Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaTwo soldiers are tasked with deciding the fate of a terrorist with a single push of a button. With time running out, their window to use a deadly military drone on the target slowly closes.Two soldiers are tasked with deciding the fate of a terrorist with a single push of a button. With time running out, their window to use a deadly military drone on the target slowly closes.Two soldiers are tasked with deciding the fate of a terrorist with a single push of a button. With time running out, their window to use a deadly military drone on the target slowly closes.
Cyrus Magus
- Mahmoud Khalil
- (as Amir Khalighi)
Don Abernathy
- Air Force Officer
- (não creditado)
Avaliações em destaque
Drones is one of the movies which make their front wallpaper very attractive. The picture usually results in the idea of a heavy action movie with soldiers and drones fighting terrorists. Not a good choice because the cover has no relevance to much of the movie. Normally some of the main characters would have been shown but there isn't. At least some parts of the movie were enjoyable. The movie is actually based in a single room for the entire 1 hour and 22 minutes! There are limited characters, and seems like a video game game-play instead of a movie! The story line is reasonable but needed more ACTION and explanation! Most of the movie is talking between two characters which some people may find boring. This is definitely not a recommended movie but its OK for people who love action movies with not too much blood and fighting.
4/10
4/10
There might be admittedly a deeper message in this movie - but the way it is presented (cover etc) one might wait for an action/war movie.
Instead your getting a discussion between two very dull characters sitting in a container, watching a video screen - in feature length. Under pretense of coolness the actors try (and fail) to transport any kind of feeling/reaction.
No action whatsoever, this seems to be some kind of no-budget movie which isn't even very ambitious. The storyline is so predictable that one could stop watching after 10 minutes without missing anything.
If I had watched this in cinema, I would have left after half an hour.
Instead your getting a discussion between two very dull characters sitting in a container, watching a video screen - in feature length. Under pretense of coolness the actors try (and fail) to transport any kind of feeling/reaction.
No action whatsoever, this seems to be some kind of no-budget movie which isn't even very ambitious. The storyline is so predictable that one could stop watching after 10 minutes without missing anything.
If I had watched this in cinema, I would have left after half an hour.
i watched this movie thinking o itll get better but no it does not get better 2 people sit in a trailer the ENTIRE MOVIE the cover is not anything similar to what actually happens got this from redbox and no doubt out of the tons of movies I've seen its the worst anybody could have made this movie in their bedroom it was 45 of my life that ill never get back what a waste of money and time i went out of my way to make an account just to give u guys a headsup that this movieis a hysterical failure when this movie suddenly ended and went to credits i turned to my brother and we bothed laughed in shock of how bad the movie was
Not too many movies really make me think. This one did.
I don't know what motivated the people that made this film, but their work stuck me much deeper than I expected.
The main characters are two soldiers in a military installation where they are assigned to man a drone spy plane. They are searching for the "enemy" and when they find one the drone is equipped with weapons to "take them out." That's their job; find 'em and kill 'em. All with the push of a button.
Causing collateral damage (killing innocent civilians) is supposed to be just another part of the job. After all, the good outweighs the bad because the people they kill, will themselves kill even more innocents - think 911 - if they're not stopped.
This is a new form of warfare. In the "old days" you just dropped a bomb from the sky and never saw the people you incinerated. But now, super high definition cameras display the faces of the people you are about to turn into human hamburger on your computer monitor; up close and personal.
The drone team think they have spotted a super enemy. A high ranking member of the Al-Qaeda that is a must kill. There's only one problem: there are a house full of innocents at the same location. This includes women and children; even a baby.
Conscience begins to surface. Do they kill a dozen innocents to get this one enemy, or not? Think about what you know of Nazi soldiers who explained their actions by saying they were "just following orders."
The find and kill operation takes two people to complete. One cannot fire the kill shot without the other being in compliance. Listen to the kill or don't kill conversation between our two soldiers. Ask yourself the same questions that they ask. What would you do?
Don't get me wrong. I support the military. I am grateful for the men and women that have made the decision to; if necessary, lay down their lives to defend and protect this country. That means your life, my life, and the lives of all the people we know and love. Many heroic men and women have already laid down their lives in the service of their country. They deserve to be honored, they deserve our respect, they deserve our gratitude. They have mine.
But this film raises moral questions about how we fight Al-Qaeda that did not exist when we fought our enemies of the past. Push button warfare. How much "collateral damage" is acceptable? Is it acceptable at all? Is there a point of depreciating returns where we become as bad; or even worse than our enemies?
Take a look at the IMDb listing of the "stars" of this film. See who is ranked first, second and third. There is a reason for it.
I don't know what motivated the people that made this film, but their work stuck me much deeper than I expected.
The main characters are two soldiers in a military installation where they are assigned to man a drone spy plane. They are searching for the "enemy" and when they find one the drone is equipped with weapons to "take them out." That's their job; find 'em and kill 'em. All with the push of a button.
Causing collateral damage (killing innocent civilians) is supposed to be just another part of the job. After all, the good outweighs the bad because the people they kill, will themselves kill even more innocents - think 911 - if they're not stopped.
This is a new form of warfare. In the "old days" you just dropped a bomb from the sky and never saw the people you incinerated. But now, super high definition cameras display the faces of the people you are about to turn into human hamburger on your computer monitor; up close and personal.
