Jarhead 2: Field of Fire

“Jarhead 2: Field of Fire,” released in 2014, spends time on gunfire montages. Jake Gyllenhaal never fired his gun in the first “Jarhead,” which was the point.

The leftovers of “Jarhead” stays, despite they do so as a limited look in the psyche of Marine Corps soldiers stationed in Taliban-ruled areas. Matt Paprocki said in his review, “However, this in-name-only sequel is less about the grind, pressures, and alluring promises hoisted upon our youngest recruits than it is a tale of sagging heroism mingling with bullet fed patriotism.”

Paprocki continued, “Mostly ignoring the mental toll, that which made Jarhead a captivating and purposeful non-spectacle, is egregious. Spinning into recruitment video level jingoism is an outright illegitimatization of the concept.”

What’s left for Don Michael Paul to direct is way out from studio areas. Paprocki said, “Universal demanded a war movie soaked in blood squibs more than internal turmoil. In that sense, Jarhead 2, in spite of heinous bro chatter dialog, is a drooping if effective war drama.” Josh Kelley enters in to take over an available Corporal post as Merrimette, taking down orders from Stephen Lang whose roughness is really evident.

Story making throws Merrimette and his team in dangerous Taliban country after a car accident, showing a series of fights with Afghan rebels meant to make up this stuff for a wider audience. It’s a usual way of modern cinematic militarism, filled with sacrifice and bravery without any context.

Paprocki said, “Jarhead 2 slinks past any potential flare ups of boredom; there’s enough desert-born bullet trading to ensure it.” However, there is also no substance. Afghanistan’s difficult existence is taken down to a single native woman who is just there so show that she is a damsel-in-distress in a finale than just give a reason for her country’s chaos.

Paprocki said, “So much of this feature is inter-cutting between B-level, shaky cam close-ups of M-16s and nondescript men in turbans flailing as they’re hit. I’s a wonder if most of this wasn’t stock material welled up in Universal’s library. Jarhead 2’s statement is only to prop up currently held belief systems of superiority.” This is cliché and obsolete, nothing like the exaggerated posters, showing helicopters blowing up villages in the name of democracy – however in plan, “Jarhead 2” is not far off from a difference from that look.

As you might have guessed, this movie is bad. What could you expect from a direct-to-video sequel? Why did they feel to make a sequel to “Jarhead?” Was there any good reason? Did the first one even leave off with a hint that there will be a sequel? Just avoid this one, if you loved the first one.

Look out next week for the continuation of the downhill slope of “Jarhead Month.”