Hollywood shoots Gulf War in 'Courage under Fire'

By Dini S. Djalal

Jakarta (JP): Courage Under Fire, the first Hollywood film on the Gulf War, opens with newsreels of midnight missiles, sand- strewn tanks, and stern soundbites from George Bush and Saddam Hussein about this "mother of all battles".

Splice by splice of war footage comparable to the finest Nintendo game, the audience comes to recall this questionably patriotic war which gave a momentary boost to Bush's rating in the polls. But when the gripping CNN production became a staged desert battle starring Denzel Washington as Lt. Col. Nathaniel Serling, my concentration wandered.

While Denzel and his boys cheered each other on in their baffling demolition of enemy tanks (a glossary of warfare jargon should be given out with the movie tickets), I was anxious not for the fighting to cease, but for Peter Arnett's on-camera commentary.

Such are the dilemmas of celluloid versions of real-life drama. Granted, some "true" stories are better on-screen than off, especially when those tuned-in are not too familiar with the story's details. But this most media-hyped of international conflicts was feasted on by television viewers. Many fans of Vietnam movies are too young to remember that carnage, but nearly everybody remembers the bombing of Baghdad. And while the public then may have rooted for Saddam's demise, they may now question what the war was all about.

Perhaps realizing the public's change of heart, this story features neither Kuwaitis nor Iraqis. On the whole, politics does not play a prominent role in the plot, at least on the surface.

That said, when Iraqis are mentioned, it is not without mercy. A soldier describes Iraqi troops as " those f---ers", then corrects himself. Denzel Washington answers, "No, you were right the first time". The audience lets out an uncomfortable laugh.

The scene is one of the film's many tense moments, and tense not necessarily as intended. Even if you are a gung-ho American this is a difficult film to digest. Although the issues are under-explored, beneath the patriotism simmer America's biggest burdens: racism and sexism.

After all, a story about a black officer and a female captain is a rare equation even in the politically-correct 1990s.

Quickly, the plot. After surviving a "friendly-fire" incident, Lt. Col. Serling is relegated by his boss Gen. Hershberg (Michael Moriarty of TV show Law and Order) to paper-pushing at the Pentagon. His first task is to review the candidacy of Capt. Karen Walden (Meg Ryan) for the Medal of Honor, who died while trying to save her men as well as a marooned Blackhawks corps. Walden would be the first female awarded the medal, and everybody on the Beltway is keen for that photo-opportunity with Walden's daughter, who will receive the award.

But Serling, haunted by flashbacks (the first Hollywood versions of the Gulf War nightmare, setting the example for this most-favorite of war-film sequences) and Washington Post reporter Tony Gartner (the consistently under-praised Scott Glenn), is hemming and hawing with his assignment. His interviews with the surviving members of Walden's crew produce patchy and disparate testimonies of Walden's death. The medic, Ilario (played with subtle madness by Matt Damon), says Walden was a brave fighter, shooting at enemy soldiers to the very end. But the gunner Monfriez (a marvelously macho Lou Diamond Phillips) counters that she was a coward who wanted to surrender.

Meanwhile, the other survivor Altemeyer (Seth Gilliam) has been so traumatized that he is bed-ridden in the hospital with every ailment one can imagine. Altemeyer offers little explanation, other than one that is incongruous with the other two stories.

But nobody in the army or the White House cares about details; all they want is a hero to justify the war. As Serling descends deeper into drink and negativity about the review, his superiors start threatening his continued career in the army. The plot twists and turns until the last 20 minutes of the film, when the scriptwriters resort to a predictable situational and personal salvation in the finest Hollywood tradition.

As is expected of Tinseltown's leading black actor, Washington excels as the tortured military man unable to cope with mistakes made by himself and by his profession. Serling's rage is quiet, but emphatic. Washington's only weakness is that he's not a very convincing drunk.

But the crucial thread of the story is Meg Ryan, who has the difficult task of making mainstream audiences love women in uniform. Yet after only minutes of her growling and barking in a ridiculously superfluous southern accent, my feminist resolve to sympathize with an uncommon role model was reduced to a cynical sneer.

Director Ed Zwick (of TV show Thirtysomething and award- winning film Glory) said he chose Ryan because of her "open, available emotionality". Ryan herself has said that she wants people to see her as other than the kooky-cute waif of romantic comedies. But if this is an unsuccessful image makeover, it is to the advantage of the film. Hiring Meg Ryan the kooky-cute waif of When Harry Met Sally and Sleepless in Seattle is a cunning and typically Hollywood way of making the character sympathetic. There is no subtlety in the acting, or the casting.

Some of the earnest dialog can also induce one to cringe. When Serling sermonizes about finding "the truth, the cold hard truth", you flinch not only at the banality but also at the arrogance. In a film produced by Twentieth Century Fox and targeted for the families of Gulf War troops, I guess the "truth" does not involve anybody other than Americans, even if the war was not fought in the U.S. (although the film was shot in Texas!).

Flawed as the film may be, it looks great. Half the story is told in flashbacks, and the editing of this fractured narrative is sharp but clear.

What isn't clear are some of the conversations. A layperson's understanding of Hueys, Medivacs, M-16s, T-54s and other military hardware is limited unless he or she is obsessed with GI Joe. After a while, all the war-talk becomes boring and weighs down the flow of the film.

But some of the dialog and messages are strong, and not without spine. Serling's retort to Gen. Herschberg -- "You hired me because I wouldn't rock the boat" -- illustrates the constraints non-Caucasians face in getting ahead in their careers. Both Walden's death and medal-award are set in the context of ingrained sexism, which is alluded to repeatedly throughout the film.

Despite the flag-waving and cannon-firings, the film cues in on the non-conformist themes of past military films, that sometimes the army is less interested in protecting individual (and especially lower-ranking) officers rather than the reputation of the military and the government. In very simple terms, Courage Under Fire is like A Few Good Men with the Deer Hunter and Private Benjamin in Clear and Present Danger.