Restrepo (2010) Poster

(2010)

User Reviews

Review this title
74 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Stop and Think About It
bobt1456 January 2011
It's a strange way to fight, without ever seeing the people you're shooting at and who are shooting at you.

The strongest aspect about this viewpoint documentary is its lack of an opinionated narration. The filmmakers--who deserve commendations of their own for putting themselves in the line of fire for 15 months--let the soldiers and their activities tell the story, the firefights, patrols, attempts to communicate with the Afghans, mundane chores.

And they let the viewer judge for meaning.

It isn't possible, however, to truly capture a year and three months in 90 minutes. I did find it curious that so much interview footage was cut. If you see it on DVD, don't miss the interviews shown under special features. Perhaps the director-cameramen wanted to keep the ratio heavier on footage than interviews.

In one omitted interview, the unit Captain admits that he thought he was responsible for losing even one soldier. He also mentions that one of those killed was the unit Sergeant Major's son. There should have been some way to weave this into the story.

Another soldier says he hates the terms "you did what you had to do" because he doesn't think he really had to do it. Says he doesn't think God will greet him with a playful punch to the shoulder and say "you did what you had to do." It's powerful stuff, the included and the omitted footage. For the most part we fight now with volunteers. The mix of soldiers is a bit different than it was when there was a draft, but "Restrepo" shows that American forces still bring a wide range of backgrounds and reactions.

And it shows that most are still so young that we are still sending kids to do the jobs old men ask them to do. They are brave, fearful, obscene, committed for the wrong reasons, committed for right reasons, and committed for no reason at all.

It's a powerful view.
32 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
A heart-wrenching documentary
This is where documentary filmmaking becomes serious. Whatever you are expecting out of this film, chances are you will get a whole lot more. Restrepo follows a platoon of soldiers in Afghanistan who are defending a valley, Korgengal. It is said to be one of the most dangerous valleys in the entire country and these brave men take fire every single day of their brutal campaign. This is a riveting film and it is one of those that you cannot shake. It gives you a glance into the absolute darkest depths of modern warfare and just how demanding the fighting is both physically and mentally. It is a film that gives you a rare look into the horrors of war. And it is absolutely astounding.

Restrepo is shot at a very personal level. The camera never intrudes on the soldiers during their work, and thank God considering some of the harrowing things they go through in this movie. This film hardly even feels like a documentary in the sense of what we think of documentary today. It is filled with interviews, but the bulk of the movie is truly documenting the lives of these soldiers. We get to see all sides of the emotional spectrum that can be afflicted through trauma. We get to look at how different people cope with such horrors as are experienced in this film. And it is all through such respectful eyes. I never once thought, 'Wow, they should really stop filming this.' Every moment of the film feels so important and the fact that all this was so clearly and eloquently caught on camera is astounding.

The unequivocally greatest thing about this film is the fact that it has absolutely no political agenda. It really has no alternative motive other than telling the story of these incredibly brave soldiers. The film only seeks to honor the brave men who served our country in the most dangerous area imaginable. This film isn't for the political leaders responsible for the war. It isn't for the military commanders that send these soldiers into battle. This movie is for the soldiers themselves. It is a true soldier's film in every sense. It has a very stern focus on the individual. It makes such an important point out of this aspect that it could have possibly gone even further. There are a lot of men in this platoon and thus we don't get to know any one person particularly well. We get to know the platoon well as a whole and how each man interacts with his fellow soldiers and how they all deal with loss and tragedy. Each individual soldier in this movie is important and the movie strives to show how meaningful that is. It is a remarkably important aspect of the film.

You won't see many documentaries like this, and there's probably a good reason for this. The kind of footage captured in Restrepo isn't easy to get and you have to be just as brave as the soldiers themselves if you are to accompany them into battle to document their bravery. But thankfully when the opportunity to get such unforgettable footage arose, it was all put together extremely well. This is not an easy film to watch, but in the end it is so remarkably worth it.
26 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
Restrepo !!!
estebangonzalez1019 February 2011
¨My personal low point? - Rock Avalanche, I saw a lot of professional tough guys go weak in the knees.¨ Restrepo is one of the five pictures nominated for Best Documentary at the Oscars and it also won the Grand Jury Prize in the 2010 Sundance Film Festival. It's beautifully directed and filmed by Tim Hetherington and Sebastian Junger (writer of The Perfect Storm). The huge success of this film and what separates it from the hundreds of other war pictures is that Junger puts us right in the middle of the action without any political agenda. He simply decides to film these groups of soldiers who have been deployed to one of the most dangerous locations in Afghanistan and lets us experience their day to day lives without making any pro or anti war comments. We are allowed to see a small glimpse of what the American soldiers have to go through and how they live amongst the villagers. In a way Junger allows the soldiers being filmed to tell their own story. We experience what they are going through in this dangerous war zone and how they interact with the local people. The cinematography is actually quite astonishing and I really felt like I was there with the soldiers. Restrepo made me appreciate even more last year's Oscar winning picture: The Hurt Locker, because it showed me how real that film actually was. At one point one of the soldiers even claims that no rush is as high as being shot at in the middle of a war zone. War can be addictive and it actually is for some soldiers.

The camera silently follows an American platoon that is being deployed to one of the most dangerous war zones in Afghanistan known as the Korangal Valley for a period of 15 months during 2007. The film begins while the platoon is arriving at the base and some of the soldiers share their thoughts about beginning their service in such a dangerous zone. We follow these soldiers as they live in tents in the middle of a valley where danger is eminent. They have to experience gun fights almost every day, and at the same time they have to adapt to the environment. When they are not fighting, we see the soldiers digging for protection; we see them burning their own feces, and just goofing around while they wait for next gunfight to take place. A day without action is nonexistent in the Korangal Valley. It is during one of these gunfights that one of the soldiers is mortally wounded, his name was Restrepo and the rest of the soldiers decide to build a resistance camp named O.P. Restrepo on his behalf. Restrepo changed the entire mood of the soldiers and they were ready to have their revenge. At the same time that the soldiers have to fight off the Taliban they also try to improve their relations with the locals who have a difficult time accepting the Americans (especially after they kill one of their cows).

