The Hunt for Eagle One

It's not a Hollywood war movie so don't expect big explosions or lots of military gear, but it looks pretty decent. The action...well it looked more real that the standard Hollywood movie, it was like a very good documentary ( I know it's not one, but still...).

The acting : well there were no "deep thoughts / lines" so not much to show for the actors and since most of the lines spoken by the "enemies" were in their native language it's hard to judge that.

There were no "bullet time/close-ups", no sound coloring or open wounds, but it looked exactly how it would like when ppl start shooting/fighting.

It isn't Black Hawk Down or Jarhead or even Apocalypse Now but it IS a solid movie about a bunch of marines doing their job and then going home ( no US patriotic bullshit etc. ).

Well they must have spent the budget they had set aside for the technical adviser on all the pyro and squibs they blew off. A good war movie is FAR more than authentic uniforms, locations, equipment. Doesn't matter how good your replica looks if the acting, continuity, and technicalities are crap! The pilot, after the crash doesn't even attempt to check the many other troops injured in the crash, she goes right to the conscious one with a hurt leg - no blood to be seen... this is the crappiest triage I have ever seen - not at all real to what a true Marine would do in that situation. She also remains way too calm during the crash AND after the crash - this scene coupled with the lame beach attack scene alerted me that turning the movie off would be the best thing to do.

This movie is a waste of time, a waste of a Hollywood budget, and a shame to army movies.

this was probably one of the worst war movies i have seen in a really long time. from the very beginning it had the feeling of wanting to be a "saving private ryan" type film, but in my opinion, never made it past a re-enactment of one of those commando war hero computer games. very bad acting and continuity mistakes all throughout the film made it very clear that they weren't trying very hard to produce a quality film. it was difficult watching these guys recite their lines instead of actually acting. i was tempted to just turn it off, unfortunately i did finish it and will never get those 90 minutes of my life back! so, do yourself a favor and go rent saving private ryan, tears of the sun, or pretty much any other war movie in place of this one. you can thank me later.

This Roger Cormon produced action/war flick is reasonably well made but ultimately as shallow as most of it's rival DTV action films. The film shot on a clearly microscopic budget manages to deliver some competent action scenes however the lead Mark Dacascos has been used to far better effect in other movies.

Following in the vein of Saving Private Ryan and Black Hawk Down this film has the requisite battle sequences, which are shot well enough to mask the low budget, however unlike Scott's film and Spielberg's film, this lacks the character and depth of those movies. The cast is not too bad and everyone does reasonably well with their simplistic roles, but we never really care about any individual characters, particularly Dacascos in the lead. Dacascos is essentially playing a his character in solider mode all the time, he's in battle mode, showing little emotion or personality. Dacascos convinces as a solider but is given little humanity to convey. Also Rutger Hauer appears to chew scenery in a quick and wasteful cameo. Unfortunately Theresa Randle is quite wooden in perhaps the most fleshed out role.

Overall there are many films better than this but similarly this isn't too bad. **

I don't remember much about this movie, other than it seemed like a very cheap production and the acting was awful. The film quality seemed B rate. It's one of the few movies that I can ever remember falling asleep during or turning off before it was over. Just bad, bad, bad. If you can catch this on regular television than maybe, but otherwise don't waste your money like I did. Luckily I only rented this, if I had gone to the theater and wasted $8-$10 I probably would have puked.

Rutger Hauer being the lead actor in a movie in 2006 should have been a dead giveaway. I knew better. War movies tend to be my favorites but this was just pathetic. :(