Last weekend, the film “Act of Valor” took the No. 1 spot at the box office with an estimated $24.7 million. The movie, featuring real U.S. Navy SEALs, is a fictional account inspired by true events that take place in various regions of the world.
The movie, despite being a hit with audiences (it received an “A” according to market research firm Cinemascore), was largely panned by critics, some calling it a cheap military recruitment propaganda film, while others described the characters as two-dimensional.
Upon watching the movie, I also couldn’t ignore that the soldiers, who were essentially playing dramatized versions of themselves, had a monotone delivery of their lines throughout.
Most of the movie revolves around rescue sequences and cross fires between good soldiers and “bad guys,” to the point that the movie feels like a first-person shooting game. Directed by two former stunt men, the film delivers solid action sequences, even though the soldiers are clearly uncomfortable saying their lines on camera.
Nevertheless, despite the thin plot and cardboard characters, the movie still delivered an emotional punch at the end, and I couldn’t help but be surprised and affected by the poignant finale.
Upon researching how realistic the movie strove to be, I was also surprised to find out that the action sequences were recreated real Navy SEAL training missions and that the soldiers shot actual bullets in the film. In this sense, I can’t help but feel that this action movie, more than any other in recent memory, may be more authentic than many other action films dealing with this subject matter.
In fact, the men featured in the film are trained military servicemen who were asked to dramatically portray their everyday lives. The men in the film are trained fighters, not trained actors, but does it matter? What are audience expectations as opposed to critics’ expectations when it comes to these films?
In looking at movies that deal with combat and war, it seems that audiences have largely been unreceptive to movies about war in the Middle East, from 2007’s, “The Kingdom,” to Matt Damon’s 2010 film, “The Green Zone,” because they are so timely and deal with issues audiences go to the movies to escape.
Perhaps because of an over-saturation of these types of movies, many war films have received poor box office returns. Are causal moviegoers, and even critics, not ready to watch a movie dealing with these contemporary issues? Does a film about terrorism and war need to be stripped down to pure patriotism, and “acts of valor,” for audiences to be receptive to it?
It makes me wonder if “Act of Valor” would’ve been as successful, as it currently is, if it were a real documentary about SEAL training (which might be logistically impossible, but still something to think about). “The Hurt Locker” is one exception that was praised by critics as a jarring and honest look at the life of a soldier fighting in the Middle East that left a sense of unease by the end of the movie. “Act of Valor,” while still offering an emotional punch at the end of the movie, offers a different kind of gratification that ultimately plays on the idea that serving one’s country is bold and valiant.
The disparity between critics and audiences has always been prevalent in the movie industry. If everyone listened to critics, movies such as “Transformers: Dark of the Moon” would’ve flopped and movies such as “The Artist,” which just won five Academy Awards including Best Picture, would be a runaway box office success.
However, what critics and audiences deem as a satisfying and entertaining movie is even more polarizing when the movies involve war. “The Hurt Locker” tried to capture the psychological and emotional repercussions of combat, while “Act of Valor” tried to recreate the physicality of war. “Act of Valor” made more in its first weekend than “The Hurt Locker” did in its entire theatrical run. My question is, why does America accept one form of authenticity and not the other?
Do you think there’s a reason audiences are embracing “Act of Valor” as opposed to other war movies? Email Palumbo at mpalumbo@media.ucla.edu. “What Went Wrong” runs every Friday.