Brian De Palma's Redacted is the strongest film of the year. It's also one of the 'war' films that have made it to the big screen in 2007. Some have been good, some have been bad. None have found an audience which led to a lot of jaw boning and little facts.
The only with any facts at his finger tips was conservative Kevin Hassett (see his "Iraq Movie 'Curse' Is a Myth Worthy of Hollywood" Bloomberg News, from November) who pointed out that films about the Iraq War aren't doing any worse at the box office than other films, that films dealing with that subject matter are "more likely to have an 'R' rating or to be unrated" (which cuts into the potential audience pool) and debunks a variety of myths.
One area he doesn't cover is promotion. We're going to zoom in on In the Valley of Elah, which is a film worth seeing. What's it about? Ads told you a soldier was missing. Ads told you Tommy Lee Jones was in it. Hillary Swank co-starred and it's a mystery! Ads told you Susan Sarandon was in it. The ad campaign was lousy.
At the heart, it's Hardcore with Jones in the George C. Scott role. Posters should have featured no one but Jones. It should have been a black and white photo of a haunted Jones. Others, including Swank and Sarandon, are important to the film. But it was marketed as an ensemble mystery when it's the story of one father. Jones' performance is strong enough that the film could have been marketed on that alone and, since the film doesn't have a strong message about the war, it should have been. Audiences could have identified with a father searching for his child -- male and female movie goers. Instead it was offered up as though it were The General's Daughter or some other alleged page turner brought to film.
Coming Home, the earliest film about Vietnam to be a major success (Two People is among the previous films that didn't find a large audience), addressed what went on at home including the spying, the betrayal of veterans by the government and a great deal more. Originally conceived by Nancy Dowd as a story revolving around the friendship of two women, it could have found success that way. It was retooled in a love story between Jane Fonda and Jon Voight's characters. And that's how it was sold. It wasn't sold through shots of Fonda, Voight, Dern, Milford, Carradine, et al. It wasn't a poster featuring every face that appeared in the film. It was a non-traditional love story (and the coupling on the poster, featuring Voight in a wheel chair) made it clear.
The marketing for the Iraq War films has been dishonest, cowardly and an attempt to be everything without ever telling the audiences what it was they should be paying money to see. That and not "topic" (there have been a number of topics and backdrops in the films) nor "message" (many had no message) is what's hurt them at the box office.
Which brings us to Brian De Palma's brilliant Redacted. We'd tell you to rush to see it onscreen, but the truth is you probably can't. From the beginning, the money men have actively undercut the film. They refused to open it wide, they refused to keep announced openings. Mark Cuban, the libertarian, not liberal, is among those to blame. The film was supposed to open in December in Dallas. The owner of the Dallas Mavericks, apparently scared off by Bill O'Lielly's blustering pulled that opening. From the beginning, the money men have shown cowardice.
Apparently that's in response to the courage De Palma shows on screen. Barring major nominations, this is a film you won't discover until DVD. When it does come out on DVD, you need to see it. Barring major nominations? The film should be a shoe in for Best Director and Best Film. But Cuban and the Cowards have so distanced themselves from the film that their own cowardice is undercutting the film's chances at nominations.
At this point, it doesn't matter. The film will have a DVD life, will be remembered as a classic and one of the few to take a point-of-view and tell a story in 2007 when the bulk of film makers hid out or try to sneak into a one scene message.
What's the film about?
Fred Kaplan fell of his pony and couldn't tell you.
It's based on real events. Captain Alex Pickands speaking (for the US military) in an August Article 32 hearing declared, "Murder, not war. Rape, not war. That's what we're here talking about today. Not all that business about cold food, checkpoints, personnel assignments. Cold food didn't kill that family. Personnel assignments didn't rape and murder that 14-year-old little girl."
Abeer, the 14-year-old Iraq girl who US soldiers, stationed to protect the neighborhood, lusted after and plotted a conspiracy to rape and murder. It is the worst known War Crime of the Iraq War and it's, honestly, not all that well known in the US because the bulk of media Big and Small refused to tell her story. She noticed the leers, she recoiled from the touching of her face, she told her parents what was happening and they made plans for her to go live with another family in order to protect her. The day before that took place, US soldiers put their plans in operation. They had a lookout, they cut through her fence, entered her home, took her parents and five-year-old sister to the main bedroom and shot them dead while Paul Cortez and James Barker gang-raped Abeer in the living room. Steven D. Green, who claims he is innocent, is fingered as the man who killed the parents and sister. Rejoining Cortez and Barker, he then took part in the gang-rape and shot Abeer. (Again, Green denies the testimony of other soldiers and maintains he is innocent.) Having killed her, her body was then set on fire in order to destroy evidence and the crimes were pinned on 'terrorists' until, months later, reality began to emerge.
Steven D. Green is the only one who has not been tried. He is scheduled to be tried in April, at a civilian court in Kentucky because he was discharged from the military before the truth came out.
De Palma's film explores those realities and the realities that make War Crimes seem 'normal' and 'thinkable' in an illegal war. It's the most involving of the Iraq War films and the most involving film of the year. More than likely, you won't be able to see on the big screen anytime soon. But when Redacted comes to DVD, rent it, buy it, wonder why you didn't hear about it?
True, the money men actively worked to destroy the film. And it's true that some losers like Fred Kaplan rushed to scream, "Don't see it!"
But they weren't the only ones. The first film about the Iraq War and where was The Nation? Had they tired themselves after wrongly going to town on Laura Dern in those shameless scribbles from a really bad critic who got an award for longevity as opposed to insight or talent? [Alexander Cockburn wrote about Abeer in 2007. The link goes to CounterPunch which we associate him with, not The Nation.] Where, for that matter, was Democracy Now! which, for those who forget turned over an entire program to announcing the release of the film Catch A Fire which dealt with South Africa under apartheid, did so in 2006. One might assume the Iraq War matters at least as much as a film that ends in 1991. But independent media's never been interested in telling the story of Abeer.
They couldn't deal with it when the news was breaking. Probably due to cowardice ("What if we call out War Crimes and it explodes in our face! We can't hide behind John Murtha on this one!") but also due to the fact that they couldn't shut up about the elections in Mexico and, when that story never took off (note, it still hasn't despite all the non-stop hype), they moved on to Lebanon. They didn't cover the Article 32 hearing in August. They didn't cover court room confessions. They still haven't covered the War Crimes. In the summer of 2006, the War Crimes emerged. It's now the end of 2007 and independent media still can't tell you about it -- even after all US soldiers have been convicted except Steven D. Green. Even after confessions. They still can't tell you. At this point, it's not that they can't tell you, it's that they won't tell you.
And where were our beloved peace 'leaders'? Let's not forget them. A large number who set themselves up as such were happy to whore themselves out for Charlie Ferguson's War -- the non-documentary that re-sells the illegal war ("Not enough planning for after the invasion!"). Ferguson supported the illegal war before it started, while he was making his first 'film' and while promoting it. He didn't hide any of that. But who didn't rush to promote that piece of filth? Who didn't share the stage with him?
When you do see the De Palma film, and are amazed by it, remember that when it could have used promotion, it didn't get it. One of the few to weigh in when it actually mattered was Nezua (The Unapologetic Mexican). For audio of his review, check out the November 21st archived broadcast of his review on KPFK's Uprising (and it will be available at the program's website after it's no longer available at the station which doesn't keep archives online forever). It is the best film of 2007.
