'Redacted' by Brian De Palma

[CarpeDiem]

_www.redactedmovie.com
Looks like 'Redacted' by Brian De Palma i's worth seeing... especially considering that Bill O'Reilly said: 'You pull that movie (Redacted) or i'm going to be your worst nightmare'

Redacted by Brian De Palma
Director's Statement

Once again a senseless war has produced a senseless tragedy. I told this story years ago in my film "Casualties of War" (1988). The lessons from the Vietnam War have gone unheeded. But how to tell the story today? And how did it all begin? Last year at the Toronto Film Festival, I was approached by a representative of HDNET films who asked if I would be interested in making a film using high definition video. I said I would if I could find a subject matter that would be best explored in the medium.

Then I read about an incident in Iraq war where members of a US army squad had reportedly raped a 14 girl, slaughtered her family, shot the girl in the face and set her body on fire. How could these boys have gone so wrong? In searching for the answers, I read soldier's blogs, books, watched soldier's home made war videos, surfed their web sites, and their YOUTUBE postings. It was all there, and all in video.

To redact is to edit, or prepare for publishing. Frequently, a redacted document or image, has simply had personal (or possibly actionable) information deleted or blacked out; as a consequence, redacted is often used to describe documents or images from which sensitive information has been expunged. The true story of our Iraq war has been redacted from the Main Stream Corporate Media. If we are goings to cause such disorder then we must face the horrendous images that are the consequences of these actions. Once we saw them in Vietnam our citizens protested and brought that misguided conflict to an end. Let's hope the images from this film have the same effect.

From _http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/
De Palma's 'Redacted' or our forced labyrinthic way to Truth

This is your chance to see how our governments treat, or mistreat, the Truth [...]

'Redacted' is the story of the rape and the killing of a 15 year old iraqi girl by two US soldiers stationed in Iraq, constructed from real material; videos and video surveillance cameras inside military camps, blogs, soldiers' testimonies, TV footage, unavailable to the public through mainstream media. The story is set in the larger context of the war in Iraq and De Palma shows us the reality of life in and around a US checkpoint, where many Iraqi civilians were killed. The movie could have been a documentary except that, De Palma, for legal reasons, wasn't able to use the real material and he had to fictionalise the story relying on actors and a carefully scripted scenario. This is a very convoluted, labyrinthic, way to reality. The reality of the Iraq war is heavily redacted on our screens and in our newspapers, and De Plama restores to us this reality through fiction. He also uses video footage as to give the impression of a documentary.

The docu-movie starts with scenes of the soldiers shot by one of their own, Angel Salazar, who intends to use the material from his videos to get into film school after his service. The docu-movie then moves to the checkpoint and what goes around. These are precious scenes. We hear a lot about checkpoints but how many of us know actually what is really a US checkpoint in Iraq ? De Palma uses an intermediary to explain a checkpoint, a real-fake French documentary in which the slow voice and the images are very didactic. We watch the boredom and the anxiety of US soldiers who guard the checkpoint and we follow the itinerary of ordinary Iraqis driving through the checkpoint. We also watch a sample of what actually can happen at a checkpoint, suicide bombing, and civilian killings as they rush to the hospital. The whole thing is a mess. And the only question that emerges from this is : 'Why on earth, an army of occupation does need checkpoints ? They are not in Iraq to fight a civil war. usually you need a checkpoint to separate communities, not to occupy a country'. It was my husband's question at the end, and I must admit for the person who I am, who lived and survived a civil war in Lebanon, that my husband's question was very relevant. Checkpoints aren't of any use in Iraq, they don't fit the official US narrative of this war and we don't know actually what purpose they serve. They incite defiance and provoke tragic misunderstandings and lost translations, like when a car rushes to transport a pregant woman to the hospital and they signal it to the soldiers, but in the middle of culturally different gestures and signs the message is lost on both sides and the pregnant woman is killed. Checkpoints are also a useful target for suicide bombers.

At checkpoints we see male soldiers strip search Iraqi schoolgirls by running their hands on their bodies. This is yet another attempt at humiliating Iraqis. I live and travel in western countries and this kind of serach on women in western countries is performed by female security agents. Why should we submit Iraqi girls to this humiliation ? If the US really wanted to win hearts and minds in Iraq then it would at least pay attention to such details. Because it is during one of these repetitive routines that a porn obsessed soldier got to land his envy on an Iraqi schoolgirl whom he is going to rape and assasinate with her whole family later on.

We also see an embedded journalist at work during a night raid to search for insurgents in an Iraqi house, void of insurgents and weapons. We see US soldiers seize documents in Arabic, even though they don't understand a word. They will check them with the translator later they say, but before that they have to determine, without the translator, what is suspicious and incriminating evidence in a language they don't understand. The house searched is that of the girl who would be raped later, but not before her father was arrested and put in prison.

We see how the Iraqi insurgency operates, with caméra fitted computers and surveillance of US soldiers' posts and checkpoints. It is after a bomb explodes and kills the officer of the group that the raid on the house is conducted as a retaliation.

We also got to see and hear from the soldiers as they are interacting and discussing their job or as they are communicating with their families. Beside salazar, who seems detached, as if outside the conflict, only preoccupied with his videos, two of the five main characters have no illusion whatsoever about their mission, they want to serve their time and go back to their families. While the two others, those who raped the girl and killed her family are clearly your type of gang street criminal and psychotic perverse killer, in real life and on duty. They are racists, they call Iraqis 'sandniggers', they don't consider them as humans. The entire story is built on the tension that will accumulate throughout the docu-movie between the soldiers. Eventually, Soldier McCoy, who was becoming upset with what he witnessed from his comrades, will denounce them to the military police. It takes some courage to do it as we see that the army is not pleased to hear or to be forced to investigate such matters.

Most of the events presented to us by De Palma are recorded by soldier Salazar, even the rape of the shoolgirl and the killing of her family. Salazar will be the one who will pay for the rape of the Iraqi girl and the killing of her family. We watch his beheading by the insurgency on a webvideo nearly unredacted.

Kurt Nimmo's take:
_http://www.truthnews.us/?p=847

Bill O’Reilly, the neocon bully, is at it again. As the Salem-News reports, Brian De Palma’s latest film, Redacted—a “beyond brutal, no-holes-barred journey through the camera lens and into the minds of two twisted young men in Iraq who showed no hesitation in raping a young girl and stealing her life, as well as those of her family”—has predictably fallen afoul of the Fox News brownshirt.
“I think most Americans care about things on this earth in the right order, but for those who insist on going the other way, this mental midget named Bill O’Reilly is there to hold the torch high,” opines the Salem-News. “The movie may touch a raw nerve with Americans, particularly veterans, but O’Reilly’s point of view equates to more divisiveness, more polarity.”
Indeed—and that is the neocon agenda: not only divisiveness and polarity but a heaping dose of intimidation directed at those who dare disagree with or are outraged by the massive war crimes inflicted on the people of Iraq. According to O’Reilly, dissent is fine and dandy—so long as it is done in private and does not translate into political action, so long as it is pathetically ineffective and impotent. In Nazi Germany, the situation was likewise: if you opposed the fascist insanity of Hitler and the Nazis, you best kept those thoughts to yourself, lest you were paid a midnight visit by the Gestapo and found yourself in a camp for the politically incorrect.
“Most anti-war Americans are running for cover over this. Only elements at NBC News have supported the film so far. As you may know, NBC is the most anti-military TV news operation in the country,” writes O’Reilly.
As usual, O’Reilly twists the truth to advance his poisonous “no spin.” NBC Universal is owned in large part by General Electric, the mega-transnational corporation that “is one of the world’s top three producers of jet engines, supplying Boeing, Lockheed Martin and other military aircraft makers for the powering of airplanes and helicopters,” according to CorpWatch. “The ‘war on terrorism’ has seen GE’s military contracts rise substantially. But the company’s ‘defense’ side has been doing well for a while.” However, if we are to believe Bully Boy Bill, NBC and GE are attempting to undermine their own profitability.
In particular, O’Reilly has singled out Mark Cuban, who financed De Palma’s film. “This is not about the Iraq War or any other policy. This is about inciting even more violence against Americans, both military and civilian. Mark Cuban may not be smart enough to figure that out. I don’t understand his motivation, but at this point I don’t really care.”
As we reported last night, liberals are not doing this. Far-left fools are. And Mark Cuban is certainly a member of that group. Obviously, our men and women overseas are making a great sacrifice. And even if you disagree with the war on terror policy, we all owe our troops support and encouragement. Any American who would harm our military people must be confronted. And that’s why I’m spending so much time on Mark Cuban…. This man is hurting our troops and helping the terrorists, period.
In other words, Americans who oppose the invasion and occupation of Iraq “must be confronted,” and that includes Mark Cuban and Brian De Palma. Mr. De Palma’s film does not endanger U.S. soldiers, as O’Reilly preposterously claims, but it does endanger the neocons and their propaganda organ and O’Reilly’s meal ticket, Fox News.
It is not specifically the “far left” the neocons, Fox News, and the quisling Bill O’Reilly—a quisling because he has cynically sold out his country to a criminal cabal of warmongers and serial killers—are desperately attempting to silence but a growing number of critics across the board regardless of ideological persuasion.
Incidentally, the word “quisling” is taken from Vidkun Quisling, head of Norway’s government during the Nazi occupation.
If the shoe fits.

youtube shorts
Trailer sez the film is 'sensational', 'the truth they wouldn't you to know'.. but... i doubt if ptb would allow any at all 'Truth' to run as official selection for several 2007 film festivals like Venice, NY, Toronto?
Did anybody see the film? What do you think might be the message beyond visuals of the film?

 

[Nawd]

Sounds like a very interesting film. I wonder if I can get it on video eventually, or will it be one of those 'rare and hard to find' ones?

Perhaps I answered my own question.

 

[nemo]

I mostly watch movies on dvd (especially because I can then see the original version - in germany every film is dubbed), so I`ll have to wait till spring to see it.
Having said that I`m very curious as well about De Palma`s Redacted. After having completely messed up his last one (The Black Dahlia, compared to the excellent
L.A. Confidential, also based on James Ellroy`s LA-Trilogy) I have high hopes for this (mostly self-financed) low budget effort. At least here he propably didn`t have
any big wig hollywood producers to interfere with his work.
Also, referring to Nawd`s post, it`s far more likely to get it in your video store rather than in your theatre.

 

[the rabbit]

I saw this last week , on a watch movies online kind of things. This film for me was totally disturbing indeed., i truly was sick in the stomach. I would say that the portrayal of the soldiers , those with heart and those without is spot on. Not that i know anything about the armed forces except they are usually in a place to kill and destroy.

I did not know whether to post any thing after I watched it. I just felt disturbed by it.

 

[nemo]

Finally saw it the other night. Made on a shoestring-budget and strongly inspired by the internet and youtube
"Redacted" seems to me the strongest Iraq-/Anti-war movie of the last years, that in spite of several flaws.

The first half is the strongest where via a fake french Iraq-documentary we are witnessing a group of soldiers on a checkpoint,
sweating in the heat under their heavy soldier`s outfit, perceiving the prosaic rural happenings around them and being aware that
violence can break out at any moment. The pressure the soldiers are under is very well depicted.
During the most surreal scene of the movie soldiers are interviewed by the press during (!!) the nightly raid of a family`s house.

Later on two of the same group`s GI`s, as shown through the consumer camera of another soldier, are about to become ponerized
at their basest level. Those in the group With Conscience are pretty powerless to change any of the deviant`s behaviour.
The reason for this inability to act is that the ponerized or psychopathic behaviour is so perfectly embedded in a pathological system.
Without any outlet for the accumulation of their sexual energy, rape and plain murder become sanctioned weapons against a population,
which is perceived by the soldiers in their fight for survival as subhuman and utterly threatening.
Later attempts to apprehend the guilty party is successfully prevented by the military/governmentally control system.

While the more dramatic scenes too often seem to be on an amateur theatre level, "Redacted" still conveys a strong sense of authenticity.
Violence is never exploited. It often comes very sudden and unexpected. The camera never lingers on gruesome detail.
From a dramatic viewpoint it seemed to me that the last third of the movie falls apart a bit, also because of some formal awkwardness (internet inserts etc.)

What do you think might be the message beyond visuals of the film?

Well, the movie simply shows the true fruits of war: mayhem, murder, rape, dehumanization, humiliation ... and thereby spits in the face of those magicans
who hypnothize us with spellbinding word-clusters like "enduring freedom" and "bringing democracy into the world".
The film shows what war is about. There`s not much more to it other than illusions. (I`m ignoring for now the benefits of certain deviant groups in this world).

The military was very critical of the film. While I don`t necessarily believe that the happenings in "Redacted" are the norm for soldiers,
they certainly seem to be far more than merely the exception of the rule.
One also has to keep in mind the fact, that the extraordinary pathological behaviour is a very logical extension of the overall pathological system (War).
The question if "rape" for example is encouraged or discouraged by the ruling warlords stays open, but when it happens it`ll get buried.
The apparent lack of bordellos or prostitutes in the military strikes me as ... ominous.

As the Rabbit already mentioned, this film is disturbing. One might ask what if any value those war movies have which don`t create a strong sense of
disturbance in the viewer. So while Mr. DePalma might not have reached the artistry of some of his older movies he deserves our respect for
having made a very dark unpopular, even subversive little movie.

 

[bedower]

This happened in a place called Haditha.

The name of Haditha has become as well-known and as infamous to Iraqis as the name of Falluja.

All of the Marines concerned were aquitted. One of the family members killed was a small child. 'Home of the brave', eh?

If you go to the SOTT main page and type 'Haditha' into the Search engine, you will get 65 hits concerning what happened at Haditha and the aftermath.

If you read all the articles, you will feel outraged and sick to your stomachs - I know I did!

Sorry if I come across as judgmental.