Rules of Engagement (2000)

Regisseur:

William Friedkin

Drehbuchautoren (WGA):

James Webb (story)
Stephen Gaghan (screenplay)

Premierendatum:

31. März 2000 (USA)

Genre:

Action | Drama | Thriller | Kriegsfilm

Werbezeile:

A hero should never have to stand alone.

Plot:

An attorney defends an officer on trial for ordering his troops to fire on civilians after they stormed a U.S. embassy in a third world country.

Plot Keywords:

What Happened To Epilogue | Dead Children | Colonel | Demonstration | Embassy

Filmpreise:

1 win & 1 nomination

Nutzerkommentare:

Interesting but too simplistic and lacking in courtroom sparks

Besetzung

Tommy Lee Jones	...	Col. Hayes 'Hodge' Hodges
Samuel L. Jackson	...	Col. Terry L. Childers
Guy Pearce	...	Maj. Mark Biggs
Ben Kingsley	...	Ambassador Mourain
Bruce Greenwood	...	National Security Advisor Bill Sokal
Anne Archer	...	Mrs. Mourain
Blair Underwood	...	Capt. Lee
Philip Baker Hall	...	Gen. H. Lawrence Hodges
Dale Dye	...	Gen. Perry
Amidou	...	Dr. Ahmar
Mark Feuerstein	...	Tom Chandler
Richard McGonagle	...	Judge Col. E. Warner
Baoan Coleman	...	Col. Binh Le Cao
Nicky Katt	...	Hayes Hodges III
Ryan Hurst	...	Capt. Hustings

Alternativ:

Règles d'engagement, Les (Canada: French title)
Rules - Sekunden der Entscheidung (Deutschland)
Rules of Engagement - Die Regeln des Krieges (Deutschland) (TV title)

MPAA:

Rated R for scenes of war violence, and for language.

Länge:

128 Min

Produktionsland:

USA | Canada | UK | Deutschland

Sprache:

Englisch | Arabisch

Farbe:

Farbe

Seitenverhältnis:

2.35 : 1

Tonverfahren:

DTS | Dolby Digital

Altersfreigabe:

Canada:14A (Alberta/British Columbia/Manitoba) | Iceland:16 | Canada:13+ (Quebec) | Canada:14 (Nova Scotia) | Canada:AA (Ontario) | Australia:MA | Argentina:13 | Denmark:15 | Finland:K-14 | France:U | Germany:16 | Hong Kong:IIB | Netherlands:12 (DVD rating) | Netherlands:16 (original rating) | Norway:15 | Peru:14 | Portugal:M/12 | Singapore:PG | South Korea:15 | Spain:13 | Sweden:15 | Switzerland:14 (canton of Geneva) | Switzerland:14 (canton of Vaud) | UK:15 | USA:R | Philippines:PG-13

Drehorte:

Alexandria, Virginia, USA

Firma:

Paramount Pictures

Dies und das:

The fictional USS Wake Island LHA-7 is often mentioned in the military drama "JAG" (1995).

Pannen:

Abfolgefehler: During attack on embassy plastic bottle was used for petrol bomb but smashed like glass on the wall.

Dialogzitate:

Colonel Hayes Hodges: If this gets bad, it gets bad for both of us.
Colonel Terry L. Childers: Why, Hodge? Are you going to jail too?

Bezüge zu anderen Titeln:

Verweis/Anspielung/Erwähnung in "Will & Grace: Rules of Engagement (#4.6)" (2001)

Soundtrack:

On the Threshold of Liberty

Interesting but too simplistic and lacking in courtroom sparks

Years have past since Col Hodges and Col Childers were comrades in combat. Hodges is now retired while Childers is still on active service in the Middle East. When he is called in to help protect and evacuate the US Embassy in the middle of a riot, Childers orders his men to return fire despite not having any definite targets. With a crowd of 80 dead, many women and children, the authorities are forced to go after Childers to have someone to blame. Childers turns to his old friend to help defend him.

With a pair of real heavyweights in lead roles I was quite looking forward to this film. It is quite easy to get into the film as the opening 40 minutes are pretty exciting and shocking in equal measure – it forces you to think where you stand on the action taken by Childers in both past and present. However as the film goes on the moral debate becomes simplified and it is clear where we are being steered, as opposed to being allowed to think things out for ourselves. The `debate' or thoughtful side is lost and we are left with the courtroom drama side of things.

I'm not a big fan of courtroom thrillers as they often rely on unlikely twists at the end and lots of shouting in place of substance. However I do enjoy the odd one if it hangs together and has energy. However, the courtroom scenes here never really get off the ground and surprisingly (given the emotive subject) really lack energy and twists. Even the conclusion of the film is a real damp squid, the verdict is simply delivered, so if you're expecting twists and turns and big revelations forget it. Inexplicably, the film puts up two or three captions over the final shot to tell us more information – for some of these the film would have been much more exciting if it had worked these into the final 20 minutes of the film. To have them as flat words on a screen is pointless (especially since this isn't a true story!).

Jones and Jackson both do good work, as you'd expect for a pair of tough nuts such as they. Jackson has the better character (until the script weakens itself). Pearce is OK in support but the script doesn't give him too much to work with, his side of the case is easy of course, so the film stops him overpowering the court case at the same time as it simplifies it's stance. Support from faces such as Kingsley, Archer, Greenwood and Underwood is OK but in some cases are so brief to be cameos.

Overall this starts well, but it fairs to really involve once the moral debate side of the film is simplified and phased out. The question `what would you do' is rendered null and void with each flashback Jackson has. The courtroom scenes barely fizzle let alone ignite the screen and the film putters to a poor ending that is badly done. Worth seeing with good performances from the leads but still a pretty big disappointment.