清空播放记录
猜你喜欢
剧照
更新时间：2023-10-04 02:23
详细剧情
2005年11月，伊拉克西部城市哈迪塞（Haditha）。两名伊拉克武装分子在路中央埋下自制的炸弹，炸毁途经此地的美军陆战队的汽车，一等兵米格尔•特拉泽斯在爆炸中身亡。此举激怒了陆战队的士兵，他们迅速对周边的伊拉克平民进行报复性的袭击，包括孩童在内共计24人遇害，此举震惊世界。 本片根据真实事件改编。
长篇影评
1 ) 他朝干戈若寂了，定有人间好时节
2005年11月，伊拉克战争已经进行了整整2年8个月了，萨达姆已经被捕，国家正在进入重建历程。然而，伊拉克民众并没有迎来和平的曙光，似乎也看不到什么发展的希望。冲突和对抗还在继续，战火仍未熄灭，销烟依然弥漫。
哈迪塞镇，一个似乎没有什么特别的伊拉克城市，或者称呼它为“城镇”应该更为恰当一点。在这里，起码，在电影里，我们看不到它有什么特别的自然资源，它应该也不是什么政治焦点，也不存在着特殊的宗教意义。在这里，美军为控制而控制，武装分子为反抗而反抗，平民，只有平民，为生活而生活。
美军士兵甚至不知道自己为什么要到这个地方来，每天重复一样的巡逻、警戒、检查、抓捕。他们可以听摇滚，可以寻求娱乐，也像在世界上其它任何地方一样，开着同伴的玩笑，也开着自己的玩笑。这似乎也算是一种生活方式。然而，他们知道自己为什么会到这个地方来，把别人当成猎物，自己也是别人的猎物，把别人当屎包，而自己，也是一个屎包。他们知道为什么，因为还有一个“至高无上”的国家利益。
袭击者甚至不认同那些武装组织的观念和行为。他们是小业主、小商贩，他们会喝酒，即使这样做有违伊斯兰教义，他们会认为枪杀英文教师是疯狂的行为。完成袭击后，他们有的要回去照看商店，有的要回家爱抚自己的孩子。在生活的这一面，他们似乎也并不极端。也许他们有怨恨，就像当兵20年，最后却只能得到50美元的遣散费，他们心中的不平似乎也有理由。
而平民，与我们有什么不同呢？买菜做饭、谈论家事、聚集取乐，我们都过着一样的小日子。有所不同的是，当袭击者在他们家门口埋下一个炸弹的时候，他们需要做出选择，是承受来自武装分子的报复，还是承受来自美军的抓捕审讯。
鱼与刀俎，这是一个三方视角下的惨案。不管是基于金钱、真主还是国家，袭击者总能找到借口；不管是基于安全环境、战友还是国家，控制者也总能找到发起行为的动机。只是对于那些平民，可怜无定河边骨，不是执枪披甲人。
袭击美军的伊拉克武装分子逃脱了抓捕，对伊拉克平民进行报复屠杀的美军兵士们也没有得到公正的审判，死去的只有无辜的民众。他们似乎成了克林顿口中的“恶棍”，他们更是成了武装分子口中的“烈士”。但是他们什么都不是，他们只是母亲、妻子、父亲、丈夫、女儿、儿子。然而他们什么都不是，现在他们只是一具具尸体。
从来都没有什么救世主，但是恶会永存。
不知道这种题材用纪录片的形式来表现会不会更有力一点。从改编电影的角度来讲，我不觉得这部电影有什么出彩的地方，这种三方视角（当然也很难说是“视角”，摄影机的角度和运动基本上不是基于个体的视点，从而也不太表现其心理活动）的叙事模式显得很凌乱、浮于表面。只从一方，或者重点表现一方的方式会不会更好一点，起码应该可以为观众提供更多的诠释可能？但是，它起码让我知道了在这个世界上曾经发生过这么一件荒诞的事情，这也许只是众多大荒诞里的一个小荒诞，但那谁谁不是说过吗，百分之一可能的悲剧落到个人头上，那都是百分百。
2 ) 哈迪萨事件的英文wiki资料以及IMDB影评
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Haditha
Battle for Haditha (film)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haditha_killings
Haditha killings
google translate
http://translate.google.com.hk/?hl=zh-TW&tab=wT
-------------------------------
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0870211/reviews
影评
65 out of 83 people found the following review useful:
Powerful & Provocative Film, 12 November 2007
8/10
Author: Black Narcissus from Maida Vale, UK
I saw this film at it's London premiere at the Odeon West End as part of the London Film Festival.
