Good start, but then it gets ruined

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

In the mid-to-late '80s, America finally came to terms with the Vietnam War, exorcising their demons via popular culture. On TV, we had Vietnam veterans The A-Team coming to the rescue of the needy. On the radio, Paul Hardcastle told us that the average age was 'n-n-n-n-nineteen', while Stan Ridgeway recounted the story of an awfully big marine. In the cinemas, Chuck Norris was Missing In Action, Rambo asked 'Do we get to win this time?', Tom Cruise was Born on the Fourth of July, Robin Williams was screeching 'Good Morning', Michael J. Fox suffered the Casualties of War, and Kubrick's jacket was of the full metal variety. Oliver Stone's Vietnam film Platoon even cleaned up at the Oscars, winning four awards, including Best Picture.It's understandable that Hamburger Hill, with its cast of relative unknowns and second-tier director, didn't receive quite as much attention as the aforementioned heavy-hitters, but if you're serious about war movies, don't let the lack of any big names put you off: the film is just as worthy of praise as Platoon, if not more-so, the green cast only adding to the film's already palpable authenticity. Shot in the thick jungles and even thicker mud of the Phillipines, the film tells of one of the most costly battles of the Vietnam War, the fight for Hill 937 in the Ashau Valley, known to grunts as Hamburger Hill. Director John Irvin's aim is to capture the horrors of war in all their bloody detail, and the sense of realism he achieves is remarkable: when his characters die, they don't throw their arms up in slow motion to the strains of Adagio for Strings… they do so in a sudden welter of gore, hammering home the notion that war is hell.By the end of Hamburger Hill, the viewer is left as emotionally drained as its surviving characters are physically exhausted.

I remember my Father making me watch "Platoon" when I was younger to show me and a friend of mine that war was not a good thing or a "cool" thing. I believe he got his point across quite effectively as it shows what war is like to a certain degree. Although I find "Platoon" a great movie I still much prefer "Hamburger Hill" for some reason, I have never been to war and hope I never do but to hear vets say that this movie gets it right where so many others haven't is a statement I would agree with whole heartedly. Like I said I've never been but the realism and the insanity of war oozes out in this film and it seems more genuine then the rest. The scenes of friendly fire and the men slipping down the muddy hill, so close to victory and yet so far from the end are especially powerful to me and although it's just a movie it seem very real and leaves you cringing and uncomfortable in some moments and laughing and smiling in others. It seems absolutely crazy to lose so many good men to gain one muddy hill out in the middle of Vietnam, but when they do it makes you feel like that was everything...to them and to the ones who never made it to the top.

As the extra material points out, this was the 1st movie for many of the cast. Only Don Cheadle and Dylan McDermott have moved on, as I can tell. the rest have stayed rested.Courtney Vance played a racial character with over-the-top racism.While the movie is based on a true event, it was acted poorly and was a poor script. In retrospect you have to wonder why the commanders of this siege just didn't pull off all the troops and just napalm the whole hill for about 3 days.. I've seen most war movies and this has to rank around the very bottom in execution. "Inglorious basterds" was a better movie to watch.

It has been a while that I saw Platoon, Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket. Movies that apparently are often used as a comparison in judging this movie. I read a lot of veterans say that this is the most realistic one out of the bunch. Knowing little about the reality of it i cant judge it on realistic criteria. Only things that came off a little bit unrealistic were an exploding head and the "firework". The rest was quite horrific, and i am sure thats what war is. But a movie should have more to offer then realism, and that is where the movie failed a bit. It just had little impact on me. The soldiers in this movie showed too little of themselves before and between battle to get me emotionally involved. In the dying finale on the hill i even had problems distinguishing one dying soldier from the other. It now felt as a final episode of a series which earlier episodes i missed out on.Apart from that i noticed discussion about whether this is an anti-war movie or not. The horror speaks for itself. Do you think it's worth it?? I don't. Of course most soldiers are not happy with press hanging around the spectacle while their comrades are dying off, or for antiwar protesters for that matter. But that seems a logical perspective to me once you are out there fighting and doing your job. offtopic: Not only in this movie, but also other stuff i watched and read about Vietnam i have gotten the image that amongst warprotestors soldiers were harassed once returning. I have also demonstrated a lot against military involvement of my country. But pointing fingers at soldiers is just screwed up. Then, as an anti-war protester, you seriously don't get it.