Shop now Shop now Shop now See more Shop all Amazon Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Shop now Learn More Shop now DIYED Shop now Shop Fire Shop Kindle Shop now Shop now Shop now
Customer Review

6 of 12 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Meretricious, mendacious war-porn, 17 Sept. 2011
This review is from: 5 Days of War [DVD] (DVD)
This is a thoroughly bad film, for a number of reasons.

First and most important is its dishonesty, which would make Ananias blench with embarrassment. The film was financed by Georgian interests, and it should be clear to anyone who has the slightest recollection of recent world events that this is a crude piece of Georgian government progaganda. Nowhere in this film is there any indication that the Georgian army started the war with a division-level surprise attack preceded by an artillery rocket bombardment on the Russian peacekeeping forces in South Ossetia. One might think that an intelligent propagandist would understand that such gross distortions of the truth are unlikely to prove effective. Perhaps there are still some who cleave to Dr Goebbels' assertion that the bigger the lie, the more likely it is to be believed.

Second is the poor quality of the storytelling and characterization. The cast includes a number of fine actors, whose talents are entirely wasted here. The film is "based on real events" only to the extent that a fictional and weakly-plotted yarn unravels against the background of an historical conflict. Highly-improbable events are used to provide rapid reversals of the narrative on at least three occasions, but all dramatic impact is lost, because it is hard to care where the narrative goes next. Likewise, the lack of depth to the characterisation of any of the film's protagonists means that nobody is likely to care whether or not they survive the random outbursts of pointless violence that are the main content of the film.

Third, these random outbursts of pointless violence. I have no particular objection to violent films; "Pulp Fiction" and "9th Company" are favourites of mine. The rolling orange explosions, the improbably large volumes of automatic fire, the slo-mo running around in wide-mouthed shrieking horror, all are competently done. But they are no different from what is done in hundreds of other films. Ever since "Saving Private Ryan", film-makers seem to have been determined to out-do each other in the spectacular portrayal of armed violence, seemingly not realising how quickly this becomes stale and dull; in consequence, they fail to achieve the impact still made by Peter Watkins' "The Wargame" or "Culloden". There may be some film-goers who find the slo-mo portrayal of a rifle bullet exiting a woman's breast to be jolly good entertainment, but I beg to differ.

I wish I could find something good to say about the film, but there really isn't anything. It is meretricious, mendacious Hollywood war-porn of the most contemptible kind.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines ">here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking on the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in


Track comments by e-mail

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-2 of 2 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 21 Jan 2012 19:41:23 GMT
The "alleged" reason given by the Georgian Government for their missile attack on South Ossetia between 7/8th August '08 was to reclaim land that and protect peace-keeping troops that the Russians were attempting to take and that the Russians had fired on previously with non-peace keeping troops. You can't say the film is Georgian Government propaganda simply because the Director maybe Georgian and he may have been financed by Georgian backers? What a shallow and ignorant comment? Where do YOU propose he should seek out his backers for the film? Antarctica? The Andes? Perhaps China or The Seychelles? No, of course he is going to look 'locally' so to speak.People like YOU see conspiracy theoreys where none exist.

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Jan 2012 00:46:18 GMT
Please elaborate, why you call this comment shallow and biased. Please present an argument that in fact would call this comment shallow and ignorant. Your view of this conflict is not enough to validate such a statement.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›

Review Details