Some of the greatest films ever made are about war, as true stories of heroism and sacrifice are often well-suited for dramatic storytelling. Whether they’re based on real history, inspired by real conflicts, or set within a fantasy or science fiction world, war films have the potential to explore the perils that come with combat. Unfortunately for cinephiles everywhere, not every war film can be as perfect asSaving Private RyanorOppenheimer.
Some war films have begun to perpetuate stereotypes and clichesthat make them age poorly. While it is understandable that a genre that existed for this long may have developed some recurring hallmarks, overusing certain plot details makes war filmsindistinguishable from those about superheroes. Here are the ten most overused war movie cliches.
10Unnecessary Slow Motion
Recent offender: ‘Tears of the Sun’ (2003)
Ever since the popularity ofThe MatrixandLeon: The Professionalduring the 1990s era of action cinema,Hollywood has become obsessed with using slow-motion effects to focus on minor details in combat scenes.Theoretically, this should help a film achieve more realism by showing a tactical environment that the characters are operating in. Unfortunately, this often results in detracting from the tension of the situation by emulating the aesthetics of a video game.
Tears of the Sunis a recent war film that would’ve touched with greatness had it not been so reliant on slow motion in its action scenes. Bruce Willisgives a great performance andAntoine Fuquaconstructs some memorable set pieces that realize modern warfare, but using so much slow motion lead to a film that felt far too schmaltzy and sentimental for its own good.
Tears of the Sun
9Disregarding Military Procedures
Recent offender: ‘Behind Enemy Lines’ (2001)
There’s truly nothing worse in a war film when the filmmakers seemingly have no regard for the way that actual military procedures are carried out. Understandably, war films areoften not supposed to be documentaries, so some dramatic license may be allowed when it comes to adding dramatic tension. However, blatantly ignoring obvious military protocol is a surefire way to make the audience feel like what they are watching is completely inauthentic.
Behind Enemy Linesis a war film that had the potential to be a classic had it not ignored the chain of command.The story of a pilot (Owen Wilson) who is trapped deep within enemy territory after a covert mission would have been completely implausible had the characters in the film followed the corrective measures necessary to making sure that a situation like this never could have happened in the first place.
Watch on Hulu
8Love Triangles
Recent offender: ‘Pearl Harbor’ (2001)
War films may be intended to play on emotions, but there’s no use in adding in romantic storylines that don’t feel realistic.The audience should have enough investment in the soldiers themselves, and don’t need to have another character introduced to add more reason to want them to come home safely. Additionally, having a petty love triangle simply makes the characters seem immature and ill-suited for military duty.
Pearl Harboris a war film that is completely ruined by a love triangle subplotfeaturingBen AffleckandJosh Hartnettin roles that are certainly beneath them. AlthoughMichael Baywas probably not the right filmmaker to make aPearl Harborfilmin the first place, any goodwill that the film earned from its impressive action sequences was completely eroded by its melodramatic romantic storylines, which stretch the running time well over three hours long.
Pearl Harbor
7Unnecessary Religious Overtones
Recent offender: ‘Unbroken’ (2014)
Faith is an incredibly hard subject to depict on screen, as it’s a personal matter that many audience members may have trouble relating to if a film does not line up with their individual set of beliefs. There’s certainly a place for religion when showing how those serving in combat find inspiration, but the overuse of religious imagery can add a schmaltziness to a film that detracts from any sense of realism.
Unbrokenis a war film that would have been bound for award-season glory had it not spent so much time reiterating obvious religious metaphors, which are not subtle enough to be effective. While the film tells the incredible true story of the Olympic athlete turned soldier Louis Zamperini(Jack O’Connell), it would have been far more effective had it solely focused on his accomplishments in the field of battle.
6Adding Humorous Banter
Recent offender: ‘Flyboys’ (2006)
Comedy has its place in some war films likeGood Morning, Vietnam,andDr. Strangelove: How I stopped Worrying And Learned To Love The Bombthat are specifically intended to be works of satire. However,the addition of humorous banter within otherwise serious dramatic stories simply makes war films feel inauthentic.There needs to be a fine line between depicting these characters as compassionate figures and turning them into the type ofsnarky heroes that pop up in action movies.
Flyboyswas a World War II dogfight movie that had potential but tried too hard to incorporate humor one-liners and banterthat felt lifted straight out ofStar WarsorIndependence Day. The result was a film that trivialized combat itself and didn’t give the men in battle the respect that they deserved for the brave service to their country.
5Simplifying Complex Political Issues
Recent offender: ‘The Greatest Beer Run Ever’ (2022)
War is an inherently political subject matter,and all war films must engage with the inherent origins of the conflicts that they depict. Even though some war films have more prominent political overtones than others, it does the audience no service if they are simplified to the point that they lose any meaning.
The Greatest Beer Run Everwas based on an incredible true story but was completely unsuccessful inexamining the way that the Vietnam War affected the American subconsciousas youthful protests attempted to shed light on the lies perpetrated by the Presidential administration. There’s no point in adding historical context if a film refuses to engage with both sides of a discussion, and simplifying the interesting story ofThe Greatest Beer Runto a “why can’t we all get along?” message feels deeply disrespectful to everyone that remembers the events as they were unfolding.
The Greatest Beer Run Ever
4Using Historical Tragedy For Comic Relief
Recent offender: ‘1941’ (1979)
War films have to walk a very fine line when it comes to comedy; while there is room for some occasional moments of humor if it fits the story being told, it should always be clear who the jokes are being directed at. Comedy can be well utilized if it helps to satirize the oppressors in a conflict, but making jokes at the expense of victims does no one any good.
1941may bethe worst film that Steven Spielberg ever directedbecause he seemingly had no grasp on what the tone should be.The film pokes fun at those that lost their lives in the infamous bombing of the military base that kicked off the United States’ military involvement in World War II, complete with a callback to Spielberg’s breakout summer blockbusterJawsthat simply felt out of place.
3Sticking To A PG-13 Rating
Recent offender: ‘Operation Finale’ (2018)
War films need a certain level of grittiness in order to feel realistic, as to ignore the inherent brutality of a situation would seem disrespectful to the pain and danger that real soldiers went through. Some PG-13 films likeDunkirkandThe Imitation Gamemanaged to succeed because they didn’t exclusively focus on combat, but war films geared towards showing visceral moments feel toothless if they sand off the edges.
Operation Finalefelt like a toned-down version of an interesting storybecause it refused to depict any violence when assessing the legacy of Adolf Eichmann (Ben Kingsley), the architect of the “Final Solution” for Adolf Hitler during World War II. A film about the brave Jewish secret service agentsthat performed a novel espionage missionto hold a Nazi accountable for his crimes could have stood to benefit from an R-Rating.
Operation Finale
2Unnecessary Non-Linear Structure
Recent offender: ‘The Yellow Birds’ (2018)
War cinema does not generally benefit from the sort ofambiguity and structural deviationsthat are better suited for thrillers and noir stories.Frankly, it can often seem disrespectful if war films attempt to utilize a traumatizing moment within a soldier’s experience as the source of a “plot twist” intended to shock the audience. These issues grow more prominent if a film is actually trying to engage with issues like post-traumatic stress disorder and grief.
The Yellow Birdshad some interesting ideas about modern warfare that felt relevant due to its odd flashback structure.While the film attempted to bridge the gap between a soldier (Tye Sheridan) in combat and his mother (Jennifer Aniston), the confusing series of narrative deviations led to a situation when neither character felt like they were given the focus and respect that they needed.
Watch on Starz
1Stigmatizing Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
Recent offender: ‘Man Down’ (2016)
War cinema has gotten considerably better intheir depiction of mental health issues,as recent acclaimed films likeThe Hurt LockerandAmerican Sniperdrew praise and Academy Award nominations for showing the consequences of post traumatic stress disorder. Unfortunately, PTSD is often simplified on screen in a manner that feels too close to melodrama.
Man Downis a baffling war film that tries to use PTSD as a plot twistthat explains why a soldier (Shia Labeouf) is living in a post-apocalyptic wasteland that is the result of his own denial of reality. While the film may have succeeded if it showed how hard it is to wrestle with the death of a loved one,Man Downruined any sense of authenticity for stigmatizing an issue that many people deal with. It was an insult to savvy audience members and frankly disrespectful to real victims.
