Kristin Reviews Hacksaw Ridge

Did you hear about the conscientious objector who served in the U.S. military during World War II? He worked as a medic and refused to carry a weapon or to kill enemy combatants. In spite of the fact that he was ridiculed by his platoon and almost court-martialed for failure to follow orders during training, he ended up being one of the most courageous war heroes in U.S. history.

No. That wasn't a spoiler. That was what happened in the preview for Hacksaw Ridge, this year's Oscar-season WWII battlefield feature.

It's also what happened in real life. Desmond Doss, the conscientious objector – or as he preferred to be called (according to the movie), conscientious cooperator – was the first American soldier to be awarded the Medal of Honor without ever firing a shot in combat.

Hacksaw Ridge, which was directed by Mel Gibson but strategically marketed to avoid mentioning his name, is a competently produced war epic. It's probably going to be nominated for a bunch of awards throughout the season. Because, you know, war.

That's not to say that Hacksaw Ridge is a bad movie by any means. It's a fine movie. It's a war epic in classic war epic fashion.

It starts with some scenes of Doss' youth, so the audience can understand how he becomes who he becomes. It introduces a love interest. It follows Doss through basic training, complete with the obligatory male bonding scenes and a sergeant who insults, embarrasses, and gives cruel nicknames to his soldiers. Then the boys go to war, and war happens. Lots and lots of war. It's brutal and ugly and horrifying and heartbreaking. Because it's war. And then heroics ensue and music swells and waste is laid to enemies and everyone walks out of the theater feeling . . . proud or inspired, I guess.

If you feel like you've seen that movie before, it's because you have. You've seen it many times. And many times it's been nominated for Oscars. Because it's a winner. It consistently has the desired effect.

Which makes me wonder why it didn't have the desired effect on me.

The performances are all solid, including Vince Vaughn playing against type as the hard-ass, but eventually respectful, platoon sergeant. Andrew Garfield is a talented young actor, whether he's superheroing or dramaing, so it comes as no surprise that he turns in a flawless performance as Doss.

And as far as Mel Gibson's direction and the overall production craft go, the film looks good. It sounds good. The battle scenes follow in the footsteps of all battle scenes since Spielberg put us directly in the action of the Normandy landing in Saving Private Ryan way back in '98.

Like, aside from the fact that it's a little long (there are a few parts that I think could have been cut without negatively impacting the story) and Doss' brother completely disappears from the narrative once he (also) joins the army, there's nothing about Hacksaw Ridge I'd say is not executed with competence.

But does competence make for an outstanding movie? A movie worthy of an Oscar?

In my book, the answer is "no." I want to be blown away by a movie. I want to see something I've never seen before. I want to feel different when I walk out of the theater.

Hacksaw Ridge, as solid as it is, still feels like it's checking off "epic war movie" boxes on a list someone made decades ago.

If you've seen the preview, you've seen the movie. There's nothing new here.

But the Academy often rewards solid over breathtaking; competent over innovative; expected over unique. Especially when it comes to war movies.

So my prediction is that Hacksaw Ridge will be nominated for Picture, Actor, possibly Supporting Actor, and Director. I also would not be at all surprised to see it pick up a screenplay nomination. And, of course, it will probably land technical noms (sound, sound editing, cinematography, editing, possibly even art direction) as well.

In other words, it's going to be one of the highly lauded movies of the year, in spite of the fact that it is not actually that laudable.

-Kristin
12.3.2016