I was wary about the options for a Xmas movie this year, especially since we already saw The Holiday (blah). Someone offered Blood Diamond, which did not really seem like a great choice. But, I relented, and half of us did see it, the other half something else.
It was pretty good, but had limitations because of its predictable genre aspects. All the same, within those restraints, it was a good movie. If you check out the comments here by "Margie24" (12/3/06), you will basically get my feelings about the whole thing. The leads, Jennifer Connelly an add-on doing decently well with a something thankless "concerned journalist" role, were very good. Quite powerful, DiCaprio (diamond smuggler/mercenary) turning heads twice this year, Djimon Hounsou great as a heartbroken father desperate to reconnect with all of his family once more. The emotional weight of the film goes to him, the local drawn into "conflict diamonds" -- smuggled diamonds used to fund rebel forces, who toss in the problem of child soldiers.
[As an aside, I do not quite get diamonds. I realize the idea of luxuries, but diamonds simply are not worth the money in my opinion. You can go on a nice vacation for the price of a nice diamond ring and take your wife with you. The money can also be put to many other uses, including a bit to charity really, since you can still buy something nice with the rest. And, for what? A little stone. Surely, something else downright trivial would replace it. Always need pointless luxury items. Still ...]
Bloody civil war (good amount of death in multiple movies this season, including a plane crash in the football movie) and so forth provide a lot of serious real world subject matter, but the reviews that warned us not to forget that this is a Hollywood flick were correct -- this ultimately is a story about our duo trying to find a diamond, DiCaprio clearly the star of the show with Connelly (respectable, not really given room to shine, but has a few good moments) providing some nice on the eyes supporting scenes (no sex, though it is suggested ... interesting choice). The background material is not really exploited, especially with the performances and talent shown (good location shooting and so forth), but deep down this is an action movie.
This is not really a bad thing -- many war movies are that, but they provide more as well ... even when various parts are not surprising. It still provides superior movie making. Such is the case here. For instance, Salon warns that it is a "public-service announcement masquerading as an adventure story." Not true -- it is actually the reverse, if anything. No classic, I would also say "lacks sparkle" is unfair, a case (see first referenced review) perhaps of overexpectation. As I said, the movie had its limitations, and basically cannot be taken too seriously. Still, worth watching.
A fair criticism would be the focus on DiCaprio (one reason why Hotel Rwanda was different -- we saw a local hero, not another cynical white, perhaps one who somehow repents), Hounsou more of a local innocent, who apparently needs outside help (sensibly, perhaps, since outsiders also are helping to make things worse). Still "the other." All the same, when an old local wonders the horrors that would occur if the land had oil, just had to laugh.
Overall, if people will be made to think while being entertained, I am okay with it. And, it seems some of this "too full of itself" stuff is a bit too overly cynical. Anyway, isn't a bit of preaching appropriate this time of year?