from what I saw it looked OK, kinda a interesting topic but I doubt the US would ever track down a Vietnam vet to charge him with something.

The lady lawyer reminds me of one of those PC idiots always worried about the US image around the world.

so was it any good I watched 10 minute but had to go to work? should I bother watching tonight?

I flipped by it and watched for a second because i think Johnson is a good actor I'll proably watch it tonight.

The book was excellent. I missed the movie, but would have liked to see it, though movies never live up to the book.

I have some questions about the weapons used in it
[url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=217662[/url]

I noticed some of the guys had m14's along with m16's? did some units have both?

I watched the movie on TV last night.Don was good.The idea of bringing 55 year old vietnam veterns up on war crimes charges must be a liberal masturbation dream.The plot was not believable for me.An "International Hospital"located in a combat zone out in the boondocks......what?????The whole thing seemed like a "squeeze a few more bits of shit out of the viet vets with a plot that is insulting"The soldiers in Johnsons'squad?looked like a bunch of haight ashbury hippies.Right....

it wasn't as anti-vietnam war as I was afraid of

The whole idea seemed really stupid to me.  Without spoiling it when I got to the end I was just like, "Why the heck did Johnson's character do any of this???"  It wasn't anti Vietnam, and really didn't feel liberal or anything like that.  Just seemed totally hokey for some reason, maybe you'll disagree.  It was done well enough, I like Don Johnson and think he did it well...

personally I thought it was much better than your typical sunday night made for TV movie.

What exactly felt hokey about it to you? the fact that he kept it a secret?

or how the lady major wore her cover inside buildings?

Spoiler>>>

Perhaps hokey wasn't the right word, contrived maybe.  I just don't see why he kept it secret after they disobeyed orders, confronted him at gunpoint, knocked him out and then murdered 50 people.  Why would he cover for them, he started to try to get them arrested at the start of it???  I mean he shot one of his men to keep him from murdering civies.  Then he goes and covers for everyone else, never to mention it again?  They were about to kill him, I'd be damned if I protected them, they basically started a mutiny or whatever the Army term for it is...

And, I had a problem with him being found guilty of murder.  It didn't feel right for that verdict for an officer who kills one under his command directly disobeying orders and in the process of killing civilians in a time of war...  Sure they basically acquitted him due to the sentence but still...  I don't know, maybe that was all how it would have gone down, just didn't sit right.  I felt like he would have to be crazy to have covered for them under this situation.

But you're right, it was better than 99% of TV movies, just bothered me in the end...