I guess Nick Broomfield was getting sick & tired of seeing Michael Moore ripping off his Documentary style so made this his Second feature film in as many years. Like the earlier film, Ghosts (www.imdb.com/title/tt0872202/), the Battle for Haditha is based on fact.
The film tells story of the events of November 19, 2005, when a troop of US Marines exact revenge for an earlier attack which killed one of their number in the Iraqi town of Haditha.
The Film focuses on three different viewpoints, the first of Iraqi insurgents, which in this case isn't some mad Mullah but an old man, who we learn is an ex-Army officer and his son. The second focuses on a Corporal Ruiz, a young Marine who you feel wants to be anywhere but Iraqi and the finally the film focuses on a young Iraqi couple and their extended family.
The film is shot Cinéma-vérité style and at times is very harrowing. But it's to Broomfields credit that he to my mind he doesn't simply demonize the US soldiers. Instead you get to understand how young men put in a situation that you the viewer couldn't understand let alone cope with, could just lose it after a comrade is killed. Likewise, in the films portrayal of the insurgent fighters Broomfield manages to make you think what would you do, if, as in the film, your a professional soldier made jobless by a an Occupying force. How do you feed your family, and wouldn't you feel some resentment to the occupation forces for making you jobless. But it's in the Iraqi families, caught between the US forces and the Insurgents that the film is at it's best. They can't do the right thing for doing wrong. It is they who bear the brunt of either Insurgency retaliation or US Forces heavy-handedness. They who ultimately will and are the losers in Film.
This is a powerful film which deals with all aspects of the problem fair mindedly, but doesn't shy away from the truth. Don't let those who haven't watched the film put you off seeing the best portrayal of the War on Terror to date.
Black Narcissus
--------------------------------------------------
71 out of 95 people found the following review useful:
Made me cry., 21 March 2008
9/10
Author: bluelionk
Made me cry.
Only issues I noticed are: That the translation of the spoken Arabic is sometimes misleading and has no relation with what they actually said.
Some of the actors' accents are not Iraqi (Palestian, Egyptian, and others...), but most are Iraqis.
It's still a great movie that shows what happens in Iraq, and that war is ugly.
It's one of the rare movies that show the issue from the other side.
The acting is great, so is the scenery (it does look a lot like Iraq).
I say it again, it made me cry, a lot.
--------------------------------------------------
48 out of 75 people found the following review useful:
If You Liked Bloody Sunday & United 93, 19 September 2007
9/10
Author: Movie-Jay from Toronto, Canada
I just saw this movie at the Toronto Film Festival, and it's going to create much controversy as the weeks pass until this film finally opens. I think those who are against a movie before they even see it are saying something about themselves, not the film. Watch it, and then make up your mind. This movie, like United 93 or Bloody Sunday, is told moment to moment, keeps it's head down and just moves forward without judgment or commentary. The movie isn't aware of the past or future, it only knows what it knows through the characters we follow, some of whom are American soldiers, some are innocent Iraqi families, others are terrorists. This movie does a wise thing by simply showing things from all points of view. I can't wait until it's released because it needs to be talked about.
At the premiere for the film, we learn that many of the actors on the American front are actually soldiers who fought in Iraq. The head of the platoon is especially good, and could go on and have a career as an actor.
--------------------------------------------------
30 out of 41 people found the following review useful:
A story that needed to be told, 13 August 2008
8/10
Author: insomnia from Australia
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.
--------------------------------------------------
26 out of 39 people found the following review useful:
better than i expected, 1 April 2008
8/10
Author: SEVEREcritic from Bangladesh
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.
Battle for Haditha (film)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haditha_killings
Haditha killings
google translate
http://translate.google.com.hk/?hl=zh-TW&tab=wT
-------------------------------
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0870211/reviews
影评
65 out of 83 people found the following review useful:
Powerful & Provocative Film, 12 November 2007
8/10
Author: Black Narcissus from Maida Vale, UK
I saw this film at it's London premiere at the Odeon West End as part of the London Film Festival.
I guess Nick Broomfield was getting sick & tired of seeing Michael Moore ripping off his Documentary style so made this his Second feature film in as many years. Like the earlier film, Ghosts (www.imdb.com/title/tt0872202/), the Battle for Haditha is based on fact.
The film tells story of the events of November 19, 2005, when a troop of US Marines exact revenge for an earlier attack which killed one of their number in the Iraqi town of Haditha.
The Film focuses on three different viewpoints, the first of Iraqi insurgents, which in this case isn't some mad Mullah but an old man, who we learn is an ex-Army officer and his son. The second focuses on a Corporal Ruiz, a young Marine who you feel wants to be anywhere but Iraqi and the finally the film focuses on a young Iraqi couple and their extended family.
The film is shot Cinéma-vérité style and at times is very harrowing. But it's to Broomfields credit that he to my mind he doesn't simply demonize the US soldiers. Instead you get to understand how young men put in a situation that you the viewer couldn't understand let alone cope with, could just lose it after a comrade is killed. Likewise, in the films portrayal of the insurgent fighters Broomfield manages to make you think what would you do, if, as in the film, your a professional soldier made jobless by a an Occupying force. How do you feed your family, and wouldn't you feel some resentment to the occupation forces for making you jobless. But it's in the Iraqi families, caught between the US forces and the Insurgents that the film is at it's best. They can't do the right thing for doing wrong. It is they who bear the brunt of either Insurgency retaliation or US Forces heavy-handedness. They who ultimately will and are the losers in Film.
This is a powerful film which deals with all aspects of the problem fair mindedly, but doesn't shy away from the truth. Don't let those who haven't watched the film put you off seeing the best portrayal of the War on Terror to date.
Black Narcissus
--------------------------------------------------
71 out of 95 people found the following review useful:
Made me cry., 21 March 2008
9/10
Author: bluelionk
Made me cry.
Only issues I noticed are: That the translation of the spoken Arabic is sometimes misleading and has no relation with what they actually said.
Some of the actors' accents are not Iraqi (Palestian, Egyptian, and others...), but most are Iraqis.
It's still a great movie that shows what happens in Iraq, and that war is ugly.
It's one of the rare movies that show the issue from the other side.
The acting is great, so is the scenery (it does look a lot like Iraq).
I say it again, it made me cry, a lot.
--------------------------------------------------
48 out of 75 people found the following review useful:
If You Liked Bloody Sunday & United 93, 19 September 2007
9/10
Author: Movie-Jay from Toronto, Canada
I just saw this movie at the Toronto Film Festival, and it's going to create much controversy as the weeks pass until this film finally opens. I think those who are against a movie before they even see it are saying something about themselves, not the film. Watch it, and then make up your mind. This movie, like United 93 or Bloody Sunday, is told moment to moment, keeps it's head down and just moves forward without judgment or commentary. The movie isn't aware of the past or future, it only knows what it knows through the characters we follow, some of whom are American soldiers, some are innocent Iraqi families, others are terrorists. This movie does a wise thing by simply showing things from all points of view. I can't wait until it's released because it needs to be talked about.
At the premiere for the film, we learn that many of the actors on the American front are actually soldiers who fought in Iraq. The head of the platoon is especially good, and could go on and have a career as an actor.
--------------------------------------------------
30 out of 41 people found the following review useful:
A story that needed to be told, 13 August 2008
8/10
Author: insomnia from Australia
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.
--------------------------------------------------
26 out of 39 people found the following review useful:
better than i expected, 1 April 2008
8/10
Author: SEVEREcritic from Bangladesh
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.
