Lone Survivor **** ( R) In this grueling, fact-based depiction of a 2005 Navy SEAL mission that went very badly, viewers are given an intimate, riveting look at the chasm that can develop between battle plans as drawn, and their execution. A four-man team is deployed to a desolate Afghani mountain range to kill a high-ranking Taliban leader whose presence in a remote village has been credibly confirmed. They find their target, but everything falls apart before they can start their assault.
The title provides its own spoiler alert, letting us know things won’t go well for the squad. Bad luck betrays their position, and they’re soon under fire from a much larger force on higher ground, with unreliable communications for support or evacuation. What follows is about 40 minutes of the most intense battlefield action since the D-Day landing sequence in Saving Private Ryan. Bullets and heavier munitions fly in all directions as the SEALs scramble for cover and try to return fire against overwhelming odds. Director Peter Berg extends his action resume from last year’s CG-laden alien clash, Battleship, with this close-up view of the chaos one may find in actual warfare among humans. It’s a far more exhausting experience than his 2007 military foray into Mideast matters, The Kingdom.
Others can debate the factual accuracy of the details, including any variations from the source book by Marcus Luttrell, the eponymous surviving team leader played by Mark Wahlberg. I claim no special knowledge or insight in that arena. The film honors the bravery of all combat forces by showing the extremes of known and unanticipated perils they might have to face. It may also illustrate a ‘pro" argument on the drone-strike controversy, at least in terms of casualties that may be avoided. The screenplay does include some offsetting positives about the mission, but if you decide to go, make sure you’re geared for the emotional drain that’s likely to come from sharing that bleak mountainside with those SEALs. (1/10/14)