10/10
Incredible.
28 April 2005
There is, of course, some controversy over the legitimacy of this film as far as whether it has a political agenda or not. It is indeed strange that they distributed 150 video cameras and, if each camera was distributed with only one tape, that's about 150 hours of footage, which was then whittled down to a meager 80-minute film. If there were two tapes per camera, about 300 hours of footage, etc. It's a clever marketing device to claim that this film was directed by the Iraqi people, but that is, of course, nonsense, because the person in the editing room could have made any film they wanted out of the footage that they had to work with.

The fact that at least 150 hours of footage was cut into a film that doesn't even run a full hour and a half should immediately dispel any idea that the people of Iraq had anything to do with directing this movie, but you can't help but respect the goal of giving the Iraqis a medium through which to try to tell their stories. But in order to allow them to truly direct the movie, it would have to be 150 hours long. Whatever the case, the film does give unprecedented insight into what normal life in Iraq is like.

What I love about the film is that it does try to show every side of the issue. There are some people who say they wish they could go back to the way things were before the Americans came to Iraq, even if it meant going back to the Iraqi regime, there are people who mourn the death of loved ones lost in battle with the Americans, there are people who sit together and have serious, concerned conversations about the occupation, understanding the damage that it is doing to their country and their fellow Iraqis, but also understanding how important it is that the Americans stay there to maintain security.

There are people in this film that claim that the Americans do nothing but harm to their country and there are people who call us saviors, and of course, peppered in the middle of all of these normal people voicing their concerns about the state of their union are various videos from the insurgents, displaying their sheer brutality and total lack of humanity.

I remember when Saddam's sons were killed and their corpses displayed all over the covers of magazines and newspapers all over the world, I was shocked that a sovereign nation like the United States would display something so grotesque and brutal about the family of the leader of another sovereign nation, even if the broadcast brutality involved a vicious dictator like Saddam Hussein. But man, once I saw the videos that were shown in this movie, I wanted to go over there myself and start shooting. Of course, I'd last about 30 seconds in Iraq with my white skin and blue eyes.

On the other hand, when I think about it, it doesn't surprise me that people are accusing the makers of this film of being involved with the Bush administration. To be sure, I wouldn't put something as sneaky as that past Curious George and his minions, but I think that the film does a good job of showing all sides. Because while the vicious and sickening videos of Uday Hussein and the disturbing melodies chanted in the Taliban videos by far overshadow everything else, the film also vindicates Michael Moore (Did you notice the children laughing and playing? See? It really does happen! Even in Iraq!), and would any company working for the Bush administration want to do something crazy like that?
4 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed