MamaGravity good back-story, and good acting

WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Anoushka Slater While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Fleur Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Wuchak Released in 2007 and directed & written by Paul Haggis, "In the Valley of Elah" is a crime drama/mystery inspired by the real-life case of Richard T. Davis. The story revolves around an elderly Tennessee couple (Tommy Lee Jones & Susan Sarandon) who get word that their son has gone missing from his base in New Mexico shortly after his return from Iraq. A retired military investigator, Hank Deerfield (Jones) goes to the base to find out the awful truth. Charlize Theron plays the civilian detective near the base who tries to help Hank while Jason Patric plays the Army counterpart. Josh Brolin is on hand as the town police chief. This is a slow-burn mystery highlighted by great acting by the principles, especially Jones, and a thoroughly realistic story, which isn't surprising seeing as how it's based on true events. Speaking of which, I was surprised to find out that the basic details of the story are all accurate. The actual events took place in the Fort Benning area of Georgia rather than the fictitious Fort Rudd, NM.The movie's not anti-Iraq War, but rather anti-PTSD; it merely reveals the awful truth about war in general: When we send our young men off to far-off lands where brutal warfare is normal they can bring that desensitized mentality back with them where the barbaric behavior that might be acceptable in war is anything but normal or conducive to a successful life, to say the least. Add the idiocy of alcohol abuse to the mix of PTSD and the results almost certainly WON'T be good. The title refers to the valley where David, as a teen, fought and defeated the utterly intimidating Goliath from 1 Samuel 17. ADDITIONAL ACTORS: James Franco, Wes Chatham, Jake McLaughlin, Mehcad Brooks and Roman Arabia play soldiers who knew Deerfield's son while Frances Fisher has a curious cameo (you'll know what I mean).The film runs 121 minutes and was shot in Whiteville, Tennessee, and Albuquerque, New Mexico, with Morocco substituting for Iraq.GRADE: B

gtylerpayne I watched this right after watching "The Next Three Days" and being very impressed. To my surprise, I actually found this movie to be even better. Not only is it thrilling, suspenseful, and contains great acting and writing, but it deals with powerful issues that stick with you.I found "The Next Three Days" To be surprisingly thoughtful for a thriller, but this movie even more so. I tend to not watch a lot of war movies and depressing films, even if they are good, because I'm not always in the mood for something depressing or sad, but this movie stays fun and entertaining, while slowly introducing important and deep issues that need to be addressed. It's basically a suspenseful thriller, and a really good one at that, but as the movie goes along, you slowly appreciate what these boys went through in Iraq, the horrible things they saw, and the horrible effects it really has. The war may be in the Middle East, and they definitely see the worst of it, but the horrible effects come back home with the soldiers and affect us here as well.I think this movie is rated unfairly low, because veterans, patriots, and conservatives write it off as liberal propaganda. It ends with a very controversial shot, but I love that Haggis had the balls to do this because it gave me even more to think about after the film was over.The film is based on a true story and is actually very realistic, so anyone who writes it off as liberal or anti-America is in denial about the real issues and the fact that war is never a good thing. Sending young boys off to war is something that governments have always brainwashed their citizens to believe is a good thing and should be honored, when in reality it is horrible and tragic. This film makes that apparent, but does not make it the central plot of the film.I really think Haggis is a brilliant writer who puts a lot of thought and effort into his writing. He is one of the best film-makers at creating movies that are fun to watch and entertaining, but also deal with important issues and leave you with something to think about.I have recently watched "The Next Three Days" and "Crash" and this movie, all three of which were written and directed by Haggis, and although this has the lowest IMDb rating of the three, I personally thought it was the best of the three. In fact, I could easily put it as one of my favorite movies of all time. Crash deals with racism and has a clever script, but I find it to be less entertaining and more depressing. This movie deals with a depressing topic, but does not bog down the movie with sad moments, but instead leaves you to think about it at your leisure after the film is over.If you haven't seen this movie, GO SEE IT! And I hope it eventually gets a higher rating like it deserves.

