D.E.A. Agent Tom Hardy investigates the disappearance of legendary Army Ranger Drill Sergeant Nathan West and several of his cadets during a training exercise gone severely awry at Fort Clay... Read allD.E.A. Agent Tom Hardy investigates the disappearance of legendary Army Ranger Drill Sergeant Nathan West and several of his cadets during a training exercise gone severely awry at Fort Clayton.D.E.A. Agent Tom Hardy investigates the disappearance of legendary Army Ranger Drill Sergeant Nathan West and several of his cadets during a training exercise gone severely awry at Fort Clayton.
- Awards
- 3 nominations total
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Basic engages your attention pretty early on and keeps you guessing throughout with the twists and turns in the storyline and its refreshingly unexpected ending.
As you would expect Travolta and Jackson are both superb, as is Connie Neilson. The characters build well, the writing is very solid, and the story is quite original.
All in all 'Basic' is a good thriller that is a little complex and confusing for the casual movie fan.
Definitely worth watching, but not a classic
7/10
As you would expect Travolta and Jackson are both superb, as is Connie Neilson. The characters build well, the writing is very solid, and the story is quite original.
All in all 'Basic' is a good thriller that is a little complex and confusing for the casual movie fan.
Definitely worth watching, but not a classic
7/10
I read a review in my local paper saying that this film was boring. But I like John Travolta and wanted to see it to form my own opinion and my opinion was that it was really good. I think there were a lot of plot twists and turns and you really had to pay attention to see where things were going, if you didn't watch every second of it then you were going to miss something crucial to the plotline. I think this is one of the best movies of the last year, no matter what other people say. I liked it, and so did my whole family. Two thumbs up!
Recalling what John Travolta did WELL as the dogged investigator in THE GENERAL'S DAUGHTER (1999), he reprises that role in BASIC (2003). This is a more fun and less full-of-itself film.
He starts slow as the alcoholic Don't-Tread-On-Me military misfit/drop-out but soon reveals both a lot of spit-and-polish, and a load of talent as an investigator/interrogator. And again he teams up with a female, although I'd rather have seen him pair with Maddy Stowe again.
The film, for me, combined the best of RASHOMON (1950) wherein the same reality is seen differently by different participants in the same event.
And COURAGE UNDER FIRE (1996), the Meg Ryan / Denzel Washington film, which required Denzel to overcome strong squad loyalty, get tight-lipped, hard-trained men (and a woman) to talk, to piece together "what really happened out there."
Giovanni Ribisi as the wounded soldier in the hospital is so good -- he reminds me of Vincent D'Onofrio in SALTON SEA (2002): you have to look very closely to see that it REALLY IS Ribisi.
So the plot trips over itself. So what? I never said the film was perfect. I'm just telling you it's a hunk of fun.
He starts slow as the alcoholic Don't-Tread-On-Me military misfit/drop-out but soon reveals both a lot of spit-and-polish, and a load of talent as an investigator/interrogator. And again he teams up with a female, although I'd rather have seen him pair with Maddy Stowe again.
The film, for me, combined the best of RASHOMON (1950) wherein the same reality is seen differently by different participants in the same event.
And COURAGE UNDER FIRE (1996), the Meg Ryan / Denzel Washington film, which required Denzel to overcome strong squad loyalty, get tight-lipped, hard-trained men (and a woman) to talk, to piece together "what really happened out there."
Giovanni Ribisi as the wounded soldier in the hospital is so good -- he reminds me of Vincent D'Onofrio in SALTON SEA (2002): you have to look very closely to see that it REALLY IS Ribisi.
So the plot trips over itself. So what? I never said the film was perfect. I'm just telling you it's a hunk of fun.
There's a whole lot of deep analysis going on here, but in the end, since so many others have analyzed this to death, I would recommend just watching it with an open mind and seeing if you find it entertaining.
I thought it original to a point, well acted out, and while predictable on a couple points, for the most part, leaving me wondering when we would find out the absolute truth of what the heck was going on...
Maybe later I will put something more in depth here, but for now, beware of the critics and their "plot holes," because in the end, aside from a couple very small glitches, this was pretty well done.
I thought it original to a point, well acted out, and while predictable on a couple points, for the most part, leaving me wondering when we would find out the absolute truth of what the heck was going on...
