Mel Gibson may not appear in front of the camera these days quite as often as he used to, but he was a major star throughout the '80s, '90s, and 2000s. Though he remains best known for the Lethal Weapon and Mad Max franchises, as well as 1995's Braveheart, Gibson has explored a variety of genres over the course of his near 50-year career, including the war movie genre.

Gibson doesn't have a great many war movies under his belt, but he did star in The Patriot (2000), which takes place during the American Revolutionary War, and he directed Hacksaw Ridge (2016), a World War II film. Braveheart could also be considered a war movie. Gibson's work in the genre has also extended to the Vietnam War, with one film that may have earned somewhat lukewarm reviews from critics, but is now earning the praise of an expert for its depiction of one key battle.

We Were Soldiers Scores A High Accuracy Grade

Mel Gibson's War Movie Gets A Few Key Elements Of Combat Correct

Former Green Beret David Harris analyses select scenes from Vietnam War movie chronicles the battle of Ia Drang in 1965, in which Gibson's Lt. Col. Hal Moore and his unit attempt to capture a position of strategic importance. The film, which also stars Sam Elliott, Madeleine Stowe, Greg Kinnear, and Keri Russell, earned somewhat lukewarm reviews from critics, and currently has a 63% critics score on Rotten Tomatoes.

In a recent video for Insider, Harris looks specifically at We Were Soldiers' depiction of a "Broken Arrow" situation, or one in which American soldiers are overrun and call in air close to their own position. According to the former Green Beret, the film ultimately depicts a broken arrow call-in as accurate, in addition to featuring explosions that feel true to life. Check out Harris' analysis and his score for the We Were Soldiers sequence below:

This scene portrays the Battle of Ia Drang during the Vietnam War, and the Americans were so overrun they had to call “broken arrow” for air . When a soldier calls “broken arrow” that basically means you’re being overrun, your position, and you need as much air as possible.

Because they actually told the commander where to stack, how much he had, what he had, those are real messages you would tell your guy. You don’t want to send two planes at the same elevation so you stack them. So that way they’re flying, they have their own lane that they don’t have to worry about hitting other planes. You may stack them because of the weapons systems they have, like I need this to drop before this. If you are being overrrun, I’ve seen a play go offensive once, ever, much as it takes.

You also have a thing with mortars and this called “danger close.” If I’m being overrun, at some point I may tell you, “Hey, I need you to drop this close.” And usually when you’re going to drop danger close they’re going to ask for the commander’s initials. We need someone that is in charge saying, “Okay.”

I rate this as about a nine [out of 10]. I thought these explosions were realistic because from what I’ve seen of drops, with the grass and everything like that, depending on what you were dropping, I’m pretty sure this is probably how it looked in real life.

What We Were Soldiers' Accuracy Grade Means For The Movie

Another Expert Shared A Conflicting Analysis

It's worth noting that a previous Insider video also included We Were Soldiers, but the expert in that case was military historian Bill Allison. Instead of awarding the Vietnam war movie a nine as Harris did, Allison only gives it a five, saying that it "fails on a lot of levels." Allison took issue with historical inaccuracies related to the use of tunnels and its confusion of the People's Army of Vietnam with the Viet Cong.

It's clear, then, that We Were Soldiers is something of a mixed bag in of accuracy. The on-the-ground combat and explosions may have elements of realism, but it falls short when it comes to the historical details. The movie earned a more positive 84% Popcornmeter score on Rotten Tomatoes, but it also fell short at the box office, grossing just $114 million on a $75 million budget. Clearly, though, the Gibson film still has elements worth celebrating 22 years later.

Source: Insider