Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

This is a very expensive and carefully scripted scenario of a real raid staged by Army Rangers in the Phillipines towards the end of World War II. The raid was designed to liberate a prisoner-of-war camp before the Japanese could kill all the inmates. The raid was successful and the cost not as high as it might have been without the help of the Phillipine resistance.The Japanese occupation of the islands was undeniably brutal. Germans treated their prisoners relatively well, as if they were captured warriors. But for the Japanese, the code covering treatment lay not in the Geneva Accords or, for that matter, in Bushido. The traditional warrior's code usually called Bushido varied a great deal over time. Earlier versions counseled patience and mercy. The Japanese militarists had subverted Bushido and turned it into an ideology in which all conquered people were characterologically inferior. The result was described to me by a friend who had grown up in Ilo-Ilo. "The river was filled with heads." The producers shot the film in swampy northern Australia and the city scenes in Shanghai. The period detail is impeccable -- right down to the herringbone pattern of the GI fatigues and the leather (not rubber) soles of their boots. The action scene is believable if confusing. It all rather resembles "Saving Private Ryan", which is understandable in view of SPR's success: a small elite unit sneaking through enemy territory on an important, life-saving mission. I suppose many other films would qualify too -- "The Guns of Navarron," "The Professionals," et al.But there are problems with both the writing and the performances. It's not one story but three: (1) the mission led by Benjamin Bratt to rescue the prisoners; (2) the misery of the captives; and (3) the true experiences of a nurse, played by Connie Nielson, living in Manila on a forged passport.The film is too long and seems sluggish. Way too much time is spent on the prisoners, whose abject despondency, if not taken for granted, could have been sketched in more briefly while remaining just as compelling. The nurse's story could have been dispensed with. As it is, a fictional romance is constructed to link her to the prisoners.Joseph Fiemannes must have lost a lot of weight because he looks extremely drawn, but again, too much time is spent with him for no discernible reason except that he's a movie star. At least his malaria is shown for what it is -- a crippling and sometimes lethal disease that involves more than a spasm of shivers.I enjoyed Benjamin Bratt as Detective Ray Curtis on "Law&Order". He was just relaxed enough in his role. Unfortunately, the role of commander of this raid requires a character with more power. My God, imagine George C. Scott! Bratt's money scene is when he gives his Rangers a pep talk, and the scene wilts as he recites his lines.Another problem, not an uncommon one, is that few of the other faces are familiar, and in their dark, sweat-stained uniforms and fatigue caps they're hard to tell apart. No particular performance stands out in any way except, perhaps, that of the Japanese major played by Motoki Kobayashi, a handsome and convincing but humorless officer. The director had a hell of a time getting the Japanese to be brutal but finally persuaded them by explaining they were playing soldiers who were "just following orders." It may not have worked in Nurenberg but it worked in Australia.

This movie seems to trade right-wing sentimentality and propaganda for World War II Pacific Theater history, and there's nothing wrong with that if that is your goal. This movie claims to portray the raid "based on true events", and yet it loses its authenticity in its zeal to emphasize Japanese brutality and American virtue. The Japanese WERE brutal, of that there is no question. It does not need to be pounded into us by making the Japanese secret police commander into a T-2, virtually indestructible in addition to being completely evil. That's not history or drama, it's just stereotype.Among the Americans there is no one who presents a compelling character to focus on, everyone is a cliché from countless war flicks that have gone before. The obligatory "dead meat" characters are quickly identified and dismissed as inevitably doomed. The non- historical love connection between the historical Margaret Utinsky and the non-historical composite character of Major Gibson added nothing to the story, functioning only as a distraction from the drama and the actual history of Utinsky's contributions. Probably the most irritating supposed historical assertion in the movie, the claim that it "remains the most successful rescue in US Military history", might be argued with by any one who participated in the raid a month later on the prison compound at Los Banos where over 2100 people were rescued in a massive raid by Army Airborne troops and Filipino Guerillas. I'm sure that hairs could be split over which was "more successful", but the raid at Cabanatuan was hardly even unique to the times. There was heroism aplenty and enough glory to go around.If you're looking for right-wing validation of "American values" irrespective of actual history then this flick is for you, watch it and have a ball. If you're looking for insight into a little known episode of history well told, keep looking and pass this one up.

What would the result be if they made a war movie where all the actors were heavily sedated during production? Now we know! Even calling this drivel a "war movie" is a travesty. And what was the budget for this thing? Like two million? With zero for the writers? If you try to watch this without the benefit of a fast forward function, good luck to you. In fact, you can watch the entire thing while in fast forward. At that rate, it almost appears as if there is some action (but not much). Much, much better movies have been made portraying the Phillipine theatre of conflict in WWII and even the sub-set of American POWs there has been done quite well, so what was the point of this mish mash?

I have not read the book, though I will now consider it. It's bitterly ironic that a new film dealing with a seldom told piece of recent history will be so under-appreciated. I purchased this on DVD along with three other war movies that not an awful lot of people know, and this was one of the two of them that I had never heard of before. Apart from Joy Ride, which is a reasonable enough horror flick, I haven't watched anything else by this director, but he's clearly talented. This is engaging and interesting from start to finish. The editing and cinematography are excellent. This has intense and exciting sequences, and it's certainly not boring for a second. It's well-paced throughout. The plot develops nicely throughout. Acting is great, ignore the fact that there are next to no "names" in this. It is also very notable that this is fair to both sides, and without toning down the atrocities(...any more than most things coming out of Hollywood do). No one is demonized, and the facts are presented almost without exception. The production values leave nothing to be desired. On the DVD is an informative commentary track by several important crew members, as well as a handful of trailers. There is gruesome, bloody violence, disturbing content and infrequent moderate to strong language in this. I recommend this to anyone who is old and mature enough to handle it. 7/10