One of the most celebrated war correspondents of our time, Marie Colvin is an utterly fearless and rebellious spirit, driven to the frontline of conflicts across the globe to give voice to the voiceless.
The film follows the 2000 K-141 Kursk submarine disaster and the governmental negligence that followed. As the sailors fight for survival, their families desperately battle political obstacles and impossible odds to save them.
In 2012, Sunday Times war correspondent, Marie Colvin and photographer, Paul Conroy arrived in Syria to tell the story of civilians trapped in Homs, a city under siege and relentless military attack from the Syrian army.
In a world where journalism is under attack, Marie Colvin (Rosamund Pike) is one of the most celebrated war correspondents of our time. Colvin is an utterly fearless and rebellious spirit, driven to the frontlines of conflicts across the globe to give voice to the voiceless, while constantly testing the limits between bravery and bravado. After being hit by a grenade in Sri Lanka, she wears a distinctive eye patch and is still as comfortable sipping martinis with London's elite as she is confronting dictators. Colvin sacrifices loving relationships, and over time, her personal life starts to unravel as the trauma she's witnessed takes its toll. Yet, her mission to show the true cost of war leads her -- along with renowned war photographer Paul Conroy (Jamie Dornan) -- to embark on the most dangerous assignment of their lives in the besieged Syrian city of Homs.Written by
Yet another piece of expensive western propaganda.
My review will comment only on the politics of this film.
Like most Hollywood films, this film fails to establish any context and chooses to only portray one side of the war. They simply failed to establish a balanced view, war is complex and all sides commit atrocities. This film choses to highlight only western propaganda talking points. Nor does it take any effort to establish causality of the war.
I find it hard to digest if no duality is fairly presented, there is no attempt to establish the covert efforts of foreign influence that escalated the conflict to its current predicament. The film expertly exploits human emotion to sell its propaganda.
A simple case in point is to compare the state of the middle east before and after the American led interventions.
151 of 272 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this