This is a really classic court movie. It really reminded me of Men Of Honor's court scene. Ouch both movies were made in the year 2000. Still it's a good movie with great acting.

This movie is very entertaining and becomes more relevant as the years pass. A Marine is sent to retrieve an ambassador and his family from an embassy after a supposedly peaceful protest is supposedly hijacked by snipers. The marines evacuate the ambassador and then fire on the "peaceful" protesters after several marines are killed. Government officials then lie and destroy evidence to blame the Colonel in charge. This movie was made over a decade before Benghazi. Much of the drama takes place in the courtroom where the Colonel hires an old friend who he served with to defend him. The government attempts to throw the full weight of their corruption to throw the Colonel in prison. The Hollywood ending unfortunately does not correspond to what normally happens in real life.

Well this movie is 16 years old now, and I hadn't watched it in several years until today. Great casting Tommy Lee Jones performance was one of his best, Samuel L Jackson was very convincing in his role as Col Terry Childers as well. I'm no war buff, heck I really don't like war movies to be quite honest. So inaccuracies in the movie DO NOT bother me. If you're looking for historically correct was movies, may I suggest a documentary or some actual footage of a real battle. If you're looking for a good movie, this is it. Quite a bit on the vulgar language side, so not a good movie to sit and watch with the kids or your preacher. So just sit back, grab a cold one and some popcorn or pretzels and enjoy the Show.

This movie had a great cast, could have been a good story, as Judge Judy says ..... Coulda - Woulda - Shouda! The marines arriving at the embassy had no idea how to deploy when under fire, they continued to run hither and thither across the parapet reminding me of the sideshow shooting gallery, not one of the marines actually tried to engage the shooters on the rooftops opposite, even though they were in plain sight and causing casualties. But the big problem with the movie in my opinion was the double filming of the crowd in the square fronting the embassy. FIRST) All the crowd shown were throwing rocks, an occasional Molotov cocktail, waving flags etc. not a gun in sight......... THEN) All of a sudden we are shown all of the crowd (even children & women) shooting with an assortment of arms up at the marines on the roof. Why did the director show us two different scenarios, either they had guns or they didn't, why show two completely different situations? If they had been shooting up from the square there would have been many bullet holes in the ceilings of the ambassadors rooms instead of bullet holes in the walls opposite the snipers positions (even though these gun men were the worst positioned snipers ever seen). Then when the orders are given to open fire the marines all of a sudden mow down the people in the square, not the gun men on the rooftops opposite. I can't imagine a real USA Marine watching this movie and believing the ridiculous actions of the soldiers at the embassy, at least I hope not.