The movie isn't pro or anti war; it simply places the camera in the middle of the action and lets us experience what is going on. No one's opinion about War is going to change: those who favor Americans involvement in Afghanistan will still do so after watching this documentary and those who don't will still feel the same because the directors don't try to manipulate us into thinking the way they do. There aren't any personal opinions about politics or war; it's all about experiencing what these soldiers have to go through every day whether or not they actually understand what they are fighting for. Some of my favorite parts of the documentary were the scenes where the Captain meets with the local villagers and tries to make allies out of them and the Rock Avalanche operation. The Captain really doesn't have a clue of the way the villagers think and goes the wrong way about trying to convince them to help the Americans. The Rock Avalanche Operation was really intense and was the climatic point of the film. I really loved the interviews with the soldiers with the camera closing-up on their faces (The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly style). Restrepo is a really good and memorable documentary that will stay with you for days. It is only 90 minutes long so it is really worth your time.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/
19 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
Grunt's Eye View of a Depressing War
evanston_dad22 February 2011
Filmmakers Tim Hetherington and Sebastian Junger take their cameras into the trenches for a "day in the life" look at what it's like to fight in the Korengal Valley, Afghanistan, nicknamed the most dangerous place on earth.

There, a platoon of battle-weary men fight the Taliban, an elusive spectre of an enemy that they rarely actually see. They seem to have little interest in what they're doing or why they're doing it; they only come alive immediately after a fire-fight (of which they have at least 3 or 4 a day), when the adrenaline of battle gives them a natural high. The rest of the time they spend going about their more mundane duties, feeling at all times like fish in a barrel.

Late into the film, one of their men is killed in a battle that pretty much all of them agree was one of their worst moments during the whole period. Other men had been killed, but this seems to be one of the first that the men actually see die before their eyes. It has a devastating effect -- they collapse into sobs and turn instantly from fighting men into small boys, and our hearts go out to them with compassion and the frustrated regret that they have to live like this while the rest of us go about our cushy existence.

"Restrepo" confirms what a lot of fictional accounts of the War on Terror (or whatever it is we're calling it now) have suggested: the feelings of determination and vengeance that got us into all of these messy military conflicts have long since given way to depressed resignation. No one is really sure what we're doing anymore, these soldiers least of all, and watching "Restrepo" didn't feel much different from watching a documentary about Vietnam.

Grade: A
23 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
10/10
Shooting Hell
proterozoic19 March 2011
How does a soft, liberal-arts civilian like me even approach a document like "Restrepo"? I don't give myself to blind, reflexive worship of the military; before, I have reviewed "Taxi to the Dark Side," an investigation into some chilling crimes committed by individuals in the armed forces, almost surely with the knowledge and approval of their superiors. This, however, is a film, shot by two insane journalists who spent a year with American Army troops in Afghanistan's Korangal valley, and it portrays men who are different from the rest of us in that they have faced and survived the impossible.

Outpost Restrepo was named after a beloved comrade killed in action, and it was dug and fortified under constant enemy gunfire. The Taliban just hated giving up the position, and the men describe how they would dig for several minutes, then be forced to pick up their weapons and return fire, and after the gunfight died down, go right back to digging. The outpost is only several hundred meters from a larger base, but in case of an attack, support might as well be stationed in Germany.

The all-seeing documentarians capture the men's brutal physical labor under a constant state of siege and barely-adequate resupply, until violence and discomfort become life's permanent background. The soldiers are forced to go on regular patrols through the countryside, tracking the progress of development projects and trying to build trust among the locals, whose allegiances are never clear. If they are only listening with one ear, if they're only out to hedge their bets between the fighting sides, who can blame them?

The film culminates in an account of a firefight during an offensive called "Rock Avalanche" – words that the testifying soldiers cannot say without a shudder. The mission consists of the men being loudly airdropped on a hilltop and moving around valleys and mountains until attacked by the Taliban. They push onwards, trying not to think which step will finally trigger the inevitable ambush. The ambush occurs; the live footage cuts out, and for several minutes, we follow the brutal firefight only through the soldiers' testimony. It is gut-wrenching. The pain and terror of the men who return fire without knowing which of their fellows are still alive and if they themselves will live for another minute are suffocating. Then, the footage is back, and we see a private wailing like a child over the dead body of the unit's favorite commander. If this can happen to the best among us, he says, what chance do the rest of us have?

It is an astonishing thing to contemplate, but even at the end of so much hostile fire, the Americans have the better deal. The young men who passed through the trials are scarred and damaged by their experience, but they knew the date when it would end, and the bird was there to take the survivors back to a better life. The local Afghans' pain has no end. Frightened, grimy faces peer out of gashes in dirt walls. Children hide their eyes, dressed in scraps of their grandparents' clothes. The doorways of their mud shacks open into black pits – even in midday, the sun is unable to dispel the darkness. The village elders are a sight from another millennium – gnarly, weather-beaten, half-decayed faces that seem to have been chopped out of rotting tree trunks. You could easily give every one of them a couple of centuries, but who knows? They may still be in their thirties. I've had some rough years as a child of the third world, but I can't imagine even a tenth of what these people go through in their lives.

So many excellent films have come out of our latest painful conflicts – "Restrepo," "Generation Kill," "Taxi to the Dark Side," "Gunner Palace"… Almost all of them have been financial failures. Who wants to spend ten dollars to get depressed and emotionally drained? What exactly are we supposed to feel at the end of "Restrepo"? Not hope. Maybe futility, weariness and an incredible desire to think about something else.

I wondered if the place I saw in "Restrepo" really exists on the same planet as the Metropolitan Opera. Will its misery ever end?
45 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
A closeup of US soldiers fighting in Afghanistan
Chris Knipp5 May 2010
'One platoon, one year, one valley' goes this documentary's impressive slogan. Such concentrated focus is truly a selling point. This is vivid, intense, unvarnished stuff, and the two filmmakers won the Grand Jury Prize for documentary at Sundance this year for their troubles. Hetherington also won World Press Photo of the Year 2007 for an image of one of the soldiers resting at Restrepo, an outpost named after medic Juan Restrepo, one of their first casualties upon arriving at this dangerous place of daily combat, Afghanistan's Korangal Valley. The two embedded journalists, Sebastian Junger (of 'The Perfect Storm,' with a contract from Vanity Fair for coverage) and distinguished British war photographer Tim Hetherington, are both filming the platoon off and on all through its 15-month deployment. They don't analyze or look at a wider context. They're in effect in the foxholes, where there are no atheists, and this time no military strategists either. What they show, and show well, is the camaraderie of this American Army unit, the Second Platoon, Battle Company, 173rd Airborne Brigade, their bravery, hard work, humor, and love of one another, and, less emphatic but also constant, a deteriorating relationship with the local citizenry. If you are going to make a narrative feature about how contemporary American soldiers in daily combat look and act, this is a good place to go, and the images are superb, and bravely shot, at the cost of physical injury and at the risk of getting shot like the soldiers. The film has no structure other than the actions of the platoon, their two big projects being building OP Restrepo, a 15-man outpost above the outpost that restricted the enemy's movements, and a foray dubbed Operation Rock Avalanche, during which the troops came under the heaviest fire; some of them still have nightmares from Avalanche.