The drone team think they have spotted a super enemy. A high ranking member of the Al-Qaeda that is a must kill. There's only one problem: there are a house full of innocents at the same location. This includes women and children; even a baby.
Conscience begins to surface. Do they kill a dozen innocents to get this one enemy, or not? Think about what you know of Nazi soldiers who explained their actions by saying they were "just following orders."
The find and kill operation takes two people to complete. One cannot fire the kill shot without the other being in compliance. Listen to the kill or don't kill conversation between our two soldiers. Ask yourself the same questions that they ask. What would you do?
Don't get me wrong. I support the military. I am grateful for the men and women that have made the decision to; if necessary, lay down their lives to defend and protect this country. That means your life, my life, and the lives of all the people we know and love. Many heroic men and women have already laid down their lives in the service of their country. They deserve to be honored, they deserve our respect, they deserve our gratitude. They have mine.
But this film raises moral questions about how we fight Al-Qaeda that did not exist when we fought our enemies of the past. Push button warfare. How much "collateral damage" is acceptable? Is it acceptable at all? Is there a point of depreciating returns where we become as bad; or even worse than our enemies?
Take a look at the IMDb listing of the "stars" of this film. See who is ranked first, second and third. There is a reason for it.
Overall I enjoyed this film. It's got a good feel to it in terms of suspense.
Unfortunately, it's also a load of crap. There are no shortage of movies out there that were created for the sole purpose of making a political point. Some of them are even pretty good. But in order to make a good point, it's important to argue from a standpoint of reality.
This movie steps aside from reality to make the assertion that the U.S. military cares not a lick for civilian casualties. They quite literally state it in plain English, they even go as far as saying that the rules of engagement support the execution of positively identified non-combatants.
Do I really need to explain that this assertion is really just ridiculous in the extreme? I'm sure many here will defend this movie by saying we've done our share of civilian killing. While this is unhappily true, I will retort back to you that it did not happen like this. This particular example is really a stretch.
Aside from their open disdain for the U.S. military, the writers make use of just about every philosophical and ethical argument for and against the use of drones. Is it really fair to wage war by pushing buttons? Is any sort of collateral civilian damage acceptable? Especially if we know about it ahead of time? Are we making asses of ourselves by using drones? Just how much obeisance are our soldiers required to give? Is there any heroism or shame left in our way of combat? And if so, is there any glory left in being a soldier? These are important questions that our new way of combat is forcing us to come to grips with. This movie would be a good one for class discussion, or to list the concerns involving drones for research and investigation.
I applaud the makers for artfully and seamlessly making use of each ethical dilemma in their story.
I also applaud the actors. In a movie like this, which can only be described as a psychological thriller, acting is the most important quality of the film. A range of emotions and believable characterizations are required, and both of our lead actors played the parts very well in my opinion.
Despite that, I'm giving the film a score of only 7. I feel that the writers could have come up with a more believable reaction to the scenario. The reaction of the upper brass in particular just seemed unreal. Also, as I said before, this film reeks of open disdain for the military. It's OK to hate the military, but don't expect that your movie will be good if you let those feelings pour into your work. If you want to promote philosophical discussion, you need to remain objective. Otherwise, your work becomes propaganda instead.
Unfortunately, it's also a load of crap. There are no shortage of movies out there that were created for the sole purpose of making a political point. Some of them are even pretty good. But in order to make a good point, it's important to argue from a standpoint of reality.
This movie steps aside from reality to make the assertion that the U.S. military cares not a lick for civilian casualties. They quite literally state it in plain English, they even go as far as saying that the rules of engagement support the execution of positively identified non-combatants.
Do I really need to explain that this assertion is really just ridiculous in the extreme? I'm sure many here will defend this movie by saying we've done our share of civilian killing. While this is unhappily true, I will retort back to you that it did not happen like this. This particular example is really a stretch.
Aside from their open disdain for the U.S. military, the writers make use of just about every philosophical and ethical argument for and against the use of drones. Is it really fair to wage war by pushing buttons? Is any sort of collateral civilian damage acceptable? Especially if we know about it ahead of time? Are we making asses of ourselves by using drones? Just how much obeisance are our soldiers required to give? Is there any heroism or shame left in our way of combat? And if so, is there any glory left in being a soldier? These are important questions that our new way of combat is forcing us to come to grips with. This movie would be a good one for class discussion, or to list the concerns involving drones for research and investigation.
I applaud the makers for artfully and seamlessly making use of each ethical dilemma in their story.
I also applaud the actors. In a movie like this, which can only be described as a psychological thriller, acting is the most important quality of the film. A range of emotions and believable characterizations are required, and both of our lead actors played the parts very well in my opinion.
Despite that, I'm giving the film a score of only 7. I feel that the writers could have come up with a more believable reaction to the scenario. The reaction of the upper brass in particular just seemed unreal. Also, as I said before, this film reeks of open disdain for the military. It's OK to hate the military, but don't expect that your movie will be good if you let those feelings pour into your work. If you want to promote philosophical discussion, you need to remain objective. Otherwise, your work becomes propaganda instead.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesSoldiers are army. The drone operaters in this movie are Air Force and are referred to as Airmen.
- Trilhas sonorasElaborate Hoax Among Friends
Written and Produced by Kenneth James Gibson (BMI)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 22 min(82 min)
- Cor
- Proporção
- 2.35 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente