Chris Burnett is a Navy pilot of seven years who is sent on a Holiday recon mission with his pilot to take some photographs. When Burnett convinces his pilot to go off course, they find an interesting settlement and take photos of the mysterious area. When the troops there discover they're being spied upon, Burnett's plane is shot down but he survives. What follows is a fight for survival as the militant group hunts Burnett all across areas of Bosnia. Will he be rescued or caught?

The thing about action movies these days is most of the time it's all about the action and not at all about the story or dialog or character development. Effects replace the essentials. Filmmakers have come to expect moviegoers to care solely about the cool camera angles, explosions, and computer generated effects than the deeper more meaningful material. 2001's Behind Enemy Lines tries to find common ground. The problem with the film is they've taken a war drama and transformed it into a Mission:Impossible 2-ish ordeal. Instead of the emotions and reality coming into play, we have more of an imaginative truth-stretching adrenaline rush with plenty of eye candy.

Is this bad? Only if you're expecting Saving Private Ryan. If you expect a plot that is just enough to get the movie by and a worthy action hero performance from usually-comedy man Owen Wilson, then you'll be happy with Behind Enemy Lines. If you're in the mood for a good ride with plenty of effects and visuals to please the eye, you'll be more than content with this film. Don't expect an epic. Don't expect a Cast Away. Don't expect to come away with a new view on life (unless it'll make you appreciate America's freedoms more). Don't expect a tear-jerker, a laugh fest, a cerebral, thinking film. As I mentioned before, if you enjoyed the surreal, testosterone-driven implausible antics of Mission:Impossible 2, just consider the feel of this one as Mission:Impossible 3 - Behind Enemy Lines.

I didn't expect anything truly amazing from the film, so I was naturally pleased and content with the film's nail-biting suspense moments and intriguing visuals. How was the content? Violent. And unfortunately the language left something to be desired. It figures that the frustration and angst of characters in the film lead to frequent uses of the "S" word, the irritating and blasphemous "G-dd*mn", and one usage of that nonsensical "F" word. As far as violence is concerned, we see, from a distance, a brief glimpse of a man executed by being shot in the head. Some other shots of wounded victims of war and slightly bloody dead bodies were also shown. No sex and nudity was present.

Overall, I actually enjoyed the film, although I was thoroughly irritated by the swearing. I can't outwardly recommend this film due to that and its violence. The film probably isn't what you would expect from a war movie, so make sure you're in the mood for this type of almost music-video-style, over-the-top action flick.

- John DiBiase (reviewed: 12/3/01)