The Korangal Valley is a scene in the middle of nowhere with no escape, as the soldiers saw it on arrival -- a place of multiple daily engagements with a hidden enemy. Strategically, this place seems like it was useless. The Korangal Outpost was closed in 2009 after six years, hundreds of US wounded, and 50 US soldiers dead (and heavier losses on the less well-equipped Afghan side). Some US military actually think the Korangal Outpost -- and the outpost of the outpost, O.P. Restrepo where most of the action takes place -- only increased local sympathy for the Taliban.

This is one "context" thing we get a glimpse of, because the film shows moments from a few of the weekly "shuras" when the platoon leader, Captain Keaney, met with local "elders," scrawny men of indeterminate age, often with brightly hennaed beards. He swears at them freely (safe, since they don't know English) and replies unceremoniously to their complaints. He's a combat officer, not a negotiator. At one point one of the locals' cows gets caught up in concertina wire (we do not see this) and the troops have to kill it (and eat it, from what we hear, and a very tasty meal it was). Elders come specially to complain about this, and demand a payment for the lost animal of four or five hundred dollars. Permission is refused for this from higher command and the elders leave with only the promise of rice and grain matching the weight of the cow. It looks as if the Afghans lose face in these "shuras," but the Americans don't gain anything.

Of course there is the inevitable clash when the Americans push so close they kill some Afghan civilians and wound some children. As with all wars against partisans or insurgents, the locals are all implicated. Captain Keaney is chagrined. But the captain -- he and a handful of the soldiers are shown interviewed later throughout the film, commenting on the experience and the platoon's major projects during the deployment -- is proud of the job they did, nonetheless. They gave the enemy a harder time than their predecessors. OP Restrepo, their initiative, gave them a strategic advantage in the valley. And the men were brave, even when they were scared, and they' were kind and loyal to each other.

'Restrepo' illustrates the Chris Hedges line that opens Kathryn Bigelow's similarly intense, visceral, but unanalytical fiction film, 'The Hurt Locker,' "The rush of battle is often a potent and lethal addiction, for war is a drug." Soldiers are shown hooting with excitement and saying that being fired upon is "better than crack," and they don't know if they can go back to civilian life after living day to day with such an adrenalin rush as the Konragal Valley and Operation Rock Avalance gave them.

The festival enthusiasm is not the end of it because 'Restrepo' will be broadcast globally by National Geographic. But, reviewing the film at Sundance, Variety reviewer John Anderson argues, with some reason, that this documentary "needs a story, much like the war. The roaring lack of public interest in what the U.S. is doing in Afghanistan is largely due to a failure of storytelling: Tell us what it's about, and then we'll care." Will we? What the story of the US in Afghanistan looks like is being stuck in one place, fighting a pointless war, on varying pretexts, in impossible conditions, like Vietnam. Here we don't see the drugs and demoralization of Vietnam, though they may be there. The interviews give only a glimpse or two of the damage this deployment did on the 29 or so men -- as well as of what a very fine bunch of men they are. Michael Levine, the film's editor, who cut Venditti's great little doc 'Billy the Kid,' deserves much credit for bringing some order to a wealth of chaotic material.

Seen at the San Francisco International Film Festival.
72 out of 93 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Objectivity
jdesando19 August 2010
"The horror! The horror! " Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness.

CNN describes Afghanistan's Korangal Valley as "the most dangerous place in the world." After seeing the powerful documentary Restrepo, I can understand the description, and I can admire an almost new dimension to that type of film: objectivity.

An American company of soldiers spent 15 months in that valley with filmmakers Tom Hetherington and Sebastian Junger recording the soldiers' combat and more importantly their personal reactions. For indeed Restrepo is about soldiers fighting an enemy they can't see, a boredom they can't leave behind, and friendships they will keep forever, depending on how long forever can be in such a hostile environment.

The singular feature of this Oscar-winning film is its attempt to make no judgment about the appropriateness of the war; it just chronicles the lives of young men stretched by fate to an endurance few of us could even imagine. Not that it's all that bloody or manic; it's just that the terror of an enemy hidden by mountains hangs about like a fog to such an extent that when they do kill one far away in the foothills, they rejoice as if they had wiped out a platoon. When the tired soldiers dance to "Touch Me (I Want Your Body)" by Gunther and Samantha Fox, they celebrate life, not killing.

Back to that objectivity: Even a documentary marries fiction when directors choose some images over others. In Restrepo the choices lead me to question how the US could ever win this war, not because that's the directors' statement but because the successes are limited to building a stronghold, Restrepo (named after a fallen comrade), at the top of a mountain among mountains that dare the most powerful army in history to try to win this one when none has ever been won here. Indeed, the army has subsequently withdrawn.

While the fictional Hurt Locker minimized its bloodshed in favor of the representational, Restrepo takes no liberties but goes for the real, which in this case is like waiting around a movie set for something to happen. And when it does, it can win an Academy Award.
40 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
God Help Us...
OCOKA1 December 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Interesting to note how out of touch the average American is with its own military, as is expressed by the litany of repetitious back-slapping preceding comments like "awesome" and "wonderful" and "outstanding". IMO, these comments reek of incredulity and are not only naive, but are indicative of a thrill-seeking audience seeking a vicarious experience from reality-based versions of "Saving Private Ryan" or "Blackhawk Down", albeit with little or no comprehension of what is actually going on, let alone viewing our military in action with a critical eye.

That said, as a former 11B20 and civil affairs soldier, there were a few scenes that made me cringe:

1) In a country where the per capita income is less than $500 per year, and where a man's cow is a man's livelihood and transportation -- an Afghani farmer would regards his cow the same way we regard our own pick-up truck or car here -- this particular unit (2nd Platoon, B Co. 2-503rd AIR, 173rd BCT) couldn't come up with a measly $400 to compensate the farmer for the cow they had eaten, choosing instead to use the flimsy pretext that since the cow got caught in their perimeter wire, it had to be "put down". I guarantee you, this will come back to haunt us on another day, at another time, on another battlefield albeit with the same people, as it will probably be one of the reasons why this particular village and their descendants will continue to nurse a grudge against us for next 1,000 years or more. We should've nipped it in the bud when we had the chance and paid the pittance sum for something we basically stole. Bottom line: Poor leadership and lack of cultural sensitivity and empathy will be our undoing there.

2) In the regular meeting with the tribal elders -- the weekly "shuras" -- the villagers brought up the fact that innocent civilians and family members had been killed by ISAF/Coalition forces. The unit's C.O., Captain Kearney, instead of offering his condolences and apologies like a normal human being would -- in addition to doing his job like he should've done by duly compensating that family in accordance with what ISAF forces are authorized to do -- instead chose to dismissively ignore their complaint and flippantly told them to "forget about it" and that they "need to move on," as if he were telling an ex-girlfriend to f&%$ off.

