Ok, so it's more of a rhetorical question, but still, the mind boggles. Was there any kind of thought put behind this project other than "let's get a few quick bucks out of this controversial event in a third-world country"?
Forget about how insulting this thing is for Peruvians and everyone involved in the real Hostage Situation the movie's "based" on (well, everyone except the terrorists themselves... They come up rather triumphantly when all is said and done). Forget about how irresponsibly the facts and the story are treated (if you're going to be so careless about the facts, why not use an imaginary country and imaginary characters?). Let's forget about all those aspects. Let's pretend this is just an original story. A piece of fiction. You know what? It still blows! Big time.
And it's not only because of the terrible acting, or the poor dialogue. It's also because this movie doesn't just ask you to suspend your disbelief. It asks you to take you disbelief and flush it down the toilet. The plot points lack any kind of logic. And when you think things can't get more ridiculous, the film-makers prove you wrong: Here, between the President dressed up as a soldier and the gratuitous sex scene, let's place a dance number!
Now, I'm not saying it's not fun. It's hilarious, if you're Peruvian. And I guess it's kind of amusing if you're the type that likes to watch train-wrecks and such. It's the kind of film that is so bad, it's almost acceptable. But, on the other hand, it's perplexing. There were actual human beings who thought they were telling a good story here? And telling it effectively?
Man... It gets really scary after a while.