have seen him pair with Maddy Stowe again.

The film, for me, combined the best of RASHOMON (1950) wherein the same reality is seen differently by different participants in the same event.

And COURAGE UNDER FIRE (1996), the Meg Ryan / Denzel Washington film, which required Denzel to overcome strong squad loyalty, get tight-lipped, hard-trained men (and a woman) to talk, to piece together "what really happened out there."

Giovanni Ribisi as the wounded soldier in the hospital is so good -- he reminds me of Vincent D'Onofrio in SALTON SEA (2002): you have to look very closely to see that it REALLY IS Ribisi.

So the plot trips over itself. So what? I never said the film was perfect. I'm just telling you it's a hunk of fun.

Before I express my more detailed thoughts about this film, I need to get something off my chest. I've read a lot of other user comments here about Basic and it's almost embarrassing! Half of the reviews here state that Basic is too confusing and hard to understand while the other half is so proud to say they managed to understand the movie. If you're a potential viewer, don't get scared off by these comments! Basic is not at all difficult to follow. If you have more or less an average IQ, you won't get confused for a minute…

On a more personal note, I think Basic suffers from a modern disease. Nowadays directors have the urge to fool the audience so much, they go over the top without realizing it. They're trying to prevent their movie is predictable, so they add so many twists to the plot that it really becomes illogical. So…NO, the clue of Basic isn't predictable, but the entire movie becomes `structurally predictable'. Basically, this means that… as a viewer… you stop being involved, because you automatically think a few more illogical twists have yet to appear, so why bother? And besides, I don't know about you but I've seen enough movies about the `perfect crime and/or murder' recently. All these films about solid and waterproof conspiracies are shoved down our throats so much lately, that it really becomes annoying. So, I'd say: Watch Basic for the above average acting performances and the few decent action sequences! The solid directing by John McTiernan also deserves a mention, even though his `hard-action' stuff like Die Hard and Predator are a lot more effective. John Travolta and especially Samuel L. Jackson don't have to convince us about their quality anymore. And Pulp Fiction already taught us they play in team perfectly.

If you're expectations on Basic aren't set too high, you'll enjoy it. It's a routine, but well-made film…no more, no less

Tagged by many critics as overly predictable despite trying to be the complete opposite, BASIC is nevertheless a strong, original and entertaining film.

The cast, from big names John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson to lesser-knowns Connie Nielsen and Taye Diggs, ably unravels the mystery surrounding the disappearance of a reviled army sergeant during a hardcore training outing. The episode is recounted in as many ways by as many witnesses, an interesting method that has worked so well in other films such as COURAGE UNDER FIRE. It may all seem confusing at first, but gifted director John McTiernan gradually weaves everything together, though perhaps not as seamlessly as one would ideally prefer.

BASIC is not without its flaws, but they are not as glaring as one might think from professional reviews, or even many of the comments on this website. Its originality is welcome at a time when so many films follow the same cookie-cutter formula.

There's a whole lot of deep analysis going on here, but in the end, since so many others have analyzed this to death, I would recommend just watching it with an open mind and seeing if you find it entertaining.

I thought it original to a point, well acted out, and while predictable on a couple points, for the most part, leaving me wondering when we would find out the absolute truth of what the heck was going on...

Maybe later I will put something more in depth here, but for now, beware of the critics and their "plot holes," because in the end, aside from a couple very small glitches, this was pretty well done.

I read a review in my local paper saying that this film was boring. But I like John Travolta and wanted to see it to form my own opinion and my opinion was that it was really good. I think there were a lot of plot twists and turns and you really had to pay attention to see where things were going, if you didn't watch every second of it then you were going to miss something crucial to the plotline. I think this is one of the best movies of the last year, no matter what other people say. I liked it, and so did my whole family. Two thumbs up!