I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

hyped garbage

Great Film overall

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

This film appears to have attracted a lot of negative publicity, mainly from pro-Russia and pro-US parties. I have no idea how accurate it is, but given what I know of how powerful countries operate I have no reason to doubt that much of this is based on fact. Wars that don't benefit western economies rarely attract support or even attention, and it is interesting that this one also coincided with the Beijing Olympics - pure coincidence? I think not. What better way to cover up atrocities than carry them out when the world is looking the other way.As a piece of film making it is faultless, however, and deserves a much higher average score. If you like films such as The Bang Bang Club and The Hunting Party then this should be right up your street. The plot and characters are good, well acted and directed, with plenty of action. If I have a gripe it's down to the lack of subtitles when people are speaking Russian or Georgian - why do film makers do this? If the characters have something to say and it's important to the story, then tell us what they're saying! So it's a good film and if it's in any way true then a lot of powerful people ought to be ashamed. At the very least it's a film that makes you want to find out more about the atrocities happening in the world today.

Having read some of the previous reviews blasting this picture as "Un-Authentic" and therefore a terrible picture, I have to say that the naysayers are wrong from my point of view. I know of NO WAR FILM that is factual in every detail. Some label this as propaganda....so what? Most of the War Films coming out of the US during WWII were propaganda. ALL Germans were Nazis and ALL Japanese were bloodthirsty little savages. I found this picture to be a rather good action film, very authentic from the "War" point of view. Having spent 10 years in the TV News Biz as a field cameraman, I was in agreement with all their actions as reporters. I thought the plot was very plausible, though some what predictable, but again, so what? I was entertained and unlike some of the reviewers I was moved in places by the actions of the characters. And to lambaste actors for "Overacting" in a war film is like saying down hill skiers go to fast. I was a good picture and overall I liked it!

This contains spoilers.A centerpiece of 5 DAYS OF WAR is that authentic video footage of a clear and brutal war crime is powerful evidence able to make change -- in and of itself.In 5 DAYS OF WAR, the conflict involves some Georgians and the Russians with roots in old Soviet politics. Whatever blatant and harsh oppression is at the center of the complaint, it is distant to American film audiences. Other people living in far away lands may, or may not, have a tradition to respect the rules of war.This is all to say that 5 DAYS OF WAR is deeply flawed because it is not grounded in reality. In real life, American film audiences are more closely familiar with American traditions. George Washington commanding a very humanitarian "rules of war" code placing virtue with the Americans, in sharp contrast with the poor ethics of the British military. The good guys (we Americans) act good. We act good. We are good. It gave Americans deep pride to be American.The flaw in 5 DAYS OF WAR is most obvious today as we all know of the Bradley Manning "brutal bloodlust video" released to the media and general public showing U.S. military gleeful war crimes on civilian targets. Authentic video footage that changed... nothing. It changed nothing because in the real world of today, the side that tortures and murders with robot drones is good, and the side that uses bare hands to farm green beans and onions is bad. Today, in the real world, we all share the ideas our leaders tell us.Life is easier now the happily cowed media and we regular people because none us ever need to think for ourselves; we have a leader who will do all of the thinking for us. This is real life. 5 DAYS OF WAR has too much fantasy.

5 Days of War is a film not out to give an accurate depiction of the 2008 Russo-Georgia War, but to gloss over any implications and make its own biased, fictitious version of it. War is a touchy subject to conduct a film on, but thankfully, many war films have been exceptionally well done and stellar in quality. This is the first one I've come across that is poor in quality.It's so rare to see a war film robbed of all character development, emotional elements, plot, coherency, and facts. Yet, 5 Days of War shows us that it is possible and that when done in such poor quality it can further cement an event into a sea of puzzlement. The United States of America wasn't up to date come time of the Russo-Georgia War in August of 2008, and Bush had decided to leave the country out of it. A smart move if you ask me. The US was already starting to get hit with one of the most deadly recessions of all time and, already fighting two wars, it was a good plan to let two other countries just settle out the differences by themselves. So, to release a film in America about the war was actually not a bad idea. The problem? Because our knowledge on it is so limited we could easily be persuaded the wrong way. And that is what 5 Days of War appears to be doing. Persuading people the wrong way.Georgia and Russia both committed several atrocities in the time of the war. The film makes it look like Georgia was minding its own business and the big, bad Russians just decided to blow the hell out of everything Georgian. Georgia actually helped to trigger the Russians into fighting back in the war. That part is almost wholly absent.The film revolves around Thomas Anders (Friend), a reporter who was rescued upon visiting Iraq with colleagues after being gunned down in their car. A year later, he gets word that conflict is brewing in Georgia, so heads out to cover the story. Anders meets a young Georgia woman named Tatia (Chriqui) and another reporter named Sebastian (Coyle) where they must learn to survive during the war.It seems 5 Days of War is less concerned with actuality and being an informative piece of work, and instead tries to be a gritty action film. Going into this expecting a nice, expansive retelling of events leading up to the war, I was presented with typical war schlock with loud, unnecessary gunfire and over-exaggerated acting all around. This is also one of the first war films I've ever seen that was void of all things emotional. It was moot in the field of playing with your tear-ducts, mainly because you don't know the characters well enough to form any sort of opinion about them. There is a scene where one of the main characters is shot off of the back of a moving truck. Her friends and companions are clearly shocked and sobbing uncontrollably. We as audience members are staring blankly wishing a tear or two would form. Alas, nothing but utter silence followed by increasing restlessness and dreariness.At the very end, the film goes sentimental and right before the end credits we see many people who've lost relatives in the five day war between the feuding countries holding pictures of their loved ones and honoring them respectably. Even in this field emotion doesn't ring, but we do feel sort of uneasy. Think about it; you watch an empty, mundane war film that is absent of emotional elements only to be tested for tears one more time before the credits role showing people who have lost their loved ones in the same event. The whole act sounds contrived and almost unforgivable.Starring: Andy García, Val Kilmer, Richard Coyle, Emmanuelle Chriqui, Rupert Friend, Johnathon Schaech, Dean Cain, Rade Šerbedžija, Antje Traue, and Heather Graham. Directed by: Renny Harlin.