I don’t plan on doing many movie reviews on this weblog, but those who know me well, know that I’ve been counting down the days until the opening of Black Hawk Down. I’m a fan of Mark Bowden’s book on which it is based. Like the book, the film stirs in the viewer simultaneous pride and shame. The individual courage of the men portrayed is as sincere and valiant as that displayed in any battle. Yet the human error, and the overriding question of “why?” is ever-present. Is this a war movie? Or an anti-war movie?

In the end, it’s both. This is not Rambo (or Behind Enemy Lines for that matter) in which war serves as a bloody back-drop for melodramatic and jingoistic super hero tales. But it’s not Apocalypse Now or Platoon with their blazing anti-war ideology napalming the audience. (For Vietnam-set films, Black Hawk Down is most closely akin to Hamburger Hill.)

Rather, this is an anti-war film in the way Darryl Zanuck described his movie, The Longest Day, as an anti-war film. Like Zanuck’s film, Black Hawk Down is a tribute to the heroes of battle (although much more graphically). At the same time, both films leave viewers wondering if the carnage is worth it; surely there’s a better way?

Black Hawk Down is the most realistic fire-fight film of the post-Vietnam era. The military, from Pentagon to private, will give it a hearty salute. At the same time, its message clearly does not glorify nor condone war; especially not one in which we tie the hands of field command nor can articulate its reasons or goals.

It is a powerful film. And timely. And honest to the book. Although the book does provide a more honest context in which to judge whether or not the historical battle was a success.

I left the film agreeing with its obvious message: War is about the man standing at your side. Heroism springs more often than not from duty to him rather than to country or cause.

Okay, let’s take a brand we’ve spent the last 50 years making synonymous with the rugged outdoors and try to reposition it as PETA-friendly. Reminds me of the time Mercedes ran an ad portraying truck drivers as highway monsters, apparently forgetting they also owned Freightliner, the country’s largest manufacturer of 18-wheelers.

More copying others about Ambrose: If this sounds familiar, it’s because I lifted it directly from forbes.com without putting it in quotation marks:

His critics say that by omitting the quotation marks, he is passing off other writers’ work as his own–and that Ambrose, a former history professor, should be well aware that what he is doing amounts to plagiarism.

Isn’t it always darkest before the dawn? Not going to be a good year for consumer magazines, some execs tell Ad Age. David Carey continues to be one of most candid people I know:

“A lot of publishers would view coming in at minus 10% to minus 15% vs. the year prior as a real accomplishment,” said David Carey, vice president and publisher of The New Yorker. The Conde Nast Publication title — a weekly yet to close its first quarter — is “on track” to land somewhere within that range, he said.

What, no Aspen meeting this year? The New York Times reports that Merke is telling its salespeople, “they should no longer treat doctors to free Broadway plays, weekend trips and other gifts that could be viewed as inappropriate.” What the article doesn’t say is the drug companies are finding direct-to-consumer advertising via TV and magazines so successful in creating “pull” for their products they can scale back on the physician perks.