Read the book and loved it.  Real stuff.

I was forced to watch a DVD this week with family on Pearl Harbor.  Hollywood screwed with the love theme so much I hated it.(as I knew it would).  

My review to my family was "not enough real history and too much love stuff to bring in the bucks".

I was label a "blood and guts guy".  I hate it when they try to make a movie to entertain folks and compromoise facts.

Ah!

Newsday didn't like it either

http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/movies/ny-etblack2526249dec28.story?coll=ny%2Dmoviereview%2Dheadlines

An Offensive Foray Into Africa

By John Anderson
STAFF WRITER

December 28, 2001

DURING "Black Hawk Down," the ostensibly true story of the 1993 battle of Mogadishu, I kept thinking of God. And country. And Princess Sacheen Littlefeather.

Back in March 1973, Littlefeather was sent to the Academy Awards by Marlon Brando to reject his "Godfather" Oscar, because of how Hollywood had treated the Indians. So a most improbable scenario presented itself: Someday, a Somalian actor, writer or director would be voted an Oscar. And some emissary would reject it because of the way director Ridley ("Gladiator") Scott and producer Jerry ("Pearl Harbor") Bruckheimer had turned his or her people into small game.

"Black Hawk Down" is perhaps a perfect movie for its time. Although jingoistic to the point of laughter and cast with the hoariest kind of cliched war-movie characters, it does have something of a cutting-edge aesthetic: Back in the '90s, the trend in movies seemed to indicate that Hollywood would eventually release only a single feature a year, consisting of a single, prolonged explosion (perhaps with subliminal advertising worked into the dust clouds and bloodstains). "Black Hawk Down," which spends 45 minutes on humanity and another 110 on unrelieved action (this is not an endorsement) is a major step in that direction.

Of course, it is a war film and a technically adept one, about the longest sustained ground battle involving American soldiers since the Vietnam War. On Oct. 3, 1993, a force of 120 American Delta soldiers and Ranger infantry were dropped into Mogadishu, to abduct two of Somalian warlord Mohamed Farrah Aidid's lieutenants. Along the way, two UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters were shot down. Subsequently, a one-hour mission turned into 15 hours of mayhem, ending with 18 Americans dead and 73 wounded.

CONTINUED

The Somalians? Other than two principal figures - one a rather cowardly operative who is supposed to lead the American force to the meeting place of Aidid's lieutenants, the other a high- ranking rebel with a striking resemblance to Idi Amin - the Somalians are a faceless (and legless and headless) ragtag army of anti-American black people who, the movie very distinctly tells us, are dispatched with the help of something very like divine intervention.

I understand fully that this is a movie about an American adventure into a hostile territory, and that the lone black soldier in the force led by Maj. Gen. William Garrison (Sam Shepard) is there to tell us that no, it wasn't a race war. And that Josh Hartnett's character, Staff Sgt. Matt Eversmann, is a counterbalance to the otherwise let's-get-a-shootin' attitude of his fellow soldiers ("We can help," he says, "or we can watch this country destroy itself..."). And that the Somalians who are shooting were not our friends, or even those of their own people - Aidid starved 300,000 countrymen by hijacking food aid, which led to the 1993 action.

But "Black Hawk Down" is not a documentary. It's certainly not a manifestation of national will. It's a big- budget movie. And except for the happy dancing blacks who greet the American force when it finally extracts itself from the besieged city, the Somalians feel like props, something to be plugged at a shooting gallery. And the accompanying sense of self- righteousness could make you lose your popcorn.
Copyright © 2001, Newsday, Inc.

Here's a link to a post I made about it-
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=81477

I was so pissed when I read this guys review that's the first thing that popped into my head.

This shitbird writes, "...this picture imitates a few scenes in David O. Russell's remarkable 1999 war picture 'Three Kings,' where the context was not sacrificed to politics."

Any dumbasss who though that was "remarkable" is really to stupid for words...

Plus, imagine the "cliches" he mentions... He just does not recognize MEN doing the work of MEN around other MEN!

Quoted:
I was thinking either a liberal, bed wetting Jew or a Black. Seems my experience has given me a sixth sense about these things.



What, exactly, does this mean?

I'll take the liberty of explaining his comment to ya by rephrasing it... "My experiences have shown me that if I eat a piece of pie and it taste like apples it is more than likely apple pie."

Pretty simple actually; it is called learning. Kinda like touching a hot stove and getting burned and not touching it again, ya know. You learn what to look for in a stove and you begin to recognize what may indicate it is hot...

Of course that "complex" learning fails some... Like some who could not have guessed that the piece was written by "either a liberal, bed wetting Jew or a Black."

The attitude of Newsday's John Anderson is exactly the attitude that led terrorists attack of the WTC/Pentagon.  They don't want to deal with people who are low-lifes and who have a somewhat unsavory background and motives. How else do would you find out where all of these people are in a land you know nothing about?

"People dancing in the streets," this really what happened like it or not. Was this the same images from some pro Taliban/Al Queada countries after the wTC/Pentagon attack?

John Anderson don't know the difference between a broomstick and a buttstock.

These writers in the liberal press are the same ones that write all the bull shit about why there should be a disarming American civians, and not giving our Military what they want when they ask for it. Les Aspin, Clintons boy, is now rotting in hell for not providing our men the armmor they requested. The times writer likes to talk about teeth for some reason, I volunteer to show him what I can do with his, READY FOR DUTY ANY TIME!
JACK

I want to know what the difference is between a "bedwetting Jew" and the "normal" kind.  Or do you think there is only one kind?