User reviews

A very enjoyable film! Reynolds captures the essence of man's struggle with right & wrong, good & evil, on several levels in this realistic depiction of the Soviet-Afghan conflict. It was both meaningful and entertaining. I gave it an 8.

The internal conflicts of the characters reflect the many ways that people reconcile and deal with their emotions and beliefs vis-à-vis the roles thrust upon them by war and duty- the soldier, the faithful, the victim, the oppressor, the revenge-seeker and the order-follower. Each main character struggles at some point with his or her decisions in the face of right and wrong, duty and morality. It is the results of these choices that guide the film to transcend the events of war, and delve into the universal questions of how and why man struggles with real and painful choices.

Although the film does prove to be quite predictable, the underlying messages are timeless and well depicted. A moving story with good character development artistically filmed and approached realistically. The brutality and violence of war is not gratuitous, and the anti-war message is delivered superbly.

I highly recommend this film to all audiences... not just war-film buffs. With the US presence in Afghanistan today, the film should serve to help understand that conflict and this one in regards to the human components that are so often overlooked.

A note regarding other user's comments: The film was subtitled. It seems that some saw it without the subtitles for some reason. If you are one of those people, you really must view it with them. Rent it. I cannot imagine truly understanding the full scope of the film without the benefit of the Afghan dialog. Also, the "Americanization" of the soviet dialog not only serves to draw parallels between that conflict and the Vietnam War, but it universalizes the struggles of war and allows the viewer to empathize on a human level- not just a political one. In our long human history, how often have these basic human conflicts occurred... particularly in times of war and oppression and injustice?

This is one of the best war-movies I have ever seen. Even if it hasn't a lot of action in it, it is still very intense. I think that the director has managed superbly to illustrate the torments of war, especially how it was - and still is - to be a member of a tank-crew on a mission in a foreign coutry. All the actors are doing a fine job and the place for shooting this movie is well chosen. And I must say that I especially appreciate the camera-movements along the tank that makes one understand the power that they contain.

The review of this film by whpratt1 is completely wrong. This film is not critical of the Mujahadeen, but rather shows them struggling to fight for their freedom. The Soviet army is the oppressive evil presence. This film was made during the Cold War, when Americans saw a line drawn in the sand between communism and capitalist democracy. In the film, the Soviets are clearly the bad guys, and the Mujahadeen are fighting the good fight. The main character comes to understand this during the film, finally telling his Soviet commanding officer that "we're the Nazis this time."

During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the United States funded, supplied, and trained Mujahadeen forces. American stinger missiles were used to shoot down Soviet helicopters. The most famous Mujahadeen fighter trained by the United States would come to be Osama bin Laden. He would participate in the fight against the Soviet army, much to the approval of the United States. This film pays tribute to the Mujahadeen for valiantly defending themselves against America's enemy. The fact that the United States has invaded Afghanistan makes the film much more interesting to watch. It is ironic that these militants once praised by Hollywood are now our enemies. The lesson this film should teach us now, albeit inadvertently, is that we should be careful who we glorify and who we vilify. Humans will be humans, and will fight for what they *believe* is right, sometimes whether it actually is right or not.

When you can get used to the Soviet soldiers having American accents, this is an excellent war movie, with some great camera-work and editing, some nice twists and turns and, and I'm not sure if this was just me, a subtle vein of black comedy. Makes you realise how awesome tanks are.

Allegedly came out during a change of administration at COLUMBIA, and they knew not what to do with it, and at a time when the 'blockbuster' mentality was starting to become the norm, THE BEAST may have played in what, five cities for a week or two.....they say the most valuable gems can be the hardest to find...and THE BEAST is no exception to that maxim...

This is as close to a 'foreign film' out of Hollywood as you are going to get...the story brings the conflict between people forward, and makes the action incidental-virtual guaranteed bankruptcy for a US film today.

And as for the actors speaking English-I think the producers realised they were close enough to no profit by having one language being subtitled as it was-the whole film being subtitled would have seen no financing at all, probably.-That just doesnt fly in H-town....'art-house' kiss of death... However...

The acting is first rate. The story is lean, and to the point. The scenery is stark and beautiful-well, IMHO.... There is little pandering to the audience, and little Cultural Condescension that I can see-

The viewer soon becomes loyal to the Mujahadeem Rebels, not because they are against the Ruskies, but because they have the will and the right to exist as they are, not to be dictated to by a 'higher' invading power...

Thought it suffers a bit from low budget, I would rate THE BEAST up with FULL METAL JACKET, PLATOON, DAS BOOT, and APOCALYPSE NOW... an EIGHT out of TEN stars... dont rent this-OWN it!

The Beast of War is not the best war film I've seen. But the fact that it's set during the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan and its David vs Goliath battle is what pleased me. The only other movie I know set during the Afghan conflict is the far more jingoistic Rambo III. The story as it goes on is rather predictable. Predictability in films or books is not what displeases audience anyway. What I enjoyed was that battle between a tank and a handful of fighters.

The verdict: 3 of 5 stars.

This film is as I said one of the greatest war films ever made. It is also the only one that I am aware of that focuses on the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. A serviceable plot makes it easier for the tank crew to turn out some great performances. Stephen Baldwin is even tolerable in this one and this is the only role to date where he shouldn't be killed for his decision to act. Don Harvey is a unsung star as the brake fluid swigging Kaminski and Jason Patric turns in a good perfomance as Koverchenko, the moral driver torn between being a good soldier and obeying his instincts. This also qualifies as the best tank movie ever made and the T-62 tank that is featured is the real star of the show. I think that the Soviets were using T-72 tanks in this particular conflict but I'm just being a little anal. Overall, this is one of my top ten and I think that any war movie fan should check this one out.

Well, I think I got the point what was meant, but it shall be clear that it has nothing to do with portraying Afgan-Soviet conflict. This movie try to deal with a nature of war as it self and does it to my mind pretty good.

Well, these guys in a tank were not Russians in any manner. Maybe it is possible that some smarts is questioning his comrades towards enemies, but it's hard to consider it in USSR troops. Comradeship is a holy thing for them, holier then bible, so there is no way they could abandon one of them even when it would be an order (even if commander would gone insane to order such an action, crew would probably beat the sheet out of him rather then obey). My uncle served in action in Afganistan for soviets as commando. Although he isn't Russian and had little respect (as most Latvians) to soviets, he's never disrespected his army fellows or combating officers.

Starting action was pretty made up as well, as for village blowing purposes soviets would use choppers not tanks. Tanks was used in protecting roads and securing routes. Operatons was mainly carried out by solders and armored vehicles - BTR's. Tanks could be used as support, but there is no way massive tank attack would be enforced without commandos on foot or vehicles guarding them as it was shown (well, armament has always been a virtue for soviet commanders not soldiers).

But as I already said, in general this movie is totally worth to see.

This neglected and largely unknown anti-war film, ranks as one of the best of the genre. Since other posters have commented extensively on this movie, I'll limit myself to a few comments about those elements others have not addressed.

In it my understanding from material I read at the time the movie was in release (I saw it in Los Angeles when I was living there in the late 80s) that the actors who portrayed Afghanis learned and delivered their lines phonetically. The fact that the "Russians" sound like Americans, and the Afghans are speaking the language without subtitles is a brilliant dramatic device. Virtually no one is going to understand what the Afghanis are actually saying, but it is possible to get the gist from the context and from body language. This has the effect of alienating the viewer from the freedom fighters and making them tend to identify with the Russian tank crew. The movie then operates subversively against this natural tendency throughout the remainder of the story.

The hunting of the tank by the Mujahadeen has an almost mythic quality, except for the fact that the T-62 is real and it has a human crew. And leading that crew is the tank commander whose entire life was shaped by his experiences in "The Great Patriotic War" against the Nazis when, as an 8-year-old, he was used by Russian troops in Stalingrad to help kill German tanks. The commander is as monomaniacal as Ahab, but instead of pursuing the whale, he is it's animating spirit.

There are a lot of layers to this movie -- it will definitely repay repeat viewings.

"The Beast" (a tank) tells the saga of a band of Afghan warriors in foot pursuit of a crippled Russian tank across Afghan desert. The film, a drama with some action and no large scale battles, manages to whet the interest, build suspense, deliver some wartime ironies, and provide slivers of insight into what war in Afghanistan must be like - something much more relevant today than during the Russian occupation. An interesting film which doesn't take sides most likely to be appreciated by guys into war dramas.

Unrealistic in the extreme. A tank in a modern army, possessed of satellite communication, being chased through the desert and that army seemingly pretending it didn't exist.

The acting it must be said, is not bad, and the hero receives some real character development. The point of the movie is also compelling enough - war is evil.

The film's insistence on demonizing the Soviets and employing them as a force of pure evil makes this a rather bad source of information on Afghanistan.

A well made piece of Cold-War trash in my opinion. Watch it if you like, but get your history somewhere else.

There aren't too many films that completely slip through the cracks when it comes to my knowledge thanks to year's of movie consumption (and some early life work at video rental stores, remember those?) but Kevin Reynolds little spoken about 1988 film The Beast of War (also commonly known as The Beast) is a film that I can honestly say I had never heard of until recently but thanks to a recommendation, I made the time to check this nightmarish war film out and I am very glad that I did.

Victim of a studio dumping it into an initial release with little to no fanfare or backing, Beast is a film that was worth more attention as Reynolds and his screenwriter William Mastrosimone (adapting his own play) create a boiling pot of tension and drama as they follow Russian tank officer Daskal and his crew across the sand swept surrounds of Afghanistan as they are pursed by a justice seeking group of Afghani locals in a secluded valley after they wreck havoc on their small village.

Getting stuck straight into the action, we as viewers are thrust into the sweat covered lives of the unstable Daskal and his skeleton crew that includes Jason Patric's Konstantin Koverchenko, Stephen Baldwin's wide-eyed Anthony Golikov and Don Harvey's unbalanced Kaminski, as they traverse the foreign landscape of the country they have invaded while Steven Bauer's village chief Khan Taj and his men pursue them deeper and deeper into a hellish valley that seems likely to lead to a conflict where only one side will come away victorious.

There's barely a moment where Reynolds film lets up, Beast moves along at a rapid pace, much like its barely functioning tank that is both a savior and a curse to the men inside, and when it comes to films set in the Afghanistan region there's a real case to suggest that this 1988 effort is one of the best set in the time and period where the Soviet's went toe to toe with the local militia in the country.

Something else that is evidently apparent in the film is the string of quality performances.

Leading from the front is the almost never better George Dzundza who goes all out as Daskal who is looking back to past glories as he dictates his men's movements into a seemingly losing battle and Patric, who brings great intensity to his role as the voice of reason Konstantin, a man who has been put into a hopeless position where he is torn between self preservation and doing what's right for the country his committed to serve.

Overall this is a white knuckle affair, one with brilliantly staged battles, great delivery and one of composer Mark Isham's most effective scores and while its unlikely you've heard of this war film, it's one you should find and check out as one of the 80's most undervalued efforts.

Final Say -

One of the hidden gems of the war film genre and one of the most effective tank based sub-genre efforts, The Beast of War is a thrilling piece of filmmaking that deserves to find an audience it was cruelly denied upon release.

4 RPG's out of 5.

How come I'd never heard of this movie. It was far better than many of the Iraq war movies coming out as of late. The Russians vs. Mujheednan plot is simply a devise: THE BEAST is better described as battle of minds within a war, i.e., more of a human drama. Not to say that many of the plot devices were not not deftly taken from the Afghan War's particular circumstances. Could've been more neatly pulled off in about 15 minutes less time. Also, while I can appreciate the use of unaccented English for foreign characters in many films (particularly Nazi ones, where German accent's sort of demonize them) in this case I think Russian accents (or Russian actors with subtitling) would've been more effective. Hard to say why but I think the plain spoken English made GI's out of the tank crew.

But overall a lot of fun for two hours, if a somewhat predictable ending.

My son found this movie, by serendipitous accident, in the $5.50 bin at Wal*Mart in vast abundance; Since viewing it, I've bought ten copies and given them to friends as gifts; Nine out of ten found it 'WOW!', and one 'really liked it'. It is simply that good.

Kevin Reynolds, along with the cast he 'enlisted' for this movie, has done what very few others in Hollywood have: Glued their viewer's butts firmly to their seats. In spite of trivial critique fielded, the movie is nonetheless a riveting, tachycardia-inspiring, sweat-inducing commentary of the inhumanities of war and the torment it invokes upon all involved. Dzundza, Patric and Bauer, although lesser-known among the 'gods' of Hollywood and together with a cast of very capable unknowns, have conspired to make a high-calibre testament to the evil of war and the resiliency of life and spirit in war's midst.

Others may fault the movie as they will: Soviet tankers with American accents, incorrect tank, inaccurate terminology, made in Israel, et al; The plot outshines all that. There is nothing thin about it. Consequently, I cannot recommend this film enough. You will not be sorry if you decide to buy this DVD; However, if you like the soundtrack (Tastefully done by Mark Isham), good luck finding it in CD, especially new. It's been long out of print and very rare, commanding prices often over $100, mint (I got mine for $50, luckily! Check eBay, keywords: 'beast isham soundtrack'). "The Beast" (Titled "The Beast Of War" overseas) is a MUST for any collection!

(EDIT) fairviewed's review comment of Osama bin Ladin being trained by the US is unfounded and purely conjecture. There is no evidence to support the claim, and should thus be regarded as urban legend.

This is by no means a bad movie but I still had some big problems with it.

Problem I had with this movie was; who's side are we supposed to be on? In a nutshell it's a movie about a Russian tank crew against a bunch of Afghan Mujahedeen. Both groups don't exactly get portrayed as pleasant ones. It would had been OK if this had been a sort of realistic anti-war movie, that showed the horrors, pointlessness and madness of war and that showed there is no good and evil in war but the movie very much has a typical Hollywood action type of approach to the whole story. I actually think that Jason Patric was supposed to be the main 'hero' of the movie but he simply doesn't get featured prominently enough for that, especially not during the fist half. This to me made the movie a very distant one to watch. I couldn't care for any of the characters and I don't know what side I was supposed to cheer for.

But honestly, it's still a pleasant enough movie to watch. Not as an heavy movie with a serious massage in it but more as a simplistic action flick. The movie does certainly has its moments, though I also still think they could had done far more with its concept, action and story-wise.

The characters should had been developed way more and better. That way we might had perhaps cared some more about any of them and would had given the story and movie in general some more depth as well. It's not like they didn't had the right actors for it. The movie has some good actors in it, that are also some well known names in the business.

An entertaining enough but ultimately pointless and bland little war movie.

6/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

I just caught this movie last night...I'd never even heard of it before, but I happened across it at Blockbuster. I'm a fan of realistic war movies anyway, but I also liked the fact that Kevin Reynolds directed it. He also did the wonderful Rapa Nui. I have to say this is one of the most gripping films I have seen, and the first I have seen about the Soviet-Afghan war. Great performances by George Dzundza, Jason Patric, and Steven Bauer, who many may remember as Manny Ray from Scarface as the Afghan leader. Definitely worth catching.

What a very odd movie. Filmed in 1988, in a way it's a document of the era, with the Mujahideen treated sympathetically. A very American cast, including Steven Baldwin (!) portraying Soviet tankers caught up in the Afghan war. It's kind of a "road movie", by turns gritty, surreal, comic & plain ... odd.

I found the music score very distracting. Creating the a detached atmosphere that helps undermine any sense of realism. It's reminiscent of some films from the '70's that have arty cinematography & a mixture of violence, realism & surreal elements. Worth watching as a curiosity.

The only movie that I am aware of that deals explicitly with the Soviet war in Afghanistan, "The Beast" is also a fascinating example of an American made war movie that features absolutely no American characters. The conflict here is totally between a group of local Afghan mujahideen and the crew of a lost Soviet tank struggling to find their way out of a valley in which they're trapped. (The image of the lost tank may well be a symbolic representation of the wider war - the Soviet Union being hopelessly lost in Afghanistan.) The movie features a fairly graphic portrayal of the horrors of the battle from the point of view of both sides, as well as of the growing weariness of the Soviets, who - with the exception of their gung-ho and somewhat insane commander - want nothing more than to get out of this country as fast as possible. The mood of the movie is complemented perfectly by the starkness of the desert landscape. Opening with an example of an atrocity by the tank crew against the inhabitants of a small Afghan village, the movie follows the mujahideen as they seek revenge against their invaders.

The performances in this movie were absolutely first-rate, headed by a fantastic piece of work by George Dzundza as the insane commander Daskal, who willingly kills his own men if he takes a dislike to them and who refuses a chance to escape via a Soviet helicopter that chances upon the lost crew, choosing instead to get out with his tank and his crew. Jason Patric was equally good as Koverchenko, a member of the tank crew who finally turns against Daskal, and eventually finds himself aligned with the mujahideen in a quest for his own personal revenge against Daskal.

The Russians in this movie speak English (thankfully without fake accents) while the Afghans speak whatever their particular native language is with subtitles, which suggests to me that the Russians (and how they respond to their increasingly hopeless situation) are the focal point of the movie. I approach this type of movie with a bit of a grain of salt. American movies that depicted the Soviet Union in the 1980's tended to be a little bit over the top in their portrayal of the Soviet Union as Ronald Reagan's "evil empire." Still, there's no doubt that the Soviet invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was a rather brutal affair, and this seemed a not unreasonable depiction of it. Truly one of the better war movies I've ever seen. 9/10

"The Beast of War" is an intense and thought-provoking war film that captures the horrors of conflict and the moral dilemmas faced by soldiers on the battlefield. Released in 1988, this powerful movie directed by Kevin Reynolds manages to leave a lasting impact on its audience, even years after its initial release.

Set during the Soviet-Afghan War of the 1980s, the film follows a Soviet tank crew as they become trapped behind enemy lines in the treacherous Afghan desert. As tensions rise and resources dwindle, the crew must confront not only the external threat of the Afghan Mujahideen fighters but also their own inner demons. What unfolds is a gripping tale of survival, loyalty, and the unraveling of the human psyche under the pressures of war.

One of the most commendable aspects of "The Beast of War" is its ability to create a claustrophobic and tense atmosphere within the confines of a tank. The cramped quarters and the constant fear of attack contribute to the escalating tension that simmers throughout the film. The exceptional cinematography captures the desolate beauty of the Afghan landscape, further enhancing the sense of isolation and peril faced by the characters.

The performances in "The Beast of War" are stellar. George Dzundza delivers a compelling portrayal as Daskal, the seasoned tank commander, whose ruthlessness and determination to survive gradually erode his moral compass. Jason Patric also shines as Koverchenko, a young and idealistic soldier who questions the purpose of their mission and grapples with the ethical consequences of their actions. The chemistry and conflicts among the diverse crew members are palpable, adding depth and authenticity to their portrayals.

Furthermore, the film delves into the complexities of war, highlighting the dehumanizing effects it can have on individuals. It explores themes of guilt, remorse, and the psychological toll that war takes on soldiers. By humanizing both sides of the conflict, "The Beast of War" raises important questions about the futility and destructive nature of war itself.

However, one criticism is that the film occasionally relies on stereotypical portrayals of Afghan characters, perpetuating certain tropes. While the primary focus is on the Soviet soldiers and their struggles, a more nuanced exploration of the Afghan perspective could have added greater depth to the narrative.

"The Beast of War" is not a conventional war film that glorifies combat or simplifies the moral complexities of war. Instead, it presents a harrowing and thought-provoking experience that challenges the viewer's preconceptions. Its raw depiction of the human condition under extreme circumstances makes it a powerful and relevant film that deserves recognition.

"The Beast of War" is a haunting and riveting war drama that excels in its portrayal of the psychological and moral conflicts faced by soldiers. With its exceptional performances, striking cinematography, and thought-provoking narrative, it stands as a testament to the enduring impact of war on the human psyche. Despite minor flaws, this film is an important addition to the genre and will leave audiences contemplating the consequences of conflict long after the credits roll.

Here it must be said about the set of characters, on the one hand, the majority of the faceless tank crew, which appears mostly for the sake of appearance, and on the other hand, the mock brave mujahideen, a kind of light knights of the desert, fighting for their homeland. This arrangement of priorities is quite understandable, because the authors are trying to show the image of an aggressive war against Afghanistan. From the crew of the tank, you can also distinguish the bespectacled honor and conscience of this film, a dull opposition to the insane Soviet military machine, the very Beast of War, but he infuriated me, so a few words about the commander. He's just cool, he has steel balls, he commands respect almost from the first minutes of the film, ordering a tank to run over a mujahid who knocked out one of the cars and set the entire crew on fire. This is one of the best films about the war.

I have watched this film several times over the years but as world events have evolved, it seems to have had fewer and fewer airings.

Maybe that's because there is no further way to 'polish a turd'.

My apologies to all of those involved but this is a reprehensible piece of US film-making.

When this film was produced, the Berlin Wall had just come down but the Soviet Union still existed and still posed a severe threat to the US.

However, no-one should delude themselves - this is simply a white hat/black hat/good guy/bad guy re-hash of what Hollywood has been doing for decades.

Only in this film, the Soviets are the bad guys and the 'Mujihadeen' are the good guys.

Then, having ousted the Soviet regime, the Mujihadeen (see the word 'jihad' in there) seized control of Afghanistan and transformed into... the 'Taliban'.