Ray Waller This is gonna have to take up some space in a way that some sites don't approve of, but just get ready to read. A director and writer like Paul Haggis cannot be meaningfully considered in a blurb or a broadside.First of all, where do people get the stones to carp that Paul Haggis' "In the Valley of Elah" is 'slow' or 'heavy handed' or 'plodding' (some of the comments I have heard from 'movie' lovers, and some of which have been made at this site)? Paul Haggis does not make 'high octane fueled thrill rides', he makes films."Valley..." actually moves along at scene level at a brisk cinematic pace. The reality is that if you are a shallow viewer you will miss the meaning beneath the surface of individual scenes that seem completely ordinary or mundane. That abiding attention to the mundane is no doubt where viewers get the idea that what they are watching is 'plodding'.Haggis is one of our most gifted scenarists, screenwriters, and directors just in the technical sense, let alone his undeniable powers of narrative, theme, characterization, subtle conflict, and tone. Technically, his gift for writing brief yet meaningful scenes that accumulate in meaning and theme is very much on display in "Valley..." Mundane interior shots and mundane dialogue are centered but not the point.In a modicum of shots he enters a scene, focuses on only what moves the plot and conflict forward, and almost always exits one or two beats EARLY, sometimes providing only the merest hint of the point but always amplifying that point with the very next scene--accumulation as an art form similar to the work of Wes Anderson ("The Royal Tenenbaums", (2001).Thus, Haggis works in scene clusters, in which meaning accumulates across sequences while brevity in any single scene drives the plot forward, sometimes mercilessly fast. The result is an uncanny ability to cut and pare down his scenario to the barest economy (the demand of all commercial first release theatrical film--in extreme shallowness we call this 'movie making', such as "Iron Man", and when done meaningfully as in "Million Dollar Baby" we call it cinema and give it an academy award. He cuts and pares down while also creating a mounting revelation of meaning, character, plot, tension, conflict, suspense, and even of theme.The "Valley..." sequence in which the father arrives at his son's military base and exchanges dialogue with on-duty personnel who knew the missing son seems throw-away, boring, but is structured eloquently to move us through a mise-en-scene that tells us crucial things about the son's character, his life, his associations, and the poverty of his (and all the other soldiers') emotional life.That poverty is immediately revealed as a clue to something being serious askew; a mystery takes initial shape here, while throw-away dialogue reveals something missing beneath the surface of the perfunctory politeness being offered by soldiers the father questions. The father sees even that sparseness to have been apparently further denuded--important things are missing and the father's theft of the phone from his son's possessions is covered up by the distraction of a boring conversation with a duty officer.The specter of a mystery, of suspense, pops a little bud out of the background here, with both an economy of words and of shots in a brief sequence.Haggis' scenarios carry an almost specter-like idea of content--the thematic ghost in the commercial cinematic machine. The opening sequence of "Casino Royal" (2006) is an example. The simple draftsmanship of this writer-director, visual and thematically, is a gift to American cinema. He doesn't write frenetic, action packed 'movies'. He writes and directs films. His most commercial works, "Crash" (2004--writer), "The Next Three Days (2010--director), and "Million Dollar Baby" (2004--writer), offer master classes in compact scene design, sequence, and accumulated meaning.His TV script work alone ("Mr. Sterling" and "Family Law") are a blueprint for some of the best written and most terse, concentrated script writing that has influenced critically acclaimed TV convention, while, hey, let's just remember, he is the first writer-director in American film academy history to write Oscar-winning Best Picture screenplays in two consecutive years.I'll stop there. I wouldn't want to take up TOO much space.

Terry Pearson This is a story about a man's love for his family and his country, and how both are shaken by the horrors of war. It will not be admired by those Americans who live by "my country right or wrong" and "greatest country in the world" and similar claptrap and, yes, there are still plenty of those around. The movie critics - the ones who are actually paid to do it - seem to have taken a stance to protect themselves from the aforementioned class. This movie makes America look bad, and by God they don't want to be hitched to that wagon. The acting is fine; the script good, though it wobbles in a few places;and the editing is perhaps the weak point in the show. The locations are great: tacky bars and diners; grim roadsides; grimy motels; whining freeway traffic; homes furnished by K-Mart. In short, life as most of us know it. The big questions raised here: is war now different from what it was in World War II, Korea, or even Vietnam? Is it more dehumanizing than at any time in human history? Does it make us more depraved than ever? If so, then why?