a_chinn Review of Uncommon Valor

Uncommon Valor (1983)

Is it a popcorn action film or a deep meditation on The Vietnam War?

[7/10 · 23 June 2019]

Taking place years after the end of The Vietnam War, Gene Hackman plays the father of a soldier missing in action and is convinced his son is still alive. Hackman then finds the surviving members of his son's unit, all of them still grappling with the effects of the war, to train for and then launch a dangerous rescue mission. "Uncommon Valor" is an oddball entry in the cycle of Vietnam War films of the 70s and 80s. During this period there were a slew of films revolving around the war, some of them taking place during the war and some taking place afterwards. Some were deep dives into the political implications of the war ("The Killing Fields" or "Born on the 4th of July") or examinations of the individual emotional impacts of the war ("The Deer Hunter" or "Coming Home") or even the long lasting societal impacts of the war ("Casualties of War" or "In Country"). Then there were even more films that took The Vietnam War and turned the tragic and failed war into rah-rah "Sands of Iwo Jima" action films filled with jingoistic propaganda (i.e. "Rambo: First Blood Part II" or "We Were Soldiers,") as well as straight up action films using the setting for nothing more than a backdrop to a jungle action film ("Missing in Action," "The Losers," "Bullet to the Head,") or back home action films ("First Blood," "The Exterminator," "Rolling Thunder"). Not all of these films were bad, "We Were Soldiers" is a dynamite 2-hour battle, John Woo's "Bullet to the Head" is a wildly enjoyable action filled epic melodrama, and "Rolling Thunder" is probably my favorite revenge film of all-time. But "Uncommon Valor" drifts back and forth between these two camps, at times trying to be a serious meditation on the lasting effects of the war and at other times wants to be a South Asian popcorn film version of "The Dirty Dozen," and it never quite decides which type of film it wants to be. Hackman's sincere performances rivals that of Robert De Niro in "The Deer Hunter" or Jon Voight in "Coming Home" and is terrific, but it seems out of place when it's placed into such a story that's a slavishly routine men-on-a-mission formula (i.e. "Guns of Navarone" or "The Magnificent Seven"). The film also slavishly follows the "Professionals" formula in it's make up of the team, with the old veteran leader, snot-nosed-recruit, crazed strongman, demolitions expert, token minority, and so on and so forth. It's this strange balance of corny film conventions mixed with half hearted attempts to be a thoughtful meditation on the personal and political implications of the war that make "Uncommon Valor" kind of a mess. John Milius was one of the producers on this film ("Red Dawn" "Conan the Barbarian" "Farewell to the King" "Flight of the Intruder") and he's one of the few directors who is consistently able to ride this fine line between corny and sincerity. His films are throwbacks to classic Hollywood and can be viewed as corny and old fashioned, but they're done with such conviction and sincerity that they work. "Uncommon Valor" need that level of conviction to fully work, but I will concede that it is consistently entertaining, features well mounted action sequences, and boasts an incredibly strong cast that includes Hackman, Patrick Swayze, Robert Stack, Fred Ward, Reb Brown, Tim Thomerson, Harold Sylvester, and Randall 'Tex' Cobb. Overall, "Uncommon Valor" is an entertaining war films, even if it cannot figure out what type of war film it wants to be.