There are few movies that grip their audience completely, the viewer not daring to blink and miss a second of the action.

“Lone Survivor” is one of those films.

Directed by Peter Berg and starring Mark Wahlberg, the film quickly gains momentum and hardly slows down until the credits roll. Based on the story of four United States Navy SEALs in the aftermath of an operation gone awry, “Lone Survivor” brings you front and center into the kind of fighting American troops have faced in the Middle East, along with the sacrifices the close-knit team was willing to make for one another.

The opening credits depict some of the harsh training that Navy SEALS undergo. As the clips document the process to graduation day, the viewer can see camaraderie and trust forming between the men. The real-life lone survivor, Marcus Luttrell, whose memoir was the inspiration for the motion picture, offers a voice-over for the montage.

Luttrell’s character, played by Wahlberg, then moves to an American base in Afghanistan after training and receives a mission briefing about Operation Red Wings, in which the SEALs will attempt to kill Taliban leader Ahmad Shah.

The team that will go in on the ground consists of four members: Luttrell (Wahlberg), and other SEALs Mike Murphy (Taylor Kitsch), Danny Dietz (Emile Hirsch) and Matthew Axelson (Ben Foster). Each actor represented a believable man, but the film neither fully introduced the audience to any of them nor effectively showed individual traits over the course of the battle. Since the movie was a little more than two hours long, perhaps “Lone Survivor” could have spent more time on the team’s characterization.

The target of Operation Red Wings, Shah, is in a village surrounded by the mountains of Afghanistan. The SEALs are placed on the opposite side of the mountains and hike to get within range of the village under the cover of night.

Just when Shah is in their sights, however, innocent mountain herders blow the group’s cover. The four men, whose communications with their base have failed, are left with a decision — let the herders go and alert the Taliban of their position, or kill them and break military rules of engagement and face the consequences.

Much of the rest of the film features intense and exceptionally captivating scenes that change as quickly and as violently as genuine battle does. A large portion was appropriately shot with shaky and seemingly hand-held cameras, which is not only a staple of Berg’s work as a director but also able to imitate the chaotic nature of guerilla warfare.

The hard-hitting film also emphasized each wound a SEAL team member suffered. The actors showed more pain as they went on and the footage was unflinching in terms of gore.

Berg took some liberties with this aspect, however. It can be hard for the audience to believe that the SEALs were able to sustain so many injuries and still fight fiercely, even if they were a part of one of the world’s most sophisticated special operations forces.

The few times the action slowed, there were moments of genuine heartbreak. Each time another member of the team is killed, “Lone Survivor” smartly eases up and lets the audience reflect on that member’s contributions to his comrades, even if only for a few seconds.

Berg also took some creative license with “Lone Survivor’s” ending, which had many aspects deviating from Luttrell’s original story. It worked for cinematic and climactic value, but was too cliché and did not match the rest of the film’s intensity and authenticity.

With a title such as “Lone Survivor,” it is not the ending that the audience wants to know — its how the ending came to be and why it happened that way. It is for that reason that the movie is successful. It shows the progression of the firefights and aftermath as accurately as it can, telling a moving and inspiring story in the process.

And you just can’t look away.

Published on January 29, 2014 at 12:20 am

Contact Vincent: vtloncto@syr.edu