BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Leofwine_draca FORTUNES OF WAR is an unremarkable, wishy-washy thriller detailing the oppression of the Khmer Rouge regime and the lives of the oppressed Cambodians under it. All of this is packaged into a Hollywood-style thriller involving smuggling, double crosses, and betrayal, but the problem is that the film is so cheap and disjointed that none of it rings true.That this film was shot on the cheap in the Philippines is obvious from the outset. The locations are limited and attempts at some Rambo-style action with rocket launchers and the like are even more embarrassing, completely inept, and even more poorly staged than a routine B-movie. The central plot and characters simply aren't enough to sustain the interest, and there are long stretches where nothing much happens apart from cheesy and unbelievable romance scenes.That leaves us with the cast. Martin Sheen is top-billed but gets only a small cameo role so if you're tuning in for him then you're going to be sorely disappointed. Matt Salinger makes for a dull, non-charismatic hero and Sam Sorbo is all cheese as the love interest. Best of the bunch is the reliable Michael Ironside who has a fantastic supporting role - all bullish desperation - but who gets way too little screen time. The same can be said of Filipino film regular Vic Diaz, excellent as a nasty general but all-too-briefly seen. B-movie veteran Michael Nouri has the tiny part of a missionary priest. That leaves us with real-life Khmer escapee Haing S. Ngor in one of his final appearances; he's fine here but simply feels shoehorned in from THE KILLING FIELDS.

zimbo_the_donkey_boy I don't disagree with much of what the previous commenter said but sure do disagree with the "interpretation." This film is basically worthless. It's stupid, amateurishly made, and mediocrely scripted. The little love story element makes no sense, isn't really built up to, yet that is one of the MINOR matters of this film. It must have been very low budget, too. They don't even bother to show a plane crash, instead simply showing it angled downward (by tilting the camera in a close-up) and then having it referred to afterwards as having crashed.Films compress time; I get that. But the lead actor repeatedly picking up the rocket-propelled-grenade launcher, which he had stolen from a bad-guy but without grabbing any accompanying supplies, without reloading it but magically new rockets kept appearing for him to shoot, one-at-a-time, until the last time he picks it up, it that time has not been reloaded, so he then says something like, "Darn, out of ammo," is jarring. He pushes a jeep over a cliff with his truck but the bad guys don't bother to shoot at him until he's down the road, out of range.This resembles an elementary school play, written by kids themselves, with no goal other than to just get through it, not worrying about logic or entertainment along the way. A typical prairie fire has as much action as this flick, and watching the park service burn one off would be as entertaining as sitting through this, as at least then you know there's a future pay-off. The above no doubt sound like gags but I'm afraid they're true. Why do people who have so little film-making talent and so little interest in making something good go into this business? I agree exactly with the other comment about Haing Ngor but then say that we viewers should not consider stuff like this even simply acceptable time-killing material. This just plain stinks. The one thing I will say for the flick is that part of the ending was OK but those few seconds sure didn't make the rest of the viewing experience worthwhile. For that matter, another part of the ending was meant to be clever but it's something I'd seen and read as the "twist" in a bunch of other gold stories so had even predicted it.What's more, UPN repeatedly promoted this as "starring Martin Sheen," only ever mentioning him at all, yet he's only in one per cent of it. They wouldn't have been much less truthful if they'd claimed it starred Charlie Chaplin or George Washington.

Lupin-9 About an American aid worker who crosses into Cambodia from Thailand, as part of a medicine for gold deal. If you overlook a few obvious flaws,then this movie isn't too bad. By this I mean that the guy crosses the border and enters the jungle which is deep in warlord and Khmer Rouge occupied territory, and comes out unscathed. Added to this are some pretty unbelieveable and laughable situations, such as when the Dr. (Martin Sheen) warns him at the border of some suspicious looking flowers,which this guy immediately spots.After shooting one, so that the "flower"explodes safely, he has no more problems! And hey presto, he continues on his way. Also the Khmer Rouge leader speaks perfect English? & possesses an impressive knowlege of American culture,eg. Elvis. After escaping the guerrillas PERFECTLY UNHARMED, he also somehow manages to avoid being hit by a guy who drops bombs on him from a plane. On the plus side, Haing S. Ngor gives an ok portrayal of the Cambodian refuge now living in Thailand, but somehow you can't but notice that he already played this role, and much better, ie. in The Killing Fields.Vic Diaz likewise was believable, as the fearsome and menacing opium smoking warlord, Colonel Shan. Just try to accept the unrealistic, Ramboesque type nonsense and this movie will pass as a time killer.