Battle for Haditha

Battle for Haditha_720p(480P)

source: Battle for Haditha

People who live in denial and believe in the fairy tale of US troops bringing "freedom" to backward Iraqis will hate this movie. But what makes this movie particularly valuable, moving, and powerful is that it humanizes all the participants in the war: US troops, insurgents, and civilians caught up in the crossfire. The director made a genuine effort to show the horrors of war without presenting a simplistic black vs. white, "us" vs "them", opposition. All the protagonists are ordinary people, people who may do horrible things, but people in the end. The insurgents who planted the IED feel remorse at what hey did, and the Marines who killed civilians are also haunted by what they did. And both are ultimately manipulated by their superiors, who really don't care about the suffering on the ground. And the message of the movie is also clear: the root of all this horror is an invasion that should not have happened in the first place.

I just saw this movie and found it very moving. I have spent some time with Iraq veterans and I feel this movie did a very accurate job portraying what they went through. I think it's important to point out that 12 of the actors, including Ruiz, who plays Corporal Ramirez, are themselves Iraq veterans. Here are some quotes from Ramirez: "I was 17 when I was sent to Iraq, during the initial invasion. We pushed all the way up to Tikrit and I ended up being wounded, I almost lost my life. It's crazy, people don't know the type of things that we go through. That's what I like about the film, it shows that." The concept of taking Iraq refugees and ex-marines to make a movie with no script is brilliant. I felt the improvisation from these actors was likely better and more realistic than anything professional actors could have pulled off. I was also impressed with the production values, especially since no US funds were available for a fair and honest portrayal of such events.

I put watching this movie off for so long because I basically knew I was going to have mixed feelings about it. This movie means a little more to me (and my family) than most people seeing I am a sibling of someone depicted in the movie. Granted this was just a movie and everyone is entitled to their opinion...it just upset me to see how my sibling was depicted in the film. From knowing my sibling, the director wasn't even close. Pretty sure he would feel the same way if someone depicted one of his family members incorrectly just to make a buck. I find exploiting horrible events to make money disturbing and disgusting. Movie says (synopsis of movie on back of the DVD case) that it was told from different perspectives...I want to know where my sibling and his comrades perspectives were in this movie?! Sigh..some will do anything and everything to make a name for themselves.

i personally never heard of Mr. Bloomfield, so i had no real intention of watching this film till i saw it mentioned in the message boards for other films. that said, i must say this was the best in the recent slew of Iraq war films (like Redacted, Home of the Brave, etc.) i half expected it to be like Redacted and was pleasantly surprised to find it much better. i think it really brought out the fact that there are multiple sides to a story, and did so without too much bias. being a Muslim myself i must admit that it seemed a little inclined towards Iraqis, with Marines portrayed as undisciplined and emotionless (though one of the protagonists feels guilt and in reality this incident caused an uproar). there are no A-list actors, which in a sense, actually made the movie better because you almost see the actors as the characters themselves (especially since a lot of the dialog is improvised). i think it was well made, and well thought out. better than expected. i wonder what the US reaction would if/when it has a release there? unlike Moore's work (as stated by another user here) neither party is shown as completely innocent or completely evil. i'm not sure if this is exactly how the incident took place, but if it is, then there is certainly some food for thought in this movie.

This is the worst movie I've ever seen! I ve been reading these reviewers who are cediting this movie and none of them seem to be judging the movie itself. They're all giving their own assessment on how they feel about the incident. This film has got nothing to do with a battle of any kind. It is a short story about two al qaeda cooperatives who plant a road side bomb, blow up one American jeep and kill one American! The Americans then take it upon themselves to kill four innocent by-standers who are in the wrong place at the wrong time while the two cooperatives responsible easily get away between two houses, shooting behind their backs as they run. The Marines then go on a rampage, killing the occupants of three houses; women and children, all unarmed of course. And thats it! There is no exchange of gunfire, there is no military strategy. It therefore cannot be considered to be a "Battle" and the title, no more than a marketing ploy. The acting is bad, the directing is worse. The filmic conventions of this type of genre are completely ignored; using Blare Whitch stlye photography and relying on video diaries in a vain attempt to acquaint the audience with the characters. If anything this makes the film more unrealistic. If you expect something on the lines "Black Hawk Down" then look the other way. There's not enough content in this story to produce something of the same calibre even if the director and writer knew what they were doing and this wasn't a low budget production (which it clearly is).

The fact that the maker of this film is used to making documentaries should have ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING on this particular film. As many other comments show, there are a ton of errors. In my opinion, the largest is calling this a "docudrama" because it is patently NOT true in almost every aspect. The Marines that this film pretends to portray were acquitted of all charges, but the film doesn't take this into account as it was produced prior to the situation being resolved. It totally ignores this fact and portrays the Marines as sloppy, paranoid hotheads with no organization or training. The Marines should be able to sue this film for slander. It would be one thing if this film were advertised as COMPLETE fiction, but they sell you a bill of goods when they make the claim that it is "based on actual events". The only "actual events" it is based on is the fact that a war is going on in Iraq and that there is actually a town named Haditha. Beyond that, it is reaching. This is the first film I have ever felt the need to comment on and I am doing so because I was completely offended by the portrayal of the Marines and I want prospective viewers to be aware. I also don't believe anyone involved with this film should make another dime from slandering our service men in this way. To profit from that is completely reprehensible. I have never had the privilege of serving but I know men who have served and men who still do and I pray they never have to bear witness to a movie such as this. These men do an honorable job and to portray them in this light is simply pissing on the freedom that they purchase for us with their blood. To leave any audience with the impression that this chain of events was not only possible but did happen is most irresponsible. I have never seen this man's documentaries and never will. If he is willing to not tell the whole story in this account while claiming it is based on actual events, then I can not trust him to tell the truth in his documentaries. Beyond that, I don't think it's artistic to make a fictional film in this shaky documentary style. Some call it "raw". I call it unfinished and shoddily put together. The production of this film could have been handled with a hand-held video camera and entry level editing software. Apparently he put just as little time into production as he put into researching the facts. This film goes to show that in film making, you really can get away with anything.

As a former Marine I am deeply offended by this movie. It is nothing but an Anti-American, Anti-Military movie. This movie tries to portray itself as a factually based movie based on actual facts. It is not. Instead it is based completely on lies. All of the Marines have been acquitted of all charges. This movie was designed to make the Marine Corps and the US look stupid. It makes the insurgents look good. I have gladly deployed twice as an infantryman to Iraq. We have done many good things. I can honestly say that as this movie is completely wrong in how it portrays Marines. We don't talk like that, we don't act like that and we sure as hell don't go around shooting innocent civilians. The "Peace Loving" Sunni insurgents on the other hand have slaughtered thousands of innocent civilians in the name of Allah. If this was a fair movie it would be 99 minutes of Insurgents killing innocent civilians and 1 minute of us killing insurgents with some innocent civilians getting accidentally killed because the cowards hide behind women and children and use them as shields. This movie is a disgrace. If any of you believe that this is a portrayal of what actually happens you are either foolish or so biased that nothing will change your mind. This movie isn't anything like what happens over there. Insurgents are less than human. They are barbarians while American Soldiers are some of the most honorable people in the world.

It's almost impossible to be totally objective regarding a subject about which one is truly passionate. The war in Iraq is a subject that divides people like no other in recent times. As with any conflict, the war in Iraq has its supporters and its detractors. There is no middle ground. There are no grey areas: everything is just black or white. Either you believe it's a justifiable war, or you don't. This brings me to Nick Broomfield's new film, "The Battle For Haditha". The subject of the film is controversial as it deals with an incident in the city of Haditha, allegedly involving the US Marines. Broomfield uses actors, some of whom are former US Marines and Iraq veterans, as well as Iraqi refugees, to fashion a film that successfully straddles the gap between a regular documentary and a straightforward feature film. The film encompasses three points of view: those of the Marines, the insurgents, and the families who lived near where the roadside bomb detonated. This film is a fictionalised account of what actually happened at Haditha. It shows quite graphically, the horrors of war and what the Americans as well as innocent Iraqis have to go through almost on a daily basis. There are deaths on both sides, but it's Iraqi civilians who are caught in the crossfire and who have to bear the brunt of dealing with men who have been stretched to breaking point. The film in no way condones the actions of either the insurgents or the Marines. It just shows the audience what might have occurred on that fateful day, and it's for those in the audience to make up their own minds as to who was in the right and who was in the wrong. When reading some of the comments posted on the message board for this film, I find it somewhat puzzling that some contributors write that "Battle For Haditha" is anti-American. Just because the US Marines are shown in a less than sympathetic light in this film, does not mean the film is on the side of the insurgents. What the film does demonstrate is how quickly things can get out of hand, in a situation such as that in Haditha. By all means criticize a film on its merits, or lack of them. Please, though, do not label this film as un-American just because it doesn't fit a blinkered view of the way the world is.