Video Sources 11 Views

  • Watch
  • Source 1123movies
  • Source 2123movies
  • Source 3123movies
  • Source 4123movies
Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies

Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies

A hero should never have to stand alone.Apr. 07, 2000128 Min.
Your rating: 0
9 1 vote


#123movies #fmovies #putlocker #gomovies #solarmovie #soap2day Watch Full Movie Online Free – Hayes Hodges finds his career aspirations dashed when he’s wounded in Vietnam combat. He then returns to America and becomes a disillusioned lawyer who goes up against the service to defend Colonel Terry Childers, who is accused of inciting an incident that leaves many demonstrators dead. Hodges in no position to decline: Childers heroically saved his life back in Vietnam.
Plot: Part war movie, part courtroom thriller, this gripping drama finds a war hero put on trial for a rescue mission gone terribly wrong with only his doubtful friend and fellow marine to represent him.
Smart Tags: #vietnam_war_veteran #the_white_house #suspense #violence #colonel #marine #embassy #combat #trial #lawyer #rescue_mission #mission #rescue #desert #ambassador #friendship #yemen #courtroom #judiciary #judicial_system #judicial

Rules of Engagement 2000 Streaming Links:


Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies 1 Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies 26.4/10 Votes: 44,583
Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies 3 Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies 237%
Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies 5 Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies 245/100
Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies 7 Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies 26.2 Votes: 457 Popularity: 14.648


A good ride, good actors, some flaws.
Last week, as I considered ordering this DVD, I checked the IMDB rating and saw a “fair” 6.5. Since I like Tommy Lee Jones and Samuel L. Jackson, I placed the order. Like most roller coasters, I found it to be a good ride and Jones and Jackson did very credible jobs. The flaws in the movie have been correctly pointed out by numerous other reviewers. I was somewhat surprised that some of the most critical reviews were by US viewers. I fully understand how non-US citizens would be irritated by the stereotypes. I found it to be a very exciting movie from my particular perspective (US citizen, military family, male over 45). The scenes of combat when the marines are ordered to the US embassy in Yemen to safeguard our state department personnel were VERY well done, even to the point of gripping. The court scenes and conflicts of evidence or lack of evidence were interesting to me and I also understood, but did not agree with, the aims of the State Department. I don’t think some of the reviewers are aware of what a person might do in such an extremely stressful situation as that of Colonel Childers (Jackson). It was fascinating to me to see what he did do and how he and others looked back on it. I would have given Rules of Engagement a 9 or 10, but for the flaws. It’s a good movie though and well worth renting. It’s an 8.
Review By: moviecat-6 Rating: 8 Date: 2001-02-01
The first time I saw this movie, I loved it. But at a second viewing, I realized with dismay that there was a major discrepancy in it that invalidated the entire point of the film. Almost every movie has a goof or an inconsistency, and while that annoys me sometimes it usually doesn’t take away from the overall value of the film: Silence of the Lambs, a great movie, has no fewer than four major inconsistent or contradictory moments in it. The problem with this movie is that the contradiction goes to the very essence of the movie’s theme. Briefly, the plot goes thusly: Samuel Jackson is in charge of a unit of Marines which is sent to an unspecified US embassy to protect it from increasingly hostile mobs. At some point, the mob becomes violent and, more, begins attacking the embassy. Jackson spirits out the ambassador and his wife, along with other staff, and then defends the embassy. Finally, he gives the order to fire into the crowd that is stoning and shooting at the building, and the unit does so with devastating results. When the smoke clears, dozens lie dead and many more wounded, including many women and children, and not a weapon is in sight. The resulting furor and outrage leads to a court-martial for Jackson. The central thesis of the film is that Jackson and Jackson alone saw the weapons. For reasons which are explained but are not totally convincing, a State Department employee destroys the surveillance tape from the embassy which clearly shows the weapons being fired by the mob. The rest of the movie describes how Jackson is defended by Tommy Lee Jones, who undertakes his own investigation.

This whole thesis falls apart, however, when you watch the scene where the Marines begin firing into the crowd. There are two impossibilities here that Friedkin (the director) asks us to swallow: 1, that an entire platoon of Marines –roughly thirty men– rise up over the wall, aim their weapons and fire for ten to fifteen seconds –and not a single one of them sees a weapon. Impossible. Even less possible: 2, after the firing stops, all the weapons that were in the crowd (and shown on the surveillance tape) disappear –just like that! Where did they go? Thirty marines are standing on a rooftop not fifty feet away from the square, looking down at it, and all those weapons are taken away without them (or the tape) seeing it. Absolutely impossible.

If this were a minor (or even major) discrepancy, but had no relation to the rest of the action, then I wouldn’t even comment on it. But the entire movie rests on the idea that only Jackson saw what he did –and that is a flat impossibility. For me, that ruined what would have otherwise been a fine film. That is very poor writing. Too bad.

Review By: frankboccia Rating: 5 Date: 2006-03-06

Other Information:

Original Title Rules of Engagement
Release Date 2000-04-07
Release Year 2000

Original Language en
Runtime 2 hr 8 min (128 min)
Budget 60000000
Revenue 71000000
Status Released
Rated R
Genre Drama, Thriller, War
Director William Friedkin
Writer Jim Webb (story), Stephen Gaghan (screenplay)
Actors Tommy Lee Jones, Samuel L. Jackson, Guy Pearce, Ben Kingsley
Country UK, Germany, Canada, USA
Awards 1 win & 2 nominations.
Production Company Paramount Pictures, Roe Productions KG, Seven Arts Pictures
Website N/A

Technical Information:

Sound Mix DTS, Dolby
Aspect Ratio 2.39 : 1, 2.35 : 1
Camera Panavision Panaflex Gold II, Panavision E-Series Lenses, Panavision Panaflex Platinum, Panavision E-Series Lenses, Technovision Cameras and Lenses
Laboratory DeLuxe, Hollywood (CA), USA (prints), Technicolor, Hollywood (CA), USA (dailies), Consolidated Film Industries (CFI), Hollywood (CA), USA (color)
Film Length 3,518 m (Sweden), 3,601 m (Spain)
Negative Format 35 mm (Kodak Vision 320T 5277, Vision 500T 5279, Eastman EXR 200T 5293)
Cinematographic Process Panavision (anamorphic), Technovision (anamorphic) (some scenes)
Printed Film Format 35 mm (Kodak Vision 2383)

Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies
Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies
Rules of Engagement 2000 123movies
Original title Rules of Engagement
TMDb Rating 6.2 457 votes

Similar titles

Infernal Affairs II 2003 123movies
Within Madness 2015 123movies
Hector 2015 123movies
The Target 2014 123movies
Pride 2007 123movies
To Die For 1995 123movies
Deliver Us from Evil 2020 123movies
Ice Cream in the Cupboard 2019 123movies
American Muscle 2014 123movies
Zoo 2019 123movies
WWE Royal Rumble 2017 2017 123movies
Assassin’s Game 2019 123movies 123Movies