3 ) 米粒尖花旗海兵队勇者维护米粒间尊严
影片中很多人都在讨论被杀的伊拉克老百姓，说实话没有他们的支持反美武装怎么可能壮大？原子弹下无冤魂，伊拉克里无平民。海军陆战队的做法专业值得学习，这些所谓的伊拉克平民由于他们的信仰最终都会成为反美武装，所以海军陆战队只是在消灭潜在的反美武装而已。
海军陆战队真的做错了的话，随队的伊拉克翻译早就反水了，所以说美国人维护世界和平真的很难，美国才配得上伟大这个词！
上帝保佑美国海军陆战队的小伙子们！
4 ) 以血还血，以牙还牙
an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth; tit for tat
——《圣经》
关于911已经有太多的声音说了太多的话
在这里我这个浅薄的孩子就不再罗嗦什么
我只是想说大家都在一个地球都一样是人
为什么总要流血总要有杀戮？
因为曾经的血人们互相仇视就要再让彼此继续流血？用新的血来冲刷已经干涸的血渍？
难道和平就那么轻？
难道仇恨就这么重？
——转自西祠·蓝羽飘落
<battle for haditha>是我最近看到的一部关于伊战的电影，看完后心中一片落寞。或许还有些暗自的窃喜，庆幸生活在一个没有战争，且远离战争的国度。
我震撼于片中关于战争原罪的交谈
也提醒我们，这场战争已经持续了整整5年，并且在可以预见的未来还会持续下去，还有有更多的此类事件发生在遥远的伊拉克。
比较国内的报道，美国的独立制片人简直可以以“神”来形容了。没有他们，我们用什么来了解这场战争中真实发生、正在发生的真相。
the truth，看来不光是我们这些旁观者在追求的，恐怕当事人也在苦苦追求。
战争让活人变成魔鬼。几乎是瞬间的，以牙还牙，以血还血，一切都发生的那么自然，宛如一场春梦。太快了，你简直来不及去想他是否正确。他就是那么发生了，瞬间的屠杀，一具具无辜者的尸体，谁来辨别对或错，正义与公平.......
以牙还牙，以血还血......
片尾的情节，我一直觉得，充满了讽刺的意味。
——《圣经》
关于911已经有太多的声音说了太多的话
在这里我这个浅薄的孩子就不再罗嗦什么
我只是想说大家都在一个地球都一样是人
为什么总要流血总要有杀戮？
因为曾经的血人们互相仇视就要再让彼此继续流血？用新的血来冲刷已经干涸的血渍？
难道和平就那么轻？
难道仇恨就这么重？
——转自西祠·蓝羽飘落
<battle for haditha>是我最近看到的一部关于伊战的电影，看完后心中一片落寞。或许还有些暗自的窃喜，庆幸生活在一个没有战争，且远离战争的国度。
我震撼于片中关于战争原罪的交谈
也提醒我们，这场战争已经持续了整整5年，并且在可以预见的未来还会持续下去，还有有更多的此类事件发生在遥远的伊拉克。
比较国内的报道，美国的独立制片人简直可以以“神”来形容了。没有他们，我们用什么来了解这场战争中真实发生、正在发生的真相。
the truth，看来不光是我们这些旁观者在追求的，恐怕当事人也在苦苦追求。
战争让活人变成魔鬼。几乎是瞬间的，以牙还牙，以血还血，一切都发生的那么自然，宛如一场春梦。太快了，你简直来不及去想他是否正确。他就是那么发生了，瞬间的屠杀，一具具无辜者的尸体，谁来辨别对或错，正义与公平.......
以牙还牙，以血还血......
片尾的情节，我一直觉得，充满了讽刺的意味。
5 ) 懂得思考的人可以看看
哪场战争不是政治野心家的阴谋？！哪场战争又不是打着“自由”的旗号？！哪场战争不是平民死的最多？！靠，人啊，就是他妈人家当权者的玩偶！
就影片本身来说，拍摄的概念和技巧不是国内能够模仿的哦，确实是出自“大家”之手，非常的真实，让你觉得是在现场直播，让你身如其境，让你不自觉的被震撼了！
据介绍，影片是根据真实的故事改编，看完觉得拍得也还是很客观的，没有故意丑化美国，也故意丑化伊拉克。
同情平民，看着无关的妇女、小孩被枪杀，感觉到心在“砰、砰”的痛。劣根性每个民族都有，“不想多事”的想法国际通用，告发被杀、不告发还是被杀的尴尬才是最后的悲哀。2个恐怖分子在那么多平民的眼皮底下埋好炸弹，又在那么多平民的头顶上面安安稳稳的呆了几天，轻轻松松的引爆炸弹，最后有堂而皇之的溜之大吉，还放枪引起最后的屠镇。这是平民懦弱引起的悲哀！总结一句话：立场什么时候都得明确、坚定。要不你就和恐怖分子一条心，全国人民团结起来，像我们赶走日本鬼子那样把布什扫地出门！要不你就老老实实的维护“和平”，打个电话告发总是可以的吧，总不能眼看着大祸临头，还他妈的祈祷！祈祷个屁啊！
同情美国战士，每天受着死神的威胁，偏偏还找不到罪魁祸首，俨然就是待宰的羔羊。再没有了Ranbo，一个人扛着机枪扫平人家一个军。影片真实就真实在，强大的美国大兵扛着M16愣是等着别个先打死几个自己人，才能还手。这是什么鸡巴事哦，每天还他妈的得巡逻，就是他妈的活脱脱的大兵饵子！郁闷啊，所以失眠了撒。死了弟兄，实在扛不住了，打着“存在火力点”的旗号，枪杀几十个平民，爽了！最后还是被国家给卖了，当了替罪羊!值吗？！人家美国大兵也不容易啊！
布什是个……，萨达姆是个……，政治家是……！！为什么是“……”因为实在找不到恶劣的词来形容他们，反正大家往最卑鄙、最呕心、最欠操、最生儿子没屁眼方面想就对了！一天到晚就知道打个“人民自由”的旗号，为了达到自己的野心，连自己人都杀！简直就是……！那些恐怖分子也是不争气，就那么容易被煽动，抱着狂热的爱国热情就去了，真是，唉，悲哀，悲哀！！
为什么打3星呢？！看的气不过！虽然拍得真实，拍得客观！但是有什么意思撒？！让我们重新认识美国？我们早就清楚的认识美国的丑恶嘴脸！让我们认识恐怖分子的丑恶？这还用说么？让我们珍惜生命，坚定立场？扯淡！
气归气，3星归3星，懂得思考的同仁们还是可以看看！
就影片本身来说，拍摄的概念和技巧不是国内能够模仿的哦，确实是出自“大家”之手，非常的真实，让你觉得是在现场直播，让你身如其境，让你不自觉的被震撼了！
据介绍，影片是根据真实的故事改编，看完觉得拍得也还是很客观的，没有故意丑化美国，也故意丑化伊拉克。
同情平民，看着无关的妇女、小孩被枪杀，感觉到心在“砰、砰”的痛。劣根性每个民族都有，“不想多事”的想法国际通用，告发被杀、不告发还是被杀的尴尬才是最后的悲哀。2个恐怖分子在那么多平民的眼皮底下埋好炸弹，又在那么多平民的头顶上面安安稳稳的呆了几天，轻轻松松的引爆炸弹，最后有堂而皇之的溜之大吉，还放枪引起最后的屠镇。这是平民懦弱引起的悲哀！总结一句话：立场什么时候都得明确、坚定。要不你就和恐怖分子一条心，全国人民团结起来，像我们赶走日本鬼子那样把布什扫地出门！要不你就老老实实的维护“和平”，打个电话告发总是可以的吧，总不能眼看着大祸临头，还他妈的祈祷！祈祷个屁啊！
同情美国战士，每天受着死神的威胁，偏偏还找不到罪魁祸首，俨然就是待宰的羔羊。再没有了Ranbo，一个人扛着机枪扫平人家一个军。影片真实就真实在，强大的美国大兵扛着M16愣是等着别个先打死几个自己人，才能还手。这是什么鸡巴事哦，每天还他妈的得巡逻，就是他妈的活脱脱的大兵饵子！郁闷啊，所以失眠了撒。死了弟兄，实在扛不住了，打着“存在火力点”的旗号，枪杀几十个平民，爽了！最后还是被国家给卖了，当了替罪羊!值吗？！人家美国大兵也不容易啊！
布什是个……，萨达姆是个……，政治家是……！！为什么是“……”因为实在找不到恶劣的词来形容他们，反正大家往最卑鄙、最呕心、最欠操、最生儿子没屁眼方面想就对了！一天到晚就知道打个“人民自由”的旗号，为了达到自己的野心，连自己人都杀！简直就是……！那些恐怖分子也是不争气，就那么容易被煽动，抱着狂热的爱国热情就去了，真是，唉，悲哀，悲哀！！
为什么打3星呢？！看的气不过！虽然拍得真实，拍得客观！但是有什么意思撒？！让我们重新认识美国？我们早就清楚的认识美国的丑恶嘴脸！让我们认识恐怖分子的丑恶？这还用说么？让我们珍惜生命，坚定立场？扯淡！
气归气，3星归3星，懂得思考的同仁们还是可以看看！
6 ) 反思
美国一向自诩正义，但是对于面对其中明显不正义的片段，敢于反思才会让人心悦诚服，敢于反思的国家才会进步，本片据真实故事改编，基本能客观反映那一段故事而几乎未带或者很少带倾向性。对比军国主义时代日本无所不能且掩盖一切的军部，今日这全世界最强力国家的最强力部门也无法阻止国内民众的反战或者反思。
7 ) 什么才是真实
对这样的一部电影来说，任何的拍摄手法都显得次要了，重要的是题材和真实性的命题。我是比较讨厌美国这个国家的，但是美国人倒是挺讨人喜欢，虽然我一个都没接触过。伊拉克的问题我也关心不过来，我更关心的是大米是不是真要涨价了。可别人家的问题外人死皮赖脸的非要进去插一脚，换做是谁谁也不会乐意。看了这部电影你会对美国大兵异常反感厌恶甚至产生当人肉炸弹的冲动，拿来作为基地组织的宣传影片还非常不错，可事实真的是这样么？恐怕不是这么简简单单。晚上看奶茶刘若英为某品牌电视打的广告，说“知未明，观未见”，那需要的是怎样的一种高度？豆瓣上居然现在还不到三十人看过这部电影，少见啊。四星。
8 ) 这就是一场屠杀
弱智的美国大兵在马路上遇到了炸弹袭击，二死一伤，没有任何证据证明炸弹是路边村里人埋的，就冲进村子里去乱杀一通，根本就是一群屠夫，算什么士兵，连一个恐怖分子都没看到，还说什么按规则指影办事。以前蛮喜欢看美国陆战队的电影，看了本片之后，美国政府及其军队还有美国人的价值观，在我心里大打折扣。这根本算不上一竟战争片，说美军屠村记更合适！从这几十年来美国的美国至上的国际行为准则来看，美国人以美国国籍当成了一个种族，其行为和言论其实跟希特勒很像，希望我国有识之士要认清这点，不要被美国的一些假像所迷惑！
仇恨滋生仇恨，冤冤相报何时了？战争是泯灭人性的苦难，不义的战争是苦难的巅峰。交战双方那些为了个人利益不顾他人死活操纵民众、士兵的政客和煽动者是最可恶最该死的！拍得很真实很震撼！给战争下了一个绝佳的定义
这两帮人天天都要把人脑打出猪脑才算完，却还要生活在同一个城市中，伊拉克到底是一个怎样的国家啊。
其实就感情而言十分理解美军在战争中犯下的错，还算不上罪行。毕竟战争本身就是残酷的，会将人逼疯。身处在其中也多身不由己，把问题拿出来大家一起解决而不是隐藏才是解决问题方法。
伪纪录片形式。真实感强烈。美军高层和伊拉克武装分子们虚伪的打着各自的幌子而让他们的同胞——前线的美国大兵和伊拉克平民成为无辜受害者。漫漫长夜你们何以安心入睡？
也算是比较中性的角度，对伊拉克的普通人、极端主义者，对美国陆战队的士兵、将军。尽管不能得到所有的全面的comment，这种多角度考虑的尝试总是有利于世界和平滴，卡卡
279 常看到很多人自豪的说，没当过兵的男人不是真男人，或许从动物本能天性来说确实如此。美利坚海军陆战队算是世界上最牛皮哄哄的兵了吧，是男人就下一百层，地狱
阿拉伯人的命就比美国人贱吗？路边炸弹这么多是阿拉伯平民造成的吗？那些滥杀无辜的美国陆战队员有错吗？复仇复仇，杀戮杀戮，这样的恶性循环，错在何人、何处？
过于的追求技术上的真实与视角的全面，反而显得缺乏真实，而流于表面。
战争就是这样一个人性的黑洞，它逼迫你放弃代价高昂的准则，以换取失去了意义的胜利。
就这片子还能看出反战意味来？还有说士兵和平民都无辜的，圣母这个词转为你造的，真是佩服。从战略上讲这tm是洗衣粉战争，是侵略战争，从战术上讲这是对手无寸铁的平民单方面的屠杀，跟主反省两句，流下两滴鳄鱼的眼泪，象征性的被追究下责任，就洗清罪恶了？拍个电影都要拿反战当遮羞布，美国佬最近打脸已经打出新高度了，你把他以前说的话说一遍都相当于在骂他。
老百姓从媒体、教科书上看到的是什么？是事件。是媒体甚至政府想告诉你的事件，是不是真相？真不知道。运气好的话，过一阵或者过几十年，水干了，露出一些河底的真相，运气不好，观众永远做傻子。你以为朝鲜人的智商很低，整天为金正恩哭天抢地？他们只是国家教育下的傻子，我们若在那个地方，也一样。
美军禽兽不如
好的战争片，最终表达的应该都是反战的。这部电影更像是一种还原，对真相的重新演绎，对战争的重新反馈，对平民的重新伤害。战争中受害最深的永远是陷入深渊的无法找到出路的平民。这个村子的人，在看到所谓的恐怖分子埋炸弹时，不敢告诉美国人，因为如果被叛军发现，注定是死。但不告诉美国人，就发生了影片中的担忧，他们作为最无辜的人被失去理智疯狂报复的美国人击杀。无法博弈，在这场战争中没有任何逃命空间。而恐怖分子是，真正的叛军雇来的市民，他们对两边都是无所谓的状态，都讨厌，却会为钱卖命。事实就是这样，人执行命令，人受到伤害，人疯狂报复，人无辜被杀。政治，社会，意识，就这样混乱。而这一切，还是乱入的战争。
想起了南京大屠杀，全世界人民都应该看清美国的嘴脸
以后下完电影一定要先过一遍看字幕完整不完整，我下的这个版本大概50分钟左右就没有字幕了，幸好战争题材台词成分比较少，还是能看明白个大概，我挺喜欢这种强调纪实性的电影，没有过分英雄化任何人，真实的揭示了战争给人们带来的灾难，有反思，有警示，你不杀人，人就会杀你，就这么简单。
真实事件改编，借用伪纪录片风格、去类型化地还原了美军在伊拉克的治安战困境，更具象的体现了家园置身于战火的悲剧，极尽冷峻纪实，让观众看到了是非对错一定程度上处于模糊地带的真实战场，美军和恐怖分子相互地袭击、报复、仇杀，结果付出最惨重代价地却是被无辜裹挟其间的普通人：平民看到恐怖分子埋炸弹却不敢报信给美军，因为怕恐怖分子报复，但攻击一旦成功，他们就像片中那样被失去理智的美国大兵无差别的杀戮，连老幼妇孺都不放过，他们唯一错的就是自己的国家成为了战场，没有任何逃生的出口，甚至连搞恐怖袭击的都不过是极端分子花钱雇来执行任务的主儿。而美军士兵杀人没得洗，但他们也不过是帝国掌权者谋取政治经济利益的工具，敌意像螺旋一样上升，真正的刽子手坐收渔利，战场的真相任强者涂抹，真正的元凶，却从头到尾都没露面。
这片让我想起《鬼子来了》。当年抗战时，民众真的像宣传的那样很支持游击队打仗吗？小老百姓只想活着罢了。顺便吐槽一下短评顶最高的一条，平民不一定无辜，高官不一定冷血，而冲在前面的也不一定都是被洗脑的傻逼。
对比1999年的《夺金三王》，2007年的《哈迪赛之战》。前者是部喜剧片，对萨达姆军队的贪婪残暴戏谑调侃，伊拉克百姓喜迎天兵。后者是部严肃纪实的电影，突出了美军的残暴猖狂，伊拉克人对美军充满敌意，游击队对美军不停的袭扰让其精神崩溃。拍这部电影的时候还在调查阶段，直到2012年参与屠杀的美军只有一人被判九十天监禁(没执行)，其他人无罪，伊拉克部分死者每人陪了两千五百美元，有敌意的死者未获赔偿。
无解的悲剧，每个人都身处其中，都觉得自己的是无辜的。事实却是别人利益博弈的棋子，既是受害者也是施暴者，没有人是无辜的。
伊拉克哈迪塞镇，I.D.E工厂..IDE使陆战队车队一死二伤，失去兄弟的MC疯狂了，接下的搜索任务中15名伊拉克平民无辜死去。被幕后黑手煽动的伊拉人纷纷拿起步枪，造成平民死亡的陆战队员们也面临审讯...这场战争到底谁错了？值观？宗教信仰？谁最无辜？伊拉克人民？士兵？当权者之间的矛盾导致了这些悲剧