"Blood Diamond" has generated a lot of interest, on account of its focus on "Conflict Diamonds" - i.e stones from war torn African Nations. It's long been an open secret that most of the rebellions and conflicts in some of these states are the handiwork of diamond cartels and arms dealers. The film symbols an admirable intention by director Edward Zwick (The Siege, Last Samurai) to bring these issues into the mainstream conscience.The Plot (spoilers abound!!)
Solomon Vendy (Djimon Hounsou) is a fisherman of a tribal village in the interior of Sierra Leone. Rebels raid his village capturing him to work in the diamond fields. He comes upon a large diamond and buries it before Government troops attack the rebel stronghold and he is arrested alongwith his erstwhile captors. While in jail, his secret is learnt by Danny Archer (DiCaprio), ex-soldier / Arms & Diamond Dealer. Danny owes money to the Arms merchants and plans that this large stone will settle his debts and leave Africa for good. Danny finally coaxes Solomon to be partners and set out in search of the hidden stone. They are aided in this trip by journalist Maddy Bowen (Jenniffer Connelly) who manages to get the duo through barricades and checkposts posing as fellow journo's. Meanwhile the rebel commander has taken Solomons son under his wings and turns him into a child soldier fuelled high on drugs and aggression. The duo finally manages to retreive the diamond & rescue Solomons son. Danny is fatally injured and chooses to die in his adopted homeland. Solomon and his son escape to the west and with Maddy's help exposes the diamond cartel Van Der Kaap (De Beers?). The film ends with Solomons speech at the UN.
My take
The film touches upon sensitive issues such as diamond mines in war torn Africa, the arms dealers who play both the sides, Child Soldiers kidnapped from home and bred on drugs, alcohol and aggression to sustain the "revolution" as well as a hypocritic West that mouth's inanities while being the major consumer of the end products. However these issues are just skimmed by on the surface, so that we get to know them, but not understand and also does not provide any solutions.
Though nominated for Oscars, both DiCaprio and Honsou fail to impress. For one thing, Leo is too young for the role [though he claims to be 31 in the film, he is actually 33 !!!] for the role of a battle weary soldier which would've suited a middle aged actor more. But lets face it, a Val Kilmer or Billy Bob Thornton wouldn't have the same draw at the BO, right? And Hounsou reprises mannerisms from his earlier films, may it be his debut Amistad or Gladiator. Connelly looks beautiful, and shouldn't be wearing a shirt the way she does, especially in a war zone.
There are quite a few typical hollywood action sequences, which could have been benefitted more if they were hard hitting in the vein of "Saving Private Ryan" or "Platoon".
Great theme and intentions are let down by caricatures i.e; the mercenary with a conscience, the struggling native and the sensitive foreign journalist. Add to the mix a shoddy script with story telling at its formulaic hollywood best, [protagonists bonding over the course of a journey, double crossing superiors etc.] and the film ends up being a mere novelty, nothing pathbreaking or outstanding here.
