"Blood Diamond"(2006)

I saw "Blood Diamond" a few weeks back, but held off reviewing it until I saw "Children of Men" because I knew both movie dealt with similar themes and both had extensive urban combat sequences.

"Children of Men" is a daring, original, cutting-edge movie that totally kicks-ass.

"Blood Diamond" kicks ass but in a different way. 'BD' is mainly a typical Hollywood movie with all the typical Hollywood ingredients that manages to be highly entertaining and deal with some truly dark subjects at the same time. The high point of 'BD' is how far they were willing to go to portray the insanity of violence in modern day Africa. This movie had a lot of guts and as far as on-screen violence goes it is breath-taking. However the Hollywood elements detract from the movie's overall importance (in the grand scheme of movies) and the ending which wraps everything up in a nice little bow undermines the rest of the movie's gritty message.

I hated the last ten minutes of "Blood Diamond" and will edit them out of the movie when it comes out on DVD. The rest of the film was incredible and featured some of the best Africa action since "Dark of the Sun". I highly recommend this movie, with the caveat that the last ten minutes are annoying as hell.

Upon comparison "Children of Men"  is ground-breaking, important, action cinema whereas "Blood Diamond" is of a more old-school Hollywood style that manages to entertain and horrify until the last ten crappy minutes.

Verdict: "Blood Diamond" is a great rental, "Children of Men" is required theater-viewing.

Originally posted on January 7, 2007.

Leonardo DiCaprio went on to win Best Actor for "Blood Diamond" even though he should have won for "The Departed". I don't even remember the last 10 minutes of "Blood Diamond"; probably because by then his character was dead.