Not only did he write them off completely without expressing any sympathy or attempt to show any empathy whatsoever, Captain Kearney put another nail in the coffin of the U.S./Afghani partnership in that embattled country, as it is highly likely that such insensitivity and lack of remorse by an American officer toward an Afghani villager won't be forgotten anytime soon by that family or village for at least another 1,000 years.

Again, this was just another example of another incident where we could've and should've nipped it in the bud by using common sense, human decency and blood money to win back the population. Also, this particular unit erred by big time by not having a full-time C.A. (civil affairs) officer attached to this unit to interface between the C.O. and the indigenous population. (Infantry officers, like Capt. Kearney, make poor negotiators.) Bottom line: Poor leadership and a lack of cultural sensitivity and empathy will be our undoing there.

Then, to top things off, in the behind-the-scenes footage, Captain Kearney returns to Ft. Benning and where he not only gets a promotion to Major, but is basically rewarded with a highly coveted posting with the elite Rangers. As he awaits orders, we are shown a glimpse of Kearney's family life, as he continues to play with his little boy and catch up with his wife as if nothing has happened.

So for certain, Major Kearney, with a family of his own, could imagine how the Afghanis in the Korangal felt about losing a family member -- but in fact, and incomprehensibly so, he didn't or couldn't, as he failed to show even a modicum of remorse, or even a de minimus amount of sympathy or empathy to their plight. Having said that, how are we supposed to win this war if our country is being represented by arseholes and hypocrites like that? In actuality, the futility and hopelessness of the campaign that this documentary captured should've inspired a different if not more befitting title like, "God Help Us."
43 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
10/10
why everyone hates Americans
lily-yo12 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
don't get me wrong...the American soldiers did their soldiering well...the reality of what happens in the field was fantastic...interestingly, the movie dispels any illusions of high tech capability/applicability in the conditions of the valley...they sure did a lot of shooting without hitting anything...OK, it was covering fire

more interestingly, there was a total disconnect between the military and the villagers...a lack of respect, sensitivity and cultural understanding...you just don't speak like the soldiers did to the elders - zero respect with a we-tell-you attitude...and the soldiers didn't get point about the cow - we'll give you its weight in rice - you've got to be kidding? ... and they "knew" it was the elders' sons who were shooting at them...so like, shooting back will win hearts and minds?

oh yes, the 'end' goal was to put a road in...i really wonder whether anyone local wanted it

but give the US soldiers their due...they stuck it out and did what they were ordered.
27 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
10/10
And I thought "The Hurt Locker" & "...Private Ryan" were intense.
Deckard-168 December 2010
After living (because "experiencing" is too weak a word here) this film for the last 2 & 1/2 hours (the DVD extras are equal to the feature) I will not be able to see another combat film for a very very long time.

What Sebastian Junger & Tim Hetherington have captured with this doc may be the final word about soldiers in combat & their thoughts afterword.

Afghanistan has been called a place "where dynasties go to die". The men shown here mostly don't give a flying f**k about history or politics. All they are concerned about is getting one day closer to the end of their 15 month deployment in the most dangerous on Earth AND the guys on either side of them.

This is most clear-eyed view of fighting I've seen since (the excellent) "Gunner Palace". Junger/Hetherington put their own asses on the line getting their footage & wisely kept completely out of their own picture. It drags at times because it shows that fighting is about burning their own human waste, building dirt barriers & killing time before the next kill --a kill they rarely see. The interviews interlaced among the field footage are as riveting as the fighting.

BUT make no mistake the fighting is as hellaciously intense as "Black Hawk Down" & "...Ryan". However J/H pull back from the gore. There are PG-13 movies which are more graphic in their violence. The real "graphic" parts of this film are the emotions in the faces & the eyes of the men. Sometimes it is difficult to figure out what comes first: the man inside or the soldier outside.

Buy the DVD. The extras are huge.
27 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Small Cruel War
Guy29 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
RESTREPO is a documentary about US soldiers in the Korengal Valley of Afghanistan, recorded over the period of one year.

The Korengal Valley was the most dangerous place in Afghanistan until it was abandoned by US troops. This documentary captures the isolation and the danger equally, though its strength lies in the way it records the soldiers; their rituals, reflections, jokes and professionalism.

The films single weakness and greatest strength both stem from outside the Valley. The single weakness of the film is that, we never see these soldiers in a non-war environment. The similar Danish documentary ARMADILLO benefited from the way it showed the soldiers at peace, at war and then returned home. The strength are the post-Afghanistan interviews where the soldiers explain how they felt and how the experiences have changed them. A few of these interviews are simply harrowing.

RESTREPO is a good documentary that well deserves the plaudits it has earned.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
excellent movie about war criminals
arinkleff-725-86101620 September 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I watched Restrepo last night. Its a documentary about some army platoon in Afghanistan. First they meet with the local populace, and the locals complain that civilians have been killed, and the commander is like, "Well, its time to move on from that. Get over it. We are starting over with a clean slate now." Then they steal one of the villager's cattle and eat it, and when the villagers complain about it being illegal, the commander accuses them of being Jihadi.

Then they arrest some people, and the villagers complain about illegal detention, and the commander says, "I Don't F***ING CARE" Then the villagers finally act up, so the army calls in airstrikes and kill ten civilians including some children. Then one of the Americans get killed, and they cry like babies until they get bolstered up by a tough-talk session in which they promise to make the enemy pay. After that, they indiscriminately shoot everything that moves. At one point, they compare it to a video game or a hunting resort. Finally, they say "F*** this place" and go home. Very inspiring stuff, god bless America.

Its basically about a bunch of uneducated moron dude-bros who are pretending that its war, when really they are just sitting on a hilltop harassing villagers.
11 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
10/10
a courageous film that shows a war that is, like the Korangal Valley, a loop of grit and despair
MisterWhiplash17 July 2010
It's inarguable that we need to support up the soldiers in Afghanistan. It's the cliché in political speeches, but this film shows that this is more than just a saying when given a human face and context. Restrepo doesn't try and bluntly make the case that the conflict there that the US is engaged in is really worth it, or that we should leave immediately. The filmmakers let the soldiers speak for themselves, and the situation tells much more about what's really going on there. The ground troop that makes Restrepo- named after a much beloved fallen man that died suddenly during a small attack- which is a fort on a hill overlooking the valley, are all mostly kids who are in the army for one reason or another (one of them, who gives the most background, came from a hippie-family), and they are where they are and got to buck up with the situation for the months into the year it goes on till they are relieved.

We see some of the action, but if you're looking for the traditional war film please look elsewhere. This doesn't share the intensity of, say, last year's The Hurt Locker, but the film isn't on the same wavelength stylistically. Junger and Hetherington want these faces of the soldiers, and their experiences, to tell more than the visceral shocks that are shown on screen. Point in fact, there isn't a whole lot of action on screen, either because, logically, it would be difficult for the already in-grave-danger cameraman to get it on film (most of all that Rocky Mountain Ridge episode that everyone's haunted by), or that the US Army wouldn't allow it to be shown in the film. It's here, in having the lack of what we expect to see in a war film, that it gathers its strength and resonance.

The film Restrepo is engaging and absorbing as a collection of moments and scenes, detailing what everyday life was like there, and sometimes it could be just plain dull, or on the 'downlow' as it were. We see the dealings the army tries to make with the locals, who are either too scared of the Taliban (one gets the sense they're like a mafia with bigger guns) or don't want to help since, frankly, the US ends up killing a few civilians here and there, many of whom have never seen US troops before. Or, on the flipside, those that do want to deal with the soldiers after a cow is caught in the outlying fence on the perimeter and is killed, which is valuable property to the natives. And we also get to see how these guys, mostly kids in their early 20's or younger, having some relaxing time when not being fired at or firing back.

To be sure, some sequences are intense, such as the Rocky Mountain Ridge tale which has the soldiers being interviewed still unable to handle with the casualties and how they were surrounded by the Afghan forces. But what one walks away from this film, shot in the Korangal with straightforward, sobering shots of soldiers doing what they do, and with telling interviews shot much later when they were in Italy, is how they weathered the chaos and did accomplish something there with the fort (albeit later abandoned altogether in April 2010). It's extraordinary to see it so up close, and to put the human face on it. The audience, however they feel about the conflict currently (from the looks of things Obama's keeping soldiers there for longer stretches until "it" is "won"), get a fresh perspective and can walk away with their own conclusions. That, and those haunted faces of the soldiers themselves, who in profile have that stare in their eyes, sometimes more-so than others depending on when talking about what, and knowing that look may be there for the rest of their lives.
32 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
Immediate, powerful, gritty, courageous and heart wrenchingly futile
veao15 August 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I grew up on idealism. I watched Stallone, Schwarzenegger and Norris and never questioned the nobility and sacrifice that must be endured to maintain our ideals in a black and white world. I believed it and took it to heart. I went down the path of wanting a career in the military.

Leftists are quick to trounce Hollywood's war narrative as being self indulgent, and understandably so. Hollywood rarely supports movies which articulately examine the other side, it's not exactly good for business. We all know about our atrocities but we don't need to be reminded about them in our movies, idealising ourselves as being heroic is much better for selling seats at the movies. If we're not Rambo or Braddock, the gallant hero upholding liberty and justice, we're the sacrificial warrior who's returned from war damaged. Examples include Deer Hunter, Rambo, Platoon and the Hurt Locker.

The Hurt Locker apparently didn't tackle the politics, it presented the sacrifice our young men make on our behalf. Like the Deer Hunter, it's a "real" story about our tragedy in war. If I'm honest, this is partly why I think this movie resonated the way it did. It does little for leftists to criticise something like the Hurt Locker because it's apolitical – it's about the troops and we all know unpopular it is if you don't support the troops.

For the record the Hurt Locker was obviously unashamedly pro-American and I don't think it is apolitical either.

I expect Restrepo will come to be regarded in much the same way, moreover it has the added authenticity of reality. Like the Hurt Locker, it is not about the politics of war, it's about the soldiers. It's about their sacrifice and boy do they make it, in spades. Some die but most give something of themselves that is lost forever and in return they have an experience forced upon them which is so immediate it will never be far from their thoughts.

Very, very powerful stuff.

This is a raw film in every sense and this extends to the filming. I don't do well with jerky filming with quick zoom in and outs. I know most people don't have as much of a problem but it really makes me want to throw up. I do think the filmmakers over indulged to add authenticity but I'm not going to overly criticise it.

This is a film about the American experience, it is not about the wider war and has even less to do with the enemy.

*** Spoilers Ahead ***

Restepro is interesting because while no one could deny the courage of these young men it also asks many passive questions not just about our approach to Afghanistan but maybe our ideals in general... A Captain entering a new war zone not wanting to know about it, a soldier and his "f**king hippie mother" who wouldn't let him have so much as a water pistol and the other solider who doesn't know how he'll top the high of a fire fight. The photo of the kid back home dressed in army fatigues, presumably the son who wants to emulate his heroic father.

Even though the soldiers engage with Afghan locals it is with an overwhelming crippling suspicion on both parts. When the Afghan elders enquire about someone, the Captain tells the locals that he doesn't give a f**k about so and so for grimacing reasons which we as the audience should identify with. When the locals' cow is killed by the soldiers, the offer of rice and beans to repay the debt is met with vacant stares of incredulity. The soldiers tell them in no uncertain terms that if you came looking for money it's not going to happen. There's no mistaking that in the Korangal Valley, it's the Americans who call the shots.

And sometimes those shots don't always hit who they're supposed to. Sometimes those shots stray into places where they shouldn't, killing and maiming the innocents. The Colonel is brought in to explain that the burned babies are unfortunate but essentially they are collateral damage. That's the price paid when the Taliban intermingle with the locals. If the Taliban would just come out to fight the Colonel's soldiers then this wouldn't happen. Such is the unfairness of an asymmetric war.

For some of the soldiers who fought there, the Korangal Valley became the last place they'd see. For others, behind the awkward smiles and the incomprehension, it will be a lifetime of nightmares and memories which will haunt them forever.

Watching these kids is humbling and staggering and I am genuinely in awe of how they can stare death in the face on a daily basis. They deserve more, way more than the $1,000 bonus they might get if they were to stay an extra month. I couldn't do it, more to the point I wouldn't want to do it, not if this is how the war is fought. Al Qaeda have spawned an ideological war which cannot be defeated alone by "getting some".

Perhaps the most sobering part is displayed as the credits roll; in April 2010 the Korangal Valley was abandoned altogether, and I can't help feeling if that is how the war in Afghanistan will end.
16 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
5/10
Thugs vs. thugs (war summed up)
A.N.1 May 2011
It wasn't boring, but this just wasn't a movie I could get inspired or awed by. For the most part, I found the demeanor of the soldiers a lot like inner city toughs playing out their regular lives with an exotic backdrop.

I actually think this movie LACKED violence, which it needed more of to get its "shock value" across. Lots of gunfire scenes but only brief, sanitized glimpses of war carnage, which would have really shocked the audience. I don't recall seeing any incoming fire except for an explosion on the road near the beginning. For all the "heavy fire" they took daily, there wasn't a whole lot of footage.

