User reviews

Sand Castle is not an easy film to review in terms of gauging it against other high adrenaline, fast paced, action filled war movies.

That is not to say the film was not worth watching. It certainly is. Avoiding any spoilers here, the story moves at a rather slow pace for a war film but has a definite message to deliver and does so with finesse and realism. The acting is very strong from each of the characters and the Direction does not overdo the story by muddling it with unnecessary and gratuitous violence. Of course there is a degree of "war time" conflicts and shows its affects on the soldiers who live with it during their tour.

To add to the credibility of the film, the writer (an actual veteran of the 2003 Invasion of Iraq) simply conveys his experience while serving there. I liked this approach to the Genra as it tells a story of a simple objective which becomes difficult due to the nature of war itself and the unfortunate casualties that suffer because of it. It also shows the human cost to both sides, the U.S. Troops as well as the people caught up in the terrible circumstances of war. I felt it illustrates that perspective quite well.

If you looking for a "Platoon" or "Black Hawk Down" type film, this is not for you. But, if you are interested in a film that successfully portrays the life's of all people affected by war, even if the story line does not center on the most brutal and violent ways, this is a film worth watching.

The story was an accurate portrayal of the environment and the people in the conflict zones. It was based on the true events of the film's writer. Nicholas Hoult did a good job. I saw it as minimalist. He spared us the over dramatic self reflection/moral dilemma that is too common in writing or film. I thought throughout the movie that it sure looks like Iraq; it was filmed in Jordan. The areas I were in looked like images from the Mars Pathfinder. There were rocks, clay, sand and more rocks. During the winter, it was mostly orange. This is not a Hollywood retread or an action film. I'm glad that they had no flashbacks/flash forwards to home/U.S. Coming home and life after is a different story. The music score was subtle and the end title was really good. Similar to Brian Eno. Great to see another quality Netflix original.

Sand Castle will likely resonate with general audiences. The acting in it is good for the most part, as Nick Hoult pulls of his part very well. His acting is pretty spot on and the story telling around his character is well done. Logan Marshal-Green did a superb job in his role as a get-it-done SSG who reminded me of a couple different platoon sergeants I'd worked with while in Baghdad. The story itself is fine, and even though the outcome was predictable, I didn't stop rooting for the guys to get it done. Where the movie fell short for me was in the details. Coimbra should have hired a decent military adviser to help him out. A good example is found within the first few seconds of the movie, as Hoult's character strolls to a great tune by Queens of the Stone Age through a staging area in Kuwait (camp New York?) he walks past some tanks that are being readied for combat. M60 tanks. I kid you not. As an M1A1 Tanker myself, I knew at this point there were going to be some obvious flaws-and there are quite a few others-but they didn't really detract from the story. I'd probably recommend this movie to others for the story alone. If you are former military, just know what you are in for.

This film tells the story of a young soldier in Kuwait, who is reluctantly being sent to Iraq to help fix the water supply system in a village. However, their help is not welcomed by the village, and they are mey with multiple hostile attacks.

"Sand Castle" has a simple but effective plot, where the soldiers have to do everything in their power to fix the water supply that got broken in the war. A seemingly simple task becomes very complicated when the locals are actively resisting and even sabotaging the operation. It can be plainly seen that, what seems to be a good will mission from one side is interpreted as an unwelcomed act by the other side. I think this unwelcomed good will mission can be extrapolated to the whole war, and this particular mission is a microcosm of the whole Iraq war. It leaves soldiers wounded physically and psychologically, especially when soldiers think they are doing good.

A decent and straightforward War movie. It's not very combat centered, but rather focuses on the soldier's internal conflicts. I've seen plenty of War films like this before and unfortunately this one doesn't stand out as that unique compared to many others. It feels like an extension of something you'd see on "Generation Kill". It's not necessarily a bad thing, because if that is your thing then you are gonna like this movie.

I will give it this though; I like the story-line of the soldier's giving water to the people in the village. That's actually one of the main missions the characters are given. I appreciate that it explores a simple story like that. Giving water to the people in need is ultimately more important than winning a war. Nicholas Hoult's character seems to find a purpose of being part of the army by doing this act of kindness because he feels that he finally does some good. So, that aspect was well portrayed in this movie.

Henry Cavill is not in the movie that much, but whenever he is on screen he plays his supporting character well. I think they should have utilized him much more, since he really was doing such a good job playing a kind of eccentric captain. A different role compared to what he has played before. The editing in some scenes distracted me. They started zooming in the image on the same shot a few times and I didn't like that. It's better to just let the scene play out in one shot. Don't start jump-cutting and zooming it in all the sudden. You have different angles for that.

The music is great. Some parts gave me "Lawrence of Arabia" and "Apocalypse Now" vibes and the end credits song is very relaxing. So, the movie leaves you with a nice feeling because of the music. It's not bad as I said, just a tad underwhelming. You can watch it and enjoy just fine.

Lots of war-type films have come out over the years, and most are OK to meh, but something about this one was done better than most. Aside from the exceptional directing by Fernando Coimbra, it's not like it had top actors in it, but his directing gave it a feel of a documentary/drama, and added interesting action and drama twist to it. Better than I expected, although slowly paced. It's a 7/10 from me

After a small squad of soldiers is tasked with helping distribute water to an embattled town, a devastating series of consequences will change them forever. Shown from the perspective of a disillusioned private, Sand Castle is as much allegory as it is a retelling of actual events. While the main character does traverse an arc, the conclusion of this film may leave some viewers wanting something more satisfying.

Unlike a large proportion of war films Sand Castle does not follow the generic narrative of a mission of immense proportions that could change the course of 'the war'. Instead we follow a small unit which has been tasked with overseeing the restoration of a water system in a small town in Iraq. Not only is this incredibly refreshing, but it is done with taste, grit and class.

What often goes unnoticed in the perceptions or over-romanticised depictions of war are the smaller operations. Largely because they are harder to depict whilst still holding the same level of gravity, so developing characters as well as a story line seems to be somewhat tricky. However, writer Chris Roessner seems to have well and truly bucked that trend, with a seemingly routine operation he is able to balance action with character development. Lead Pvt Ocre played by Nicholas Hoult is seen to be the main arc of the movie, as when we first meet him he is seen smashing a Hummer door on his hand in a bid to get withdrawn from the war. From there (as he does indeed get deployed to said operation in Iraq) we see him begrudgingly get to grips with reality and relationships start to flourish with his fellow comrades, most notably with Sgt. Harper played by Logan Marshall-Green his first superior. Who does an excellent job of adding an ounce of humility and sincerity to the role of a sergeant, which rejuvenates the old 'cigar in the mouth', crude sergeant we see oh so often. Not only Harper but the entire squad's performance is great, there are no overbearing characters, instead you feel a certain level of compassion for each individual and the situation they are in.

The locations are outstanding. The cinematography, direction and editing are superb in depicting the harsh realities of the Iraq war. The locations were evidently carefully selected and the swooping landscapes only add to that element of vulnerability this squad faces. It is arguably one of the best recent representations of the war, not only with the incredible visuals but of the natural relationships that flourish between soldiers and locals. The edginess of the squads day to day rituals are translated brilliantly to the screen, you genuinely start to feel sceptical about who to trust in a land riddled with extremism.

Sand Castle genuinely tries to be something different which is admirable. War is often a touchy subject to translate to cinema, especially a war as recent as the Iraq war which is still so fresh in everyones mind even for those who were not serving. It is fascinating to see these relationships in war flourish through such bizarre circumstances, not only between the soldiers but also with the Iraqi locals. A must see for those struggling to visualise the horrors of the Iraq war, as well as the day to day rituals of the teams that were deployed there.

it is actually a very good movie considering it has been filmed by a TV network (netflix) the movie writing wasn't great but it got some good lines and quote and funny moments too ... and the directing was kind of fine but it could be better... What i hated the most that they had some good actors but they didn't use they full potential such as Henry Cavill and Nicholas Hoult and speaking of Henry Cavill hell i still seeing superman when i look at him! finally it is a good movie and i recommend it if you have no thing else to watch....

I don't even know what I would have chosen as a summary line, but reading another review, one from someone who at least claims to have been in the service and pointing out things that he thought were inaccurate, made me think, yeah that's what I should write. And while we all know that Fiction is a big part of movies, when they do portray something that actually happened (or happens) we the viewers do tend to take it a bit as a given, that what we see, is what happened.

If you can shut off those thoughts in the first place you can watch a war movie, that does not seem to shy away from controversy. It does paint a picture that some may call cliche, but the actors make it feel real. While we don't get deeply into their characters, we can see through the eyes of the main protagonist, his emotions and what this must do to ones psyche and mind. It's not easy to watch and it has flaws, but it is worth watching

I'm not one to take the time to review movies but this one really got to me. Now like all service members know, military movies are always going to stretch fiction for dramatic purposes. That being said, this movie really comes off as having little to no research done to attempt to show any accuracy in its story. The majority of the US population has a small understanding of the US military and tends to believe whatever they see on TV. The questions I have been asked because of movies like The Hurt Locker, Jarhead, etc. prove just how in the dark people are. Hollywood, understandably, wants to capitalize on the recent conflict but needs to realize what a disservice it does to service members when it shows such irresponsibility in its product. The inaccuracies are too many to list but just a handful are: vehicles and equipment crosses service branches and even generations, the unit patch of the "infantry" unit followed is a non-combat arms civil affairs unit patch(I'm Biased, but as an Infantryman that is a big slap in the face), tactics and every day basic operations are zero, rank structure is in title only, and one last thing to mention, and I'm no Special Operations guy so take it with a grain of salt but, to show a Special Forces guy growing his beard out to better interact with the local populace but then always have the cleanest of buzz cuts seemed a little off. It's my understanding that the writer is a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom. I would be curious to see just how far this strayed from his original story line due to being pressured by Hollywood. In the end, if you have never been in the military, or at least have not deployed in support of our recent conflicts, this movie is decent enough to kill a few hours. Casting has quite a few known names and the locations actually due closely resemble Iraq. Just please don't watch this and believe this is how the military does things.

I don't know what the budget for this film was but I doubt that it was huge. Even so this is an excellent film about men and war and the aftermath of their actions. Although there is a some conventional war film action this is generally a well-paced, slow moving film which might not appeal to viewers hoping for non-stop action.The characters are well drawn and the acting is first rate. Hoult, in particular, is excellent but Cavill, as well, is fine. There is a little of the usual American gung-ho moments but these are timed and acted well so they help to define the characters rather than simplify them. It's not a preachy film about rights and wrongs and the Iraqis are, the limited fight scenes aside, portrayed as people under duress attempting to continue their lives as best they can. Overall a very good, thoughtful film.

This movie was very nice and it sticks to the story it wishes to tell, and do not use action for the sake of entertainment. It might not be historically correct, however it portrays a small view of a (well acted) soldier. Worth your time!

'SAND CASTLE': Three and a Half Stars (Out of Five)

A war drama about a US Army rifleman, and his squad, who are trying to restore water to a dangerous Iraqi village. It's based on the real life experiences of it's screenwriter, Chris Roessner, and the script was featured on the 2012 Black List of unproduced screenplays. The film was directed by Fernando Coimbra, and it stars Nicholas Hoult, Logan Marshall-Green, Henry Cavill, Glen Powell, Tommy Flanagan, Beau Knapp and Neil Brown Jr.. It was released by Netflix through it's streaming site, and it's gotten mixed reviews from critics. I found it to be mostly well made, and somewhat effective, but it would have been a lot better with a little more character development.

Private Matt Ocre (Hoult) is a young rifleman in the US Army, who enlisted (in 2001) in order to get financial aid for college. When the Iraq war starts (in 2003) he desperately wants to quit though. He slams the door of a Humvee on his hand, in an attempt to get sent home even. His efforts don't succeed, and he's instead sent to Baqubah, with his squad, to repair a broken water system there. Many of the locals don't want their help though, and Matt has to witness multiple casualties to his unit. This causes him great depression and frustration, naturally.

The movie has all the makings of a good war film, it's well cast (Hoult, Marshall-Green and Cavill are all good in their roles) and it's nicely directed. It has well shot action scenes too, and seemingly effective emotional drama. I didn't know enough about the characters though, to really care for what they were going through. Technically the movie appears really well made, but it's just lacking enough character development to make it really effective.

The story focuses on a young soldier and his small group of colleagues carrying out seemingly futile and overwhelming projects in the misguided spirit of helping the local Iraqi community. I was not completely clear if the film had a message and the character journey from apathetic to invested seemed at odds with the events of the film. The cast did fine and there were a few good moments but ultimately this was a middle of the road war movie.

If you are one of those who watches movies for the blood and gore stay away from this one, as this is only for smart people.

In fact, what this movie focus on is on the human side of war, how complicated and tangled things can become, when one brings death, but still wants to help, but finds out that it is all a waste of time.

Great acting for a smart movie

My initial reaction to seeing this low-key but powerful film was along the lines of "wow, that's some intense stuff...and fairly well acted". I also liked the premise of it, the basic plot line. However, there are a number of issues with the film.\

First off, since it is supposedly set in the very early phase of the Iraq occupation (2003), there would not yet have been this open Sunni-Shiia hostility and the well-organized guerilla resistance/terrorism by local malcontents. These incidents were only starting to crop up in 2004 and really came to the fore in 2005, 2006. Second detail is the low level of security that the US soldiers seem to deploy while trying to work with random locals. For example, there's no way that a suicide bomber with a cooler full of explosives would have smuggled himself into an actual construction site.

I was also left wondering why the main protagonist was sent back to the States and effectively relieved of duty, as opposed to the other guys. It may have been left undefined for the artistic purposes but in a real army setting, there would have been a debrief. Is he seen as suffering from a kind of PTSD or as having gone a bit rogue, or is it a case of "mission not well handled"? The feeling it left was one that army cadres were feeling a bit sorry for this college kid and were shipping him to where he could do no harm or come in harm's way. There is this kind of a rush to wrap up the script and end the story, which rubbed me the wrong way.

As an allegory or a stylized cautionary tale, though, this is powerful - and intimate - film because it does get inside the heads of some characters and because the characters are compelling. The difficulties of working with the Iraqis and generally in an alien cultural environment were portrayed in an interesting way.

This is not a fast-paced, high body count war action flick. But some of the action sequences are intense. Lots of mixed feelings about this one.

Another Netflix original war drama film that tries to struck gold, as it did with the breathtaking "Beasts of No Nation", but sad to say it doesn't meet the same expectations.

"Sand Castle" takes the events of the Iraq War to more of a rehabilitation effort during the conflicts. It follows a platoon of soldiers who must restore the water system of a Iraqi village that was bombed by the same US Army. While the soldiers were doing damage control, the tension between them and the villagers is palpable and dangerous, put significantly on screen in great lengths by director Fernando Coimbra.

This movie won't leave you thinking at the end of it nor will it be imprinted on your brain for time to come, but it's a very good approach to an Iraq War setting and from a point of view where the US army helps the native communities.

I didn't expect much from sand castle but the movie turned out to be a surprise package just for its content and screenplay. Agreed, this may not be a Saving Private Ryan or a Apocalypse Now, but Sand Castle delivers a no nonsense approach and tells us all the initial problems faced by US soldiers in its invasion of Iraq in 2003. The confusion & the helpless faced by the soldiers is presented in a beautiful manner.

But the biggest problem made by the makers of Sand castle is its presentation. The treatment, casting, and acting is a big let down to such a wonderful and different screenplay on their hands. It would have definitely helped to have had a better action director for stunt sequences. Cinematography was average just like the production design and makeup. Actors though they tried their level best, didn't deliver much to help the movie's cause.

Overall, Though Sand Castle punches above its weight with a strong screenplay, sadly ends up looking like a B grade movie with a high quality screenplay. I would definitely recommend this to "War" movie fans for its strong & different content, but will also warn you not to expect a Platoon or a Black Hawk down.

No spoilers, well shot but lacking in any real character development. I did find myself wanting more of Cavill's SF character. No real surprises wished they'd fleshed out Hoult's character more

This film is about as interesting as watching water drip from a tanker. A Flat and uneventful waste of 1 hr 50 Min's. Whilst the acting itself was pretty good, the heart of the story was lost in a meandering tour of duty in the hostile, sand swept land of Iraq. With action being in shorter supply than the local water supply, this film just didn't hit the mark in any shape or form, which is a shame as the characters themselves were convincing but the plot void of all depth.

This movie is straightforward and honest, and avoids the clichés that ruin many other films about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Rather than having an agenda of trying to convince us that "War is Hell" or "War is Glorious", it simply tells an interesting story of a group of soldiers who were trying to provide water for Iraqi civilians.

The cast is very good, it was nice to see some new faces instead of overexposed, worn-out actors. The direction is proficient, the combat scenes are realistic and convincing.

This is a very different war movie. In fact, the film is more about the characters' reaction to a dire situation, set during a war. So don't expect a battlefield with blazing guns and tanks. It's not that type of film and you'll be disappointed if you watch for that reason.

The only reason I decided to watch this, is because Logan Marshall-Green is in it (having marveled at his brilliant portrayal in films like 'The Invitation' and 'Upgrade'.) Unfortunately he isn't given much to do in this film. Instead, Nicholas Hault steals the show as a private who didn't want any part of the war, and then became smack bang involved in the turmoil. He is very good. In fact, the entire cast was excellent and this is a very well made film. I just don't understand why it was made. It is a very simple premise, but one that doesn't have a wide appeal. Why would anyone care about soldiers restoring a broken water pipe in a country that doesn't want it fixed? It doesn't make sense why the soldiers risked their lives for a cause they couldn't possibly benefit from and that actually had nothing to do with them.

The actions scenes are few and far between, but they hit you so hard that you want to shout out for the soldiers to pack up and leave and abandon their mission. The scenes are well done and very realistic. Although it is a well made film, it is a bit slow moving with a sense of deja vu more than once. I did enjoy this first viewing, but its not the type of film I'd watch again in a hurry.

I was there in '03. You could have hired me for a few hundred bucks and made this a somewhat realistic depiction of what was actually going on there. Everything "military" about this movie was wrong. Tactics? Wrong. Gear? Wrong. Characters? Forgettable and uninteresting. I have to write more to meet the minimum character requirement for this review, so do me a favor and just go back and read it again from the beginning because this movie is terrible from a military point of view, and if you want a real depiction, watch HBO's Generation Kill miniseries. It's great and worth the watch. Ok, that's enough characters.