MovieChat Forums > Casualties of War (1989) Discussion > Casualty of bore...

Casualty of bore...

posted 14 years ago by terrible2
26 replies | jump to latest

I’ve always found this film a bit pretentious, and over-acted.
I’ve also always viewed it as a blatant attempt to cash in on the success of “Platoon” which is (IMHO) a far better movie. Some of the dialog between characters was almost exact: “Torch the place!” etc… Even Dale Dye appears as the same @#&% character…
Fox is completely miscast here. I like Fox, and think he’s a good actor, but he failed to sell me as a soldier. He’s too small, clean cut and seemed to be missing his delorean.
Penn and (especially) Harvey go way overboard with the whole villainous characterizations to the point that it almost becomes comical. I mean seriously, these guys could go up against Batman…
Thuy Thu Le does her best at keeping the emotional backbone of the film, but the rest of the clichéd characters fall flat as they try to wring out every last drop of drama.
I hadn’t watched this film in over 20 years until last night. I remembered that I really didn’t care much for it back then, but couldn’t remember why… I do now.

Stick with the original… Platoon.

[–] Vincen7 12 years ago

yeah, I agree with pretty much everything.. this movie was very weak, and the worst performance I've seen from Sean Penn

[–] supernova_painkiller 12 years ago

I liked this movie a lot, and I think it was way better than Platoon, which is boring as hell.

But I do agree that Fox was miscast and Penn overacted a bit. But I don't think that they screw anything up.

[–] GreyHunter 12 years ago

I just thought about this movie for the first time in years and came to check it out. I recall it being a decent enough movie, generally speaking, but one that was completely unable to pull me in because I couldn't get past the presence of Fox. I like his acting, I do, but I simply didn't buy him in this movie. It was like watching a recruit from the Mormon Midget Brigade running around playing soldier.

[–] NinjaFOXForce 12 years ago

I like this move AND Platoon....just couldn't stand Sean Penn's overacting, such as the "You Dinky-dau,man...you beaucoup dinky dau!, line. UGHH!

[–] Hanz-Willhelm 12 years ago

No two people will like anything the same way.
I think this is an awesome movie, I find it heartbreaking, gripping and it totally pulls me in 100%.

I remember when I first saw it, it was funny because I didn't know anything about it. I lived at home at the time and my parents had rented it. I saw the cover and I thought they were going to make Fox some action hero like Platoon, Rambo, Die Hard, Commando type of movie. I thought it was going to be action seeing it was a movie about the U.S. involvement in Vietnam. He's such a little guy I was flabbergasted they'd try him out as an action hero.

Once the move got going and I saw it wasn't about Fox being an action star and with the shocking story that unfolded I was totally drawn in. I was so sad he didn't get her out of there and (I wasn't there and don't know what I would have done) I was bummed he didn't blow Clark away when Clark came back for Fox and the young girl (when he was about to sneak her away because she wouldn't leave all alone). So sad.

[–] eeoulo 12 years ago

pretentious overacted cliche filled movie indeed! It's like Eastwood and De Palma got together to see who could fill a movie with the most solider cliches. I think clearly De Palma won with this movie but likely only because Eastwood went first with Heartbreak Ridge.

[–] CromeRose 11 years ago

Agree with OP. I never saw this when it first came out. I hate all of DePalma's films. I think he's one of the most overrated directors of all time - right up there with those other overrated fellows Cimino, Scorsese and Coppola. I tried to watch this last night for the first time ever and just could not get past the first twenty minutes. I love MJF but I simply could not accept him in this role. As another poster said in this thread, he seemed to be missing his DeLorean. He's a great actor at what he does best, which is comedy, especially as Marty McFly. And in this film it seemed to me that the F word was thrown in for his character purely as shock value for audiences of the day to say wow MJF said the F word. It just seemed forced. And Sean Penn really hammed it like a cartoon bad guy, right down to the silly Popeye-esque accent. Where was he supposed to be from, Treasure Island? And John C. Reilly, who is excellent in everything these days, looked utterly uncomfortable playing a badass marine. Anyway, I got as far as the scene where Fox, Reilly and some third guy I don't know were taking a shower (just before going off duty) and they were all scowling and saying mean stuff that was so forced it was laughable, that I could bear it no more and ejected the DVD.

[–] eeoulo 11 years ago

And Sean Penn really hammed it like a cartoon bad guy, right down to the silly Popeye-esque accent. Where was he supposed to be from, Treasure Island?

CLASSIC! You nailed it on every observation. I wish I had the sense to shut it off when you did since it only got worse.

[–] luvthemflicks 11 years ago

I don't know how anyone can say either this movie or Platoon is boring. They both came out at a time when America was trying to understand and place perspective about our activity in Vietnam. Therefore, it raised some of the issues that existed at the time such as brutalities of civilians and the anger that soldiers may have had simply from being there.

I do agree this movie fed off the popularity of Platoon. So did Hamburger Hill (a less popular movie than Platoon or Casualties of War, but still pretty good). Anytime a movie that presents a topic is popular, other movies will be made to try to capitalize on the genre. Happened big in the 70s with the disaster flicks (Poseidon Adventure, Towering Inferno, etc) and in the 80s with adventure films, (Indiana Jones, Jewel of the Nile movies with Michael Douglas/Kathleen Turner).

Sean Penn just played himself. A complete creep and A-hole.

Michael J Fox - while I remember thinking at the time I first saw this movie that he was miscast, I think now it was great casting. He is the clean cut All-American type that clashes with the evil Sean Penn role. I think Fox did well in the role.

So you have the honorable WWII type soldier that America would like to believe is the only type that exists and also did in Vietnam competing with the more realistic Sean Penn / Tony Meserve. This character is one that is based on the type of soldier that people (referring to those who never served) in the US were not made aware of before Vietnam and the My Lai incident.

I like the movie for what it is. I was in the Army the time it came out and it was pretty well liked among fellow soldiers, but I think most consider Platoon better.

[–] Special-Order-937 11 years ago

Personally, I didn't compare it to Platoon - they're as different from each other as Born on 4th July is from Apocalypse Now. Platoon's nearest comparison is Hamburger Hill. They all offer a perspective on the Vietnam war and taken as a collection they show how war messes up people in different ways. I found Casualties of War engrossing and tragic and I thought this was one of Michael J Fox's best films.

[–] Disardor 11 years ago

Platoon is terrible. Casualties of War is far better in every conceivable way. Better acted, better written, better filmed and far better directed. Casualties of War is by no means a perfect film, but it is a very good one that deals with a very disturbing case of power being abused in the field.