Maybe later I will put something more in depth here, but for now, beware of the critics and their "plot holes," because in the end, aside from a couple very small glitches, this was pretty well done.
"Basic" takes a lot of plot twists through the steamy jungles of Panama. They are often impossible to follow. No, literally. Impossible. As in they literally do not piece together. You can try to analyze them, but when you do, you find out there is nothing really to be analyzed. But the film, by confusing and tricking the audience, makes it appear as if something is there, which is almost as good as if something really is there. Therefore, the movie, though frustratingly difficult to follow at times, is entertaining. Confused yet? Yeah, that's what the movie will make you feel like.
The film opens up in a rain-drenched Panama jungle at night on an Army training mission headed by Sergeant West (Samuel L. Jackson). Most of the film--ALL of the film, for that matter--takes place at night, during a rainy hurricane, and adds to the nonexistant plot. What is so intriguing is that the plot isn't really there, but the writer tries to manifest one, and we feel as if we are staring at some nonexistant, material wad of words and flashbacks and images thrown together in a blender, the writer hoping for it to come out smelling of roses. But I already went over that, didn't I?
Flash forward to the next day. An Army chopper picks up two men from the training mission, one injured and one very much alive. The injured man, Kendall (Giovanni Ribisi), is sent to a hospital, and the alive man, Dunbar (Brian Van Holt) is sent in for questioning by the very sexy and very Southern Osborne (Connie Nielsen). Dunbar refuses to speak to anyone except a Ranger. So in comes Ranger Tom Hardy (John Travolta) to piece together the events surrounding the death of Sgt. West and his team.
The writer of "Basic," James Vanderbilt, has so many twists and turns that the film is impossible to keep up with. I like movies like these, where you see different characters telling their version of one event, but the mistake Vanderbilt makes is that he overuses the plot flashbacks in the middle of other events. It becomes hard to seperate present from past and what's real from what's not. So many revelations happen that I feel like I'm in the middle of the writer's mind, as he comes up with new ideas and tries to squeeze them in time after time after time. There is a limit to how many times you can use "surprise" revelation endings. Vanderbilt uses three of four in a row, piled on top of each other, time after time after time. Just as we think the plot twists are done, and we start to smile because we think we might finally understand the basis of the plot, something else happens, and we zoom in suspensefully on John Travolta's face as he, along with the audience, realizes something. Which leads me to something else.
The end of the film leaves more open than concluded. So many plot holes are never ironed out. With the ending being the way it is, you can look back at certain events and think, "Why did that surprise (so-and-so)," and "Why did that event happen as it pays no relevancy to the plot?" The answer to all this? Simple: It's called audience manipulation, and James Vanderbilt uses it a lot. He throws the audience a bone to keep them happy, continues with something else, throws another bone, and when it's all done and over, we're choking on all these bones and he doesn't realize it. Interesting how he said he named his character Tom Hardy after the Hardy Boys. If I recall, the Hardy Boy novels, which I was an avid reader of at one time, usually revealed a lot at the end. "Basic" tries to, but does not.
The film has an excellent director at its helm, John McTiernan. A man who chooses his projects carefully and wisely and, unfortunately, sometimes horribly ("Rollerball" was exceptionally bad). But "Die Hard" and "Predator" are two of my all-time favorite action films, "Predator" being my all-time favorite "alien" movie. Who wants McTiernan to return to his roots and film a "Predator 3"? It would be good, but don't count on it. Like I said, he chooses wisely, and if I assume correctly, he's the kind of director who doesn't like to return to old projects.
"Basic" confused me, but after the film was over and my mind was in a knot trying to figure out all the different plot twists, I realized how much fun I had being duped by this film. I laughed to myself as I came to realize that this movie has a paper-thin plot, and the filmmakers all tricked us by taking so many twists and turns and throwing so many confusion bones at the audience and making us believe that the underlying plot of the film was something deep. I really enjoyed this movie, even if I still don't really understand it fully. Then again, I don't think you're really supposed to.
