Bat★21 (1988)

Wonderful character development!

Excellent but underrated film

It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Bat 21 is an obscure but intriguing Vietnam War movie. Avoiding the flag-waving jingoism of many other 1980s Vietnam films, it crafts a riveting tale of survival while chronicling the relationship between two men flung together by war. Hackman plays an Air Force Colonel shot down over South Vietnam, while Glover plays the pilot who guides him to safety.Glover and Hackman are both believable in their roles, but what separates Bat*21 from so many other 80s war films is its eschewing of politics. We are not treated to tirades for or against the war, and equal consideration is given to the violence employed by both sides of the conflict. Viewers are made to feel just as uncomfortable by the destruction of a village full of Vietnamese civilians as they are by an American pilot being made to march through a mine field.The main problem with Bat*21 is its lack of historical accuracy. The film takes a number of liberties with what happened. In particular, it plays down the fact that South Vietnamese soldiers were left without support during the rescue attempt, with casualties resulting. Furthermore, the final escape is played overly dramatically, with Hackman and Glover dodging American bombs while being chased by NVAs. Still, this is an entertaining, worthwhile film.

Initially I thought this was a quite thrilling movie, based on a true story. I carried my usual suspicion for Hollywood versions and cringed as usual on the huge amounts of gasoline used in the explosions.Then I read about the true story about Gene Hambleton's rescue, and was grossly disappointed in the movie. What remains is some respect for Gene Hackman's acting, good footage and two good scenes (from an acting point of view at least, they apparently did not happen).Why on earth did they not stick to the true story? You can read about it in a thread on the IMDb board. It is vastly more exciting than this Hollywoodized version which I cannot understand.Do not watch this movie if you have any thoughts on the true story. But do if you just want some piece of Hollywood action with a very vague true background.

Peter Markle directed this based-on-fact account of Lt. Col. Iceal Hambleton(played by Gene Hackman) a weapons counter-measures expert during the Vietnam war whose plane is shot down over enemy territory. The military is desperate to get him back, but there is an unfortunate shortage of helicopters, so Air Force reconnaissance pilot Captain Clark(played by Danny Glover) makes radio contact with Hambleton, and they work out a means of secret communication based on golf course terminology. The area he is stuck in is going to be carpet-bombed, and Iceal must also deal with enemy soldiers, and gets a first-hand view of death, which he previously only saw from afar... Well-acted and directed film is also an intriguing character study as well as a rousing action piece.

While this is a very good film, it should not be confused with the reality of the loss of Bat-21 Bravo. The real events were more agonizing than the movie and many brave men American and Vietnamese died as a result of a seeming lack of comprehension, of the battle situation in Quang Tri, at MAC-V and 7th AF. In addition to the EB, an HH-53, UH-1H, AH-1G and OV-10 were downed with resulting crew losses either KIA or captured. This was not a piece of cake mission as the summary suggests. These aircraft EB-66 flew an electronic decoy mission to take the surface to air missile pressure off the bombers. The real downing occurred during the Easter Offensive. Many people tried to save LTC Hambleton, ultimately it was a Navy SEAL and a Vietnamese Sea Commando.