Then there were the macro-pore closeup interviews with the usual "it was bad over there, man...really bad" dialog. I'm not making light of their pain but none of it seemed like new territory in a documentary.

I wasn't impressed by crude references to a ranch where all you really do is shoot wildlife, a kid calling his mother a (bleep'n) hippie, and similar low-brow stuff. I'm not knocking the bravery of the volunteer army, but it makes these foreign conflicts seem not much different than turf wars in American ghettos. The Taliban are probably the equivalent of U.S. gangsters over there. Dull-eyed people creating trouble out of thin air for the most part, over greed and ego. "It's been going on for ten thousand years" says an old song.

"Restrepo" reminded me of what's wrong with the whole human race; the lack of foresight and thoughtfulness, with a shoot first, ask questions later mentality. I am weary of those who say "we're just doing our job" without seriously (as nations) questioning the futility of warfare and all the lives that end up being wasted just so similar conflicts can arise again somewhere else.
17 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
"Over the top"
heaveyeo19 May 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Gritty depiction of the (sur)realities of modern warfare.

"the only hope I have is that eventually I will be able to process it differently." These are the words of young men thrust onto the frontier of a conflict for which they have no ideology for or real stake in, except for their own survival of identity and self. Plucked from the suburbs of working class America before been repackaged as fighting machines then sent to one of the most hauntingly beautiful places in the world to play tit-for-tat bombs and bullets ground combat with a people and culture they can not and will not ever relate to at a human level. The embedded reporting is at a hearts and minds level with these troops. Living with them through their daily experiences that gravitate around shoveling rocks around the mountainsides of the valley in order to create an outpost that "is like a big finger sticking up at them (Taliban)" a task that gradually finds rhythm and purpose in between the fire-fights and the monotony of their existence far from home. They are so insulated from the locals (albeit by necessity to a large extent) that from the top level of command down there is not once any effort to reconcile their posting with any external reality. They are doing their "job" for a "1000 dollar a month" pay cheque and dental care. Any passion that they display is confined to the security of their outpost and consists of avenging the death of their comrade Restrepo and "hitting them hard." They do not distinguish the locals from the enemy, and the arrogance that is displayed in the meetings with village elders by the top brass shows how it is impossible for these guys to ever consider the human side of the valley even when during a chaotic patrol/raid they call in air support and end up destroying buildings and innocent lives within in pursuit of the enemy. They never really see the enemy, they hear the enemy (sometimes monkeys), they are told the enemies eyes are on them, watching them from the trees, they cannot see the enemy they obliterate with large caliber gunfire, only witnessing the body falling apart as it is gunned down from distance by one of the specialists form the outpost. There is such a fine line for these guys between reality and "war games" that they get such an adrenaline high from combat, they have no idea how they will reconcile that with returning home eventually. During the day they play around like teenagers, wrestling, slagging each other off, smoking the hours away but "…the fear is always there especially at night...". This group of soldiers have few if any qualms about the political, cultural, economic or human forces and values which are core to this conflict. They never question the fact that they are there, only when they can go home and let the next battalion take over. The mission was one which ended and will always be for them a testament to their fallen comrade and the outpost resurrected and defended in his name, but beyond that there is no achievement for them…except becoming men – blooded by the US military in a war that has no end, that echoes the clarion calls of the political elite and the industrial military complex that has pushed this war and the concept of terror to the very frontiers of (sur)reality. They return to civilian life battle scarred and proud, but the scars are likely to last a lifetime, pride will raise questions at night, with the nightmares and the sleeping pills.

I liked this movie, it is a brilliant war movie, one of the best I have seen. It is hard to believe the USM allowed it to be shot and released. It shows the ideological hollowness of American foreign policy, merely a conduit for the arms industry. It shows the complete lack of cultural sensitivity and assumed primacy of American might and right anywhere it sees fit. The futility of war evident in this movie is akin to WWI over the trenches stuff. What has changed in the past 100 years of war and the incalculable losses incurred by mankind? Have any lessons being learnt? It appears that the lessons learnt are kept for those in power, those who manufacture war and provide a steady stream of toy soldiers and bogey men on the Xbox or through the media for which we can all fight against in our hearts and minds. The technological individuation of western society is clearly evident here, the soldiers using hi- tech weaponry, us the audience using dvds to watch the embedded reporting of a conflict that bears no technologically capable resemblance to the causal factors in loss of life in another war classic, Gallipoli, and I mean that in the sense that we can all see this happening in the wired world, yet it goes on and on, it's going on. We are all telling them "right lads.. over the top, over the top!"
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
A riveting documentary that shows us the human face of a pointless war
Howard Schumann14 May 2011
Winner of the Grand Jury prize at the Sundance Film Festival, Restrepo is an up close and personal documentary about the war in Afghanistan that depicts the day-to-day experiences of combat soldiers of the Second Platoon, Battle Company, 173rd Airborne Brigade as seen through their own eyes. The film has no narration or interpretation by experts, no special effects or background music, only an intimate recording by journalists Hetherington and Junger, who risked their lives to spend fifteen months with the men and to record their activities, some mundane, others hellish.

The film is named for the military outpost in the crucial Korengal valley that the American soldiers built to honor one of their fallen friends, a 20-year-old medic, Juan "Doc" Restrepo, who was killed by the Taliban in July, 2007. Hetherington and Junger maintain a non-political stance, focusing only on the men, their courage and camaraderie, the highs and lows, the tedium and endless firefights, and the agony of having to come to terms with loss. Like the atrocity of the war itself, the film seemingly has no beginning and no end, only the end of one phase and the beginning of another, the battle for one rock and then another.

As each soldier talks to the camera about their thoughts and feelings, their words convey an unforgettable impact, especially when they describe the terror of a mission called Operation Rock Avalanche, during which they came under the heaviest fire. It is not clear what the men thought about the mission, but what is clear is the bond they forged with each other and the heroism with which they faced the possibility that each new day could be their last. One of the most moving segments of the film is when a young soldier openly expresses his grief when learning of the death of his friend. If you have a heart that's still beating, it will be torn to bits.

While the bravery of the men is unquestioned, like soldiers in any war, their focus is on the job in front of them and there is little time for reflection. In an unforgiving terrain, where even the enemy is an abstraction, it is hard to distinguish between "good guys" and "bad guys" and the gunfire is aimed at a mostly unseen foe. At the same time, local farmers, including women and children, are often mistakenly killed by bombs dropped from helicopters, exacerbating strained relations with the local population. Locals are angry and demand money when one of their cows is killed, but only rice, beans, and sugar are offered as compensation along with vague promises about building an infrastructure in the area that will create jobs (what kind of jobs is not discussed).

In the midst of this insanity, it is sad is to hear platoon leaders still talking about how war makes boys into men, a theme used throughout history to justify turning recruits who join the military out of love of country, into dehumanized killers. Restrepo is a riveting documentary that shows us the human face of a war that, if it ever had a purpose, has now become completely pointless. To underscore this, we are told that after six years of bleeding and dying, the Korangal Outpost has now been surrendered to the Taliban. A deeply moving film, Restrepo becomes twice as poignant with the knowledge that one of the directors, Tim Hetherington, was killed in Libya only in the last month. We owe him and his co-director an enormous debt of gratitude.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
Tim Hetherington's Legacy
valleyjohn27 April 2011
Exactly 7 days ago British director Tim Hetherington died in Libya from an RPG while working . Respeto will be his legacy.

This is an eye opening documentary film which follows an American platoon for a year in the most dangerous area of Afghanistan - The Korangal Valley. We see the toll the Afghan war takes on a group of young men who have been put in a near impossible position thanks to a bunch of oil greedy politicians. You get to see how close these men get to dying thanks to some fantastic and brave camera work. There are some very upsetting moment as the platoon lose men along the way and Innocent Afghanistan women and children die in the crossfire. How these , or any other men can put themselves through this is beyond me but they have my total respect despite my thought that we should never be in this unwinnable war. 90% of this movie is real footage where the other 10% are interviews with the soldiers. Restrepo is a superb documentary and it's a crying shame that we will never see this directors work again. Tim Hetherington R.I P
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
21st Century Cowboys and Indians
tieman6426 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
"Is there any man here that does not know that the seed of war in the modern world is industrial and commercial rivalry?" – Woodrow Wilson

Like most "fly on the wall" war documentaries, "Restrepo" is an exercise in macho sentimentality. The tale of a U.S. Army platoon based in Afghanistan, it unfolds like a typical war movie, alternating between moments of downtime, and moments of tense, adrenaline pumping violence. Simple military values and emotions are then espoused – sacrifice, heroism, male bonding, the frustrations and drudgery of killing an unseen enemy – the end result being a narrative arc designed to make you feel sad for what our boys, and their zillions of dollars worth of hardware, must endure in the name of spreading "freedom". It's Kipling's "White Man's Burden" posing as objectivity.

The soldiers themselves are the usual assortment of jar-heads; most view war as a rights of passage, a chance to prove their manhood, define themselves, go on an adventure and do "something important". These are trivial reasons to enlist, but the military has always been a cultic institution, preying on the anxieties and insecurities of the young.

"Armadillo" pretends to be apolitical, but the very act of avoiding all context is itself a firm ideological stance. What the film ignores is the fact that the Taliban have been deliberately dehumanised by the West for a number of decades. They are painted as irrational fanatics, intolerant fundamentalists, bearded extremists, and terrorists. This, of course, paves the way for aggression, war, and genocide, all of which are waged under the guise of collective self-defence. Killing the Taliban is then celebrated as a legal virtue. To leave the Taliban in control of Afghanistan, says the US and NATO, is to leave a haven for terrorism.

Yet before 9/11, these same "terrorists" were Washington's close allies. They were funded, supported and hailed as "freedom fighters" who with "our help" would be able to fend off the Soviet Union, whom the American public were told sought to destroy Afghanistan. Under the pretext that the Afghan government was a Soviet puppet, which was false, the then Carter Administration authorised the covert funding of opposition tribal groups. These groups were armed and trained in secret camps set up in Pakistan by the CIA.

Thus was born "mujaheddin", a campaign of terror which resulted in the Afghan government in Kabul requesting the help of the Soviet Union, resulting in an ill-fated military intervention which ended ten years later with the retreat of Soviet forces and the descent of Afghanistan into an abyss of religious intolerance, poverty, warlordism and violence. So contrary to "official history", the mujaheddin did not arise in response to a hostile Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The Soviet Union intervened at the request of the Afghan government in response to the instability being wrought by a US funded and armed insurgency. See Nicaragua, Syria, Iraq and Libya.

After 9/11, the White House then turned against the very "allies" they supported, a pattern which we find occurring throughout history. Think Washington's funding of Saddam Hussein against Iran, prior to sweeping in and wiping him out decades later. In the case of the Taliban, the justification for their newfound status as "our enemies" became their supposed links to the WTC attacks and their sudden "oppression of women". In reality the Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11, and were the White House concerned about women's rights they wouldn't be close allies with countless other counties, most notably Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, both of which practise an "Islamic Law" akin to the Taliban.

The real reason for the West's change of stance toward Afghanistan? During the mid 90s several mega oil corporations began to seduce the Taliban, all seeking approval to build pipelines across the country. Eventually the deal came down to a handful of corporations, the Unocal-CentGas consortium (which later "became" Chevron, and which has ties to the Bush family and Dick Cheney) and Bridas (an Argentine company). While negotiations were underway, Bridas found a partner in gas giant Amoco and Amoco itself went on to merge with British Petroleum. Throw in the fact that Gazprom, a Russian gas company, pulled out of the Unocal-CentGas consortium and that Unocol's proposed pipeline was closed to Afghanistan, whilst that proposed by Bridas would also service the local market, and it looked likely that the Taliban would strike business deals with Bridas. In response, Unocal and its lackeys stepped up their game. Their Vice President of International Relations appeared before the US Congress in February 1998, basically calling for the removal of the Taliban regime. The Taliban themselves were issued an ultimatum: take our offer or we drop the bombs. Meanwhile, cue the Clinton administration's sudden concern about "human right violations" in Afghanistan, the seizing of all US-held Taliban assets, the placement of trade bans, and the calling for the "surrender of Bin Laden". In other words, it was only when absolute control of oil was challenged that the Taliban regime was openly discredited.

Although the Taliban continued to offer negotiations on the handover of Osama bin Laden, the atrocities of 9/11 gave Washington oil policies a convenient new all-inclusive justification. Oil motivations, never a popular foreign-policy justification, could now be submerged within a primal response to a deep-seated national combination of fear, loathing and outrage.

Incidentally, drug trafficking constitutes the third largest global commodity after oil and the arms trade. Afghanistan produces 92 percent of the world's opium, the profits of which are laundered back to the West or channelled toward corrupt chieftains and locals. The longer the war can be prolonged, the more these 3 industries profit. Unsurprisingly, most of the major White House players during this era were affiliated with oil companies active in Central Asia (Condolezza Rice, Bush, Zalmay Khalilzad, Hamid Karzai, Cheney, Donald Evans, Gale Norton, Spencer Abraham, Thomas White etc).

6/10 – Superficial.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
American propaganda movie
schar_law6 December 2010
I actually thought that this will be an objective movie about the war in Afganistan, but it turned out to be just another documentary that glorifies American stupid wars. In the end of the film there is a note that 50 American soldiers died in this valley - I wonder how many local people they killed while they were there. I bet a lot more. And, what is the most stupid is that after all this, they retreated from the valley so even their money driven goal was not achieved. I'm afraid that this will turn out to be the scenario for the whole war in Afganistan - politicians and big companies made a lot of money, a lot of innocent of people killed and all for "protecting the land of the free and fake democracy"!
53 out of 100 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
4/10
interesting reporting? yes. award-winning documentary? no.
prestonloyola27 December 2010
It's a sad commentary on contemporary journalism that a film like Restrepo can win a prestigious award like the Grand Jury 2010 Sundance Best Documentary Award. Basically, the film-makers embed themselves with a US platoon in Afghanistan, document the experience, and intersperse interviews of some of the soldiers (taken after the period in question) throughout. There's no attempt to place the events in a larger context, no narrative to tie anything with the policy decisions taken in Washington, all we get is a raw "life in Afghanistan" seen through the eyes of soldiers on the ground in a single location. Don't get me wrong, it is quite interesting to actually see some of what is going on the ground in Afghanistan, after the thousands of hours of TV punditry and miles of newspaper column inches that media heads have filled with opinions, debates, tirades and justifications of the so called "war on terror". But this is the kind of reporting that should be omnipresent in our media, something you might see in a segment on 60 minutes, or some other outlet for investigative journalism (of which there are fewer and fewer).

Unfortunately, as we know, investigative journalism is expensive, and has dramatically been cut down in our age of media mega mergers. It's a lot cheaper to stick a few people around a table to mouth off on TV (and then cover the debate in the print media), then it is to ship true journalists across the globe (and around the centers of power in the US) who are not afraid to stir things up and take on the powers that be.

And so something like Restrepo - which is a bog standard journalistic piece - becomes an award winning documentary film. Examples of the kind of items that might be included in a wider scope documentary film worthy of awards: - Restrepo like footage in multiple locations in Afghanistan - similar footage of the other side (Taliban/AlQaeda or whomever is actually doing the fighting) with interviews on the reasons - interviews with the policy makers in DC explaining what the policies are and why, what they are trying to achieve - compare these goals with what is going on the ground - facts and figures about how much money is being spent on the war (compare to how much is being spent on Afghan aid), start digging into which corporations are making the most profit out of it - look at the cozy ties between retired DoD personnel and defense contractors etc, etc, etc you can just keep pulling at strings forever really... Tie everything into a cohesive narrative, maybe start actually providing answers to the still unanswered question of what we are actually still doing in Afghanistan, and maybe we would have an important documentary film worthy of an award. But a context free year in the life of a US platoon - sorry guys, that just doesn't cut it.
30 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
4/10
not really worth watching
niel-drummond19 December 2010
A very monotonous view of the battle in Afghanistan.

If you don't mind watching plenty of interviews with immature soldiers facing the reality of modern warfare, this is your film. Sadly, the film is neither grim, nor funny, nor bloody, or anything more than a mediocre documentary.

The film does illustrate how inept the American forces are at negotiation, and the overwhelming emphasis on heavy weapons and air power. Possibly, it could entertain the pride of a nationalistic American, but to the vast majority of the rest of the world, it simply portrays the Americans as expensive buffoons.
31 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
Innocents Abroad?
nyshrink2 July 2010
Warning: Spoilers
The film follows a platoon of US soldiers building an outpost in the Korengal Valley of Afghanistan. Cinema verite-style, we see them shoot at the Taliban, search a home, interrogate individuals, meet with village elders, enjoy leisure time and get killed. There are also some interviews with surviving soldiers later. My impression of the war from this film is that if this is the way we are fighting terrorism, it has got to be the slowest and costliest way to do it.

One soldier dies on camera (or rather, he is caught on camera right afterward). The reaction to this is poignant. Even more depressing is a scene in which the soldiers visit a home after a US helicopter has dropped a bomb on it. We see a dead child and several injured people. The soldiers don't seem to be particularly upset, although their captain expresses regret and anxiety in a later interview. In several meetings with villagers, soldiers seem brusque while listening to complaints ranging from a request for money for a villager's cow the soldiers apparently ate and the number of innocent civilians killed by a previous platoon. I began to think that public relations skills must not be part of the training at West Point. And this was when they were being filmed--what is it like when the camera isn't there? The captain talks about how the villagers will get a road and jobs, as if this is more important than someone's child who was killed.

I wondered as I watched the film how many of the soldiers portrayed understand how the India-Pakistan conflict over Kashmir, or the U.S.'s support for Israel's war against the Palestinians, or the US's support of the dictatorships of Egypt and Saudi Arabia led to Sept. 11 and created the conditions that led to their being in Afghanistan and their comrades getting killed. If any of them find out this information, my guess is they might be very, very angry. The interviews help us learn more about some of the individual soldiers, but not much. Some have been deeply affected by their experience, but it isn't clear if they learned much from it. Overall, the film is touching and at times riveting, but also frustrating.
19 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
Great film, rang true for me!
BrowningAR2930 November 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I just read a complaint ripping this movie apart saying: "The problem I had with this "movie," is that it was not much of a movie at all. It seemed like two guys decided they were going to embed and then make a movie about their experiences, whether there were any experiences to really show. We see a lot of forced shots where the soldiers really have nothing to say" I could not disagree more, as somebody who has spent a significant amount of time being deployed I was happy to see something that came off as real to me. Something that film makers always miss in movies about war is the boredom. War is hell and war is f***in boring! You have to find ways to entertain to yourself when you are there and that is what they did.

Aside from saying that soldiers have nothing to say sometimes the facial expressions say it all, soldiers don't always need words to express what they are thinking. The anger that those soldiers had after Restrepo died rang very true for me too especially when they talked about wanting to go out and get payback for what happened. It was cold and real.
8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
10/10
War doesn't need a story.
egg57319 February 2011
Warning: Spoilers
When my friends and family ask me what deploying to Afghanistan was like, this is the movie I tell them to watch. I have never seen so accurate a depiction of modern soldiers on operations as I have in this movie.

I have completed two tours in Afghanistan with the Canadian army, both times in outside the wire capacities as a member of a Force Protection platoon and as a member of the Kandahar Provincial Reconstruction Team. The interactions and actions of the locals, the "magic line" you cross and can be shot at after, the shuras, the incidents, the injured civvies... This movie had me riveted and I cannot recommend it enough.

Some say "Generation Kill" is the depiction of the modern soldier at war; it's not. It's a taste of it. This documentary and the events, action, reactions and depictions of the soldiers is real. If you want to know about the war and what it's like in Afghanistan, this is you movie.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
loading
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews