Customer Reviews

Rules of Engagement

5 star:		(46)
4 star:		(32)
3 star:		(29)
2 star:		(16)
1 star:		(20)

 

 

Tommy Lee Jones and Samuel L. Jackson are excellent as usual in their roles: two old friends from Vietnam whose careers took different courses after a firefight that badly injured Jones. Jackson's Marines rescue a cowardly ambassador and his family from an embassy pelted with rocks, insults and the occasional sniper's bullet. In return for this service, the ambassador will testify that Jackson lost control and opened fire on a crowd full of unarmed civilians, because his superior at the Department of State thinks he should to save the American reputation in the Middle East.

The basic story is good and the actors have amazing presence, but there are a number of amusing inconsistencies in the script, like:

1) Dale Dye, as Samuel L. Jackson's commanding officer, asks him whether he wants private counsel or the base legal office to represent him (if you watch this in a theater full of military personnel, expect this line to be among the funniest in the film). This occurs right in the middle of him briefing the man whose court-martial he will convene, which happens absolutely never.

2) Why didn't anyone analyze the bullet holes in the embassy wall to establish trajectory?

3) How the hell do you find a Vietnamese company captain from an action that occurred thirty years ago with no sort of attention at any previous time? (This probably makes no sense to you if you haven't seen it, and it really won't in the film, except to make the point that even officers on opposing sides have the common trait of valuing their troops' lives more than anything else on the field of battle.)

The conflict between functions of state and defense isn't as implausible as the reviewers appear to think, particularly in a time when we deploy our soldiers and Marines to the world's least desirable corners as beat cops. Whether you set this story in Yemen or Kosovo or somewhere else, it can happen, it has happened and will probably continue to happen. State wants its wars to resolve neatly into ends comfortably discussed in meetings over tea, and gets annoyed when Defense reminds them that rules of engagement always make room for an exception necessary for saving lives.

Rent it before you buy it.

I enjoyed this movie a lot and I think that it is underrated. Samuel L. Jackson is Marine Colonel Terry Childers and Tommy Lee Jones is the lawyer who must defend him. The movie begins in some nameless jungle in Vietnam where Childers and Jones are soldiers fighting Charlie. A huge gun battle ensues and Jones's group is massacred. But Childers convinces the VC leader to call off the attack by killing his radio operator. Then we are taken to the present day, to San'aa, Yemen, where Childers is forced to get the ambassador out. His marines are being shot at, he thinks by the crowd, and so he orders his marines to open fire. They do, and so begins his difficult legal battle. It is not "A Few Good Men," Rob Reiner's spactacular military courtroom drama, but it is a good, interesting look at the military's justice system, and it keeps you riveted. It is not a really surprise ending, but it works. Jackson is absolutely amazing and Jones plays his part well as Childers's lawyer and friend. Go out and rent it, it's better than at least two of the movies nominated for best picture.

Having served in the Marine Corps, I am a sucker for all things Marine. I am also a fan of both Tommy Lee Jones and Samuel L. Jackson, but then again who isnt? These two powerhouse performers team up for one good movie.

Jackson plays Terry Childers who is a 30 year combat veteran colonel in the Marine Corps. Childers is sent into Yemen to rescue an Ambassador (Ben Kingsley) and his family. The mission gets quite hairy and terrorists and civilians both are caught in the firestorm to follow. The incident in seen as an embarassment at best and a political nightmare at worst by the folks in Washington and Childers is put on military trial for murder. He asks his old buddy Hayes Hodges (Jones) to defend him. Hodges also happens to owe Childers his life from events in Vietnam.

The movie has the outcome you might expect and along the way we are introduced to a not so hidden conspiracy to frame Childers for the crime. What separates this usual plot from other films is the outstanding acting of Jackson and Jones. Jones takes center stage and wows you as a former combat Marine turned military lawyer who struggles to search for his own identity and questions his value as a Marine along the way. Jackson as always delivers a rock solid and emotional performance.

The direction of this movie is particularly note worthy. It does an admirable job with addressing the modern military dilemna of fighting unseen enemies in urban environments. The director holds some things from you so that you will find yourself questioning the acts of the Marines involved in the shooting. Only at the end does he give you everything you need to know. This makes the movie better than most.

Overall it is great and the only thing that keeps it from being a five star flick is that Jackson's character, although central to the plot, had to take a backseat to Tommy Lee Jones performance. I thought the nature of the film would have benefited from more scenes surrounding how Childers was dealing with the consequences of his actions. Still, it is a movie worth adding to your collection. Enjoy.

I actually thought that the movie was pretty good. I did enjoy every minute of it. But since I am in the Marines, it kind of made me mad because of the fact that there has been incedences like the case in the movie. Where the government throws all responsibilities and allegations at one man to save their own hide. The suspense was outstanding. I really don't see what made some of the other veiwers not like it. Take it from me. The movie was couldn't have been better unless they showed that congressman getting beat down.

This is really the movie "The Siege" should have been. It tackles a complicated issue, and doesn't back away from it. The director shoves the brutality of war in your face from the get go, and doesn't let up. He makes the compelling case that combat is not easy, and innocent people might suffer. He also, in no uncertain terms, points out the appalling betrayal the men and women of our armed forces are daily subjected to by the politicians who are supposed to stand up for them. Finally, all this violence and intrigue is juxtaposed against a smart court room drama, in whcih Samuel Jackon's character is being court-martialed essentially for protecting himself and his troops.

This is a smart, exciting movie that is bound to ignite controversy. But that is what good movies do, and this one carries a powerful message about duty and honor.

As for the DVD, it's nothing special, extra feature wise. However, with all the battle scenes in this movie, it benefits from the high quality A/V features that come with any DVD.

This movie has an excellent protrayal on present day combat. Today's wars are no longer fought in fields and jungles, but in towns and cities. The director's depiction of the Marine Officer's cool under fire attitude, was excellent. Though hard for most people to swallow, the Government is definately quick to point fingers, in order to save face. (Another excellent "fictional" example of this, is the movie Clear and Present Danger.) The only bad points about the movie, are the way they produced the Vietnam Officer, and the ending that left you hoping for some last minute action. Over all, this movie was an excellent example of the US Marines' Commanding Presence in any situation. You make the choice to buy, but it's definately worth watching once.

War is rife with moral ambiguities, particularly if some combatants are not in uniform. Rules of Engagement, a military drama that ends up in the courtroom, sets out to explore the uncertainties of pulling triggers and ends up pulling no punches.

Jackson and Jones portray Marine Corps colonels who served together in Vietnam. Now, nearly 30 years -- and many battles and medals -- later, Jackson faces a court-martial after ordering Marines under his command to shoot civilians demonstrating outside a U.S. embassy in Yemen. He contends that the demonstrators were armed, that he was only returning fire, and asks Jones, an attorney, to defend him. "I'm a good enough lawyer," says Jones, "to know you need a better one."

These two accomplished actors have a fine time playing off each other -- Jackson all concentrated energy and Jones taking it slow. Director William Friedkin (The Exorcist) does an especially effective job with the early bloody combat scenes.

Intriguing military procedural film with two brilliant actors.

An excellant film! Why? Because it not only shows what men do under heavy fire, it also shows what they would really do. Not just have it sugar coated for the audience. Looking at the opening part of the movie, one can tell that it is Vietnam. Without words this sets the tone. You can just tell that a battle is going to happen. When it does the images are real. Later on in the film there is another battle taking place and this seems to be one of the most realistic I've ever seen. Samuel L. Jackson plays a Marine in charge of a rescue mission to save an American ambassador. When he orders his men to fire into a crowd containing men, women and children. Jackson is sent to trial. Tommy Lee Jones must some how prove that Jackson and his men had been fired upon from the crowd. A very real story centering around Marines, and a realistic view of war and every other day stuff helps give us a good view of men who risk there lives for others! Great sound and sound effects editing! Grade:B+

After reading the reviews of Leonard Maltin and other online reviewers, I am disgusted by the ignorance of the public toward the way the United States handles military operations these days. The only reviewer who got it right was the Marine. This film was written in response to the real life situation in Somalia. Army Rangers and Delta operators found themselves trapped in the hostile city being shot at by militiamen who were hiding in crowds of civilians. The moral dillema for the soldiers was whether they were able to fire into crowds of women and children if they were in effect protecting armed combatants. In the battle to get out of the city 17 Rangers and Delta operators were killed and 80+ more seriously wounded. While the mission was seen as a failure by politicians in Washington, it was a success by military standards. A vastly outnumbered american force had inflicted massive casualties on the enemy and completed its objective which was to apprehend several warlords in the city. The public reacted with horror at the death count, and the President withdrew all american forces from Somalia. The Rangers and Delta operators felt betrayed by their government, which they felt had forced them to run away like cowards. The american people regarded the whole episode as forgettable and the media pushed it aside. The truth is our government sends soldiers to far away hell holes telling them that they are not allowed to fight back against aggressors, and then pulls them out after casualties are suffered portraying the military as a bunch of cowards who are unable to defend themselves. This film brings these issues to the publics attention. It reflects the fact that soldiers are sent to risk their lives for a government that does not fully support them and a public that cannot understand them and their actions, because none of us really knows how it feels to be in combat. I would like to thank everyone involved in this film for bringing the public an appreciation for what our country's fighting men have to do.(For more information on the battle in Somalia I recommend the book "Black Hawk Down")

I enjoyed this film. Sam Jackson and Tommy Lee Jones are always excellent and they are here as well. I even liked Guy Pearce. It works well both as an action movie and a court room drama.

I have to laugh the reviewers saying the action scenes were unrealistic. "When have you seen a 6 year-old firing a pistol?" Read Blackhawk Down sometime. Watch the film clips on the website of 10 year old children with AKs charging a downed helicopter. Read about the Somalians using their women and children as human shields. You know why you don't see this in the movies normally? Because they don't want to make any interest groups mad. You want the truth? You can't handle the truth.