Jamie Foxx and Channing Tatum have been regular mainstays of the action genre. Foxx’s first action movie was the dark comedy action movie Bait in 2000. The movie was directed by Antoine Fuqua, who eventually became a notable filmmaker through The Equalizer series. Foxx has continued his stint in the action genre, including Back in Action. Released on Netflix earlier this year, the film saw him team up with Annie co-star Cameron Diaz in a story about former CIA spies pulled back into their work.
Tatum made his movie debut in 2005, playing Jason Lyle in the sports movie Coach Carter. Since then, the actor has featured in multiple action franchises, including the 21 Jump Street movies and the Kingsman movies. More recently, he portrayed the main antagonist in the mystery thriller Blink Twice in 2024 and played a supporting role in ᴅᴇᴀᴅpool & Wolverine. Now, an expert provides his evaluation of an action movie that featured both Tatum and Foxx.
An Expert Evaluates White House Down
The Score Is Not Good.
A real-life former Army Special Forces member provides his opinion on White House Down. The 2013 movie unravels what would happen if an armed group of paramilitary invaders threatened the White House. In addition to Foxx and Tatum, the film’s cast included Maggie Gyllenhaal, Richard Jenkins, and Jason Clarke. White House Down got mixed reviews, scoring a 52% Tomatometer on Rotten Tomatoes. The film’s box office was a mixed bag, bringing in $205.3 million worldwide against a $150 million budget.
ScreenRant‘s Ben Kendrick gave White House Down 6 out of 10 stars, writing, “Attempts to center the movie around present-day issues help make twists and turns in the plot relevant, but Emmerich’s sometimes on-the-nose message results in predictable revelations and fallout that might be off-putting to certain viewers (especially anyone who disagrees with the director’s banal characterization of the political arena).“
In a video with Insider, former United States Army Special Forces and Delta Force operator Bob Keller provides a realism evaluation of White House Down. Keller took issues with a lot of the way the climactic scene was framed, noting how if this really were to happen, the team would have prepared and done more research. Among other inaccuracies, he mentioned that the Special Forces helicopters would not self-identify as being Special Forces, as the announcer in the film indicates. Overall, Keller gave White House Down a 4 out of 10 for accuracy. Check out the full quote from Keller below:
So this is supposed to be the unit coming in on these gunships. And they’re going to save the White House. I mean you can never say never. We’re not supposed to do missions in the United States. And that’s how anything military, that’s the whole posse comitatus, right? That would be one situation that the White House is down. You should probably come to the best guys at hostage rescue. I can’t say what happened, should have happened, heck yeah.
Would you actually come in on helicopters for a mission like that? It’s all situation dependent. I’m probably not going to infill from the air on a mission like that. And then flying through the streets? How cool is that. They’re masking that they’re actually coming in is the reason why they’re doing that. Would you actually pick that route? Probably not. I mean you could do a false insertion or have them there as a distraction. I mean there’s tunnels going into the White House. There’s other ways to get into the White House that you would have privy to if this was going down.
It’s funny that the reporter as they’re flying over, she’s saying ‘oh, it’s special forces coming over.’ How the heck does she know that? It doesn’t say special forces on the helicopter. But it’s the movie thing.
And that’s another thing too. Like you would have done the research before going. You would know that these guys have any kind of heat seeking missiles, so you’d be like alright, coming in on that helicopters, that’s out of the equation. We’re not using air ᴀssets to do this. But it looks cool. And why not? This one’s kind of janky. I’d give it a 4.
What This Means For White House Down
This Contextualizes Its Mixed Reviews
Despite its lackluster rating, Keller is generous with his final evaluation. He says “it looks cool,” speaking to the movie’s merits as a piece of entertainment even when it lacks accuracy. Some of the movie’s negative reviews complained about the script, and with the further context of the movie’s inaccuracies, it is no surprise that people were able to poke holes in White House Down.
Source: Insider