3.5/5 stars -
The film opens up in a rain-drenched Panama jungle at night on an Army training mission headed by Sergeant West (Samuel L. Jackson). Most of the film--ALL of the film, for that matter--takes place at night, during a rainy hurricane, and adds to the nonexistant plot. What is so intriguing is that the plot isn't really there, but the writer tries to manifest one, and we feel as if we are staring at some nonexistant, material wad of words and flashbacks and images thrown together in a blender, the writer hoping for it to come out smelling of roses. But I already went over that, didn't I?
Flash forward to the next day. An Army chopper picks up two men from the training mission, one injured and one very much alive. The injured man, Kendall (Giovanni Ribisi), is sent to a hospital, and the alive man, Dunbar (Brian Van Holt) is sent in for questioning by the very sexy and very Southern Osborne (Connie Nielsen). Dunbar refuses to speak to anyone except a Ranger. So in comes Ranger Tom Hardy (John Travolta) to piece together the events surrounding the death of Sgt. West and his team.
The writer of "Basic," James Vanderbilt, has so many twists and turns that the film is impossible to keep up with. I like movies like these, where you see different characters telling their version of one event, but the mistake Vanderbilt makes is that he overuses the plot flashbacks in the middle of other events. It becomes hard to seperate present from past and what's real from what's not. So many revelations happen that I feel like I'm in the middle of the writer's mind, as he comes up with new ideas and tries to squeeze them in time after time after time. There is a limit to how many times you can use "surprise" revelation endings. Vanderbilt uses three of four in a row, piled on top of each other, time after time after time. Just as we think the plot twists are done, and we start to smile because we think we might finally understand the basis of the plot, something else happens, and we zoom in suspensefully on John Travolta's face as he, along with the audience, realizes something. Which leads me to something else.
The end of the film leaves more open than concluded. So many plot holes are never ironed out. With the ending being the way it is, you can look back at certain events and think, "Why did that surprise (so-and-so)," and "Why did that event happen as it pays no relevancy to the plot?" The answer to all this? Simple: It's called audience manipulation, and James Vanderbilt uses it a lot. He throws the audience a bone to keep them happy, continues with something else, throws another bone, and when it's all done and over, we're choking on all these bones and he doesn't realize it. Interesting how he said he named his character Tom Hardy after the Hardy Boys. If I recall, the Hardy Boy novels, which I was an avid reader of at one time, usually revealed a lot at the end. "Basic" tries to, but does not.
The film has an excellent director at its helm, John McTiernan. A man who chooses his projects carefully and wisely and, unfortunately, sometimes horribly ("Rollerball" was exceptionally bad). But "Die Hard" and "Predator" are two of my all-time favorite action films, "Predator" being my all-time favorite "alien" movie. Who wants McTiernan to return to his roots and film a "Predator 3"? It would be good, but don't count on it. Like I said, he chooses wisely, and if I assume correctly, he's the kind of director who doesn't like to return to old projects.
"Basic" confused me, but after the film was over and my mind was in a knot trying to figure out all the different plot twists, I realized how much fun I had being duped by this film. I laughed to myself as I came to realize that this movie has a paper-thin plot, and the filmmakers all tricked us by taking so many twists and turns and throwing so many confusion bones at the audience and making us believe that the underlying plot of the film was something deep. I really enjoyed this movie, even if I still don't really understand it fully. Then again, I don't think you're really supposed to.
3.5/5 stars -
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaScreenwriter James Vanderbilt wanted to fool a certain type of moviegoer. He said: " . . . those who say 'I know who the killer is' in the first ten minutes."
- GoofsDuring the first platoon inspection scene, Sergeant West is wearing Specialist rank on his uniform collar, four ranks lower than the Master Sergeant ranks he is wearing on the epaulets of his sweater.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Basic Ingredients: A Writer's Perspective (2003)
- SoundtracksBolero
Written by Maurice Ravel
Performed by Hungarian State Orchestra
Conducted by Ádám Fischer
Courtesy of LaserLight Digital
By Arrangement with Source/Q
Everything New on Hulu in May
Everything New on Hulu in May
There's a whole lot to love about Hulu's streaming offerings this month — get excited for brand-new series premieres and film favorites to watch at home.
- How long is Basic?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Yếu Tố Cơ Bản
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $50,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $26,793,311
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $11,511,960
- Mar 30, 2003
- Gross worldwide
- $42,792,561
- Runtime1 hour 38 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
