In Love And War

In Love And War also stars Sandra Bullock and is based on some of the early years of master American writer Ernest Hemingway's life.

Hemingway apparently went off to the first world war as a pimply teenager, got himself wounded and fell in love with an American nurse in Italy who later rejected him.

Broken hearted he then skulked back to the U.S., became bitter, wrote fabulous novels like A Farewell to Arms, married three times and decades later suicided.

Sandra Bullock is Hollywood's current "girl next door" and although nearly a decade too old for the part scrubs up tty well as the twenty eight year old beautiful nurse.

She maintains a slightly mournful, thoughtful seriousness throughout In Love And War which makes her character fairly fascinating, but Chris O'Donnell's earnest suitor is totally unconvincing.

O'Donnell started his career with Hollywood career with great success opposite Al Pacino in Scent Of A Woman, but since then has blighted in particular Batman with his sence.

He's not such a bad actor but still has to show anything more than a superficial approach to the characters he plays.

Compare Chris O'Donnell to Leonard DiCaprio to see what I mean.

But the truism remains that we (read the general film going public) get the leading men we deserve, and want.

In Love And War also suffers from being largely set in a hospital ward and Richard Attenborough has given this hospital ward an "epic" feel as we would expect from the epic Richard Attenborough.

So there's the epic feel of bones splintering from one cinema wall to the other and if you are at all squeamish about legs being cut off and such, then In Love And War might become a little trying. But perhaps it was Chris O'Donnell's acting that left me pale.