Afghan Luke

"It's a war, my job is to report what I see." When journalist Luke Benning (Stahl) is on a job in Afghanistan he catches a Canadian sniper cutting the fingers off of his taliban kills. When his paper refuses to print the story he quits and returns to the country to investigate further but soon finds that the fighting and tension has become much worse then when he left. There have been a recent influx of "embedded reporter" movies lately but they have all to this point been entertaining. While this was also a good movie and kept me interested it is basically another version of movies like "5 Days To War" or the "Bang Bang Club" (both of which I thought were better). Stahl does a good job and the movie is tense and thought provoking but like so many movies lately it seems to just copy everything else that is being released. I did like this one but "Bang Bang Club" was a better version. Overall, a movie worth watching but a new idea was needed to make it stand out. I give it a B-.

Let's welcome back the director of "Trailer Park Boys" Mike Clattenberg for what I believe is his second full length feature film and quiet a good one at that.

"Afghan Luke" stars a bunch of incredibly talented young actors/actresses my personal favorite of course Nick Stahl along with Stephen Lobo and Nicholas Wright. It's a drama that follows Luke Benning(Stahl) and the story he is attempting to write and prove about Canadian solider mutilating corpses in Afghanistan during the war. After initially being rejected Luke quits his paper to return to Afghanistan with his best friend Thom played by N.Wright where they attempt to gain proof of the story by heading across the country in search of the evidence.

Well what can I say, I suppose I will start with the cinematography the film is shot beautifully I believe in parts of British Columbia but had such great authenticity and really made you feel part of the journey. The dialog was very cleverly written along with some great comedic timing, everyone owns there roles, I was surprised to find all the cast were either American's or Canadians and with a multitude of dialects and accents throughout the film it was performed successfully, Nick stole the show leading us down the road the film ultimately takes.

On a limited budget a solid project raising questions and answers on war was carried out very well. Only thing missing was a good musical score which could have accompanied the film, and it was a little slow in it's build up. Warning alert to those easily offended there is a bit of drug use and plenty of heavy language throughout the film, but most is in context with the storytelling. If you are looking for a unique take on a journalistic point of view of the war this is much better then recent films "The Bang Bang Club" and "5 Days Of War" if your a fan of Nick like I am, it's one worth a viewing.

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.

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.

(2011) Afghan Luke DRAMA

Canadian freelance reporter/ journalist, Luke Benning (Nick Stahl) thinks he has witnessed from a distance a well renown Canadian sniper cutting a finger from each of his kills while fighting in Afghanistan. And upon going back to Canada, he tries to get it published, but with no avail he ends up getting fired for wanting to pursue it. So he decides to go back to Afghanistan to that exact same location where it all happened so that he can physically check on the bodies himself. From looking at the big picture, to make it a goal to convict a single person of war crimes, for something as trivial as checking up on people who're already dead and buried, you would've think that would have to be the least of his problems. I still have know idea why that is so important when they're worst things that happened in the war of Afghanistan, such as unreported sexual assaults of women in the military (The Invisible War), freelance shootings by covert operations and then cover up (Dirty Wars), and torture tactics at Guantanamo Bay, road side bombs, Taliban extremists targeting foreigners and Taliban extremists using children as martyrs, and I can go on forever. The other confusing aspect of this movie is the fact that viewers don't have any sense what this movie is about, is it about the reunification of Afghanistan people, the fact that they sell pot to make a living when their is nothing else, or to produce proper sanitation even though Taliban extremists also target foreign aid workers. This movie narrow mindedly addresses a small little problem out of something bigger. And as a result of them doing that, it kind of portray Luke Benning as an annoying douche.