Redacted (2007)

 

            “Redacted” was directed and written by Brian De Palma. It’s a companion of his “Casualties of War”. This time the war crime occurs in Iraq. He based his screenplay on the Mahmudiyah killings in Mahmudiyah, Iraq. The movie cost only $5 million to make and it flopped, making only $782,000.

            PFC Salazar (Izzy  Diaz) enlists in the Army with the goal of eventually going to film school. He plans on making a documentary that he hopes will get him into the school. He carries a videocamera when he goes on patrols and other duties. One day when on duty at a checkpoint, Salazar is filming when an Iraqi car comes speeding up to the check point. PFC Flake opens fire, killing the pregnant woman who was being rushed to the hospital by her brother. Flake did not fire any warning shots, but the killing is declared justified by the rules of engagement. Flake shows no remorse, even when interviewed by Salazar for his film. Later, a popular sergeant is killed by an IED which puts the platoon on edge and looking for payback. Flake and another soldier make plans to visit a house where they noticed an attractive teenage girl. Salazar goes along to film even though it is apparent a war crime is likely.

            De Palma’s “Casulties of War” is a good movie with a similar plot about an actual war crime in Vietnam. This movie is nowhere near as good. It lays it on much thicker than the earlier film. De Palma has lost his game. The screenplay is ham-handed and shrill. The acting is amateurish by an unrecognized cast. It is supposed to be all footage from Salazar or a French documentary crew, but clearly some of it is not. So much for the gimmick. The raid is hard to swallow. Salazar comes along to film and Flake allows him to!

            Clearly, De Palma was trying to shine a light on American mistreatment of Iraqi civilians. God knows there was some, so the story is not clearly fictional. However, the execution dilutes the message with overt anti-Americanism. It doesn’t help credibility that the movie ends without a conclusion. It is not a surpise the film made no mark at the box office.

 

HISTORICAL ACCURACY:  The actual incident was worse than the film depicted. Flake was based on PFC Steven Green who was just flatout evil. He and four others raped the girl and killed her family. The story was passed on secondhand by a soldier who heard it from a soldier that Green told the story to. In a scene reminiscent of “Casualties of War”, the soldier was reamed by his commanding officer for ratting out other soldiers. He was told to drop it, but didn’t. The five were eventually arrested and all got long prison terms. Green committed suicide in prison.

            De Palma was criticized for depicting American soldiers in a poor light and conservatives encouraged Americans to boycott the film. The movie certainly is not pro-American, but it does not exaggerate what bad soldiers did in Iraq. And it is based on an actual incident. De Palma did not make up the incident. He used it to shine a light on American actions. Were Green and the other four typical? Of course not. But neither were the soldiers in “Casualties of War”. The big mistake De Palma made was not mentioning that justice was served in this case. Unlike in “Casualties”. And he may have had blood on his hands because of that. Because one result was a gunman killed two American soldiers in Frankfurt in 2011. He claimed he was getting revenge for a YouTube video he saw of American soldiers raping a teenage Iraqi. The video was a clip from the movie.

 

GRADE =  C

Sisu: Road to Revenge (2025)

 

                 Three years ago, I went to see a Finnish movie called “Sisu” in a local theater. I was surprised a foreign film like it was playing near me. This time I was surprised that a Finnish movie was playing at the same theater and doubly surprised that the original had a sequel. It turns out “Sisu” did unexpectedly well at the box office (if you can call $14 million as good box office with today’s inflation), so a sequel was in order. Encouraging the sequel was the positive critical response to the original. In fact, the response was astounding. The film ended up with a 94% on Rotten Tomatoes. To give you an idea how insane that is, here are some of the war movies that did not reach that level: Lawrence of Arabia (93), Spartacus (93), Last of the Mohicans (88), Zero Dark Thirty (91), Letters from Iwo Jima (91), Full Metal Jacket (90), Downfall (90), and Patton (92). If that is not mindboggling enough, I have read articles claiming it is one of the best war movies of the 21^st Century!  I have to assume whoever wrote those articles has seen very few war movies. I rewatched it last night to confirm my opinion that it was not anything special. I gave it a C-. It’s fairly entertaining in a mindless way. I did not have high hopes for the sequel.

                 “Sisu: Road to Revenge” is directed by Jalmari Helander again. Both movies were influenced by Indiana Jones, James Bond, and Buster Keaton movies. However, the most obvious link is to Rambo. Jorma Korpi plays Aatami Korpi who is a veteran of Finland’s Winter War with the Soviet Union. In the first film, he is a gold miner living a simple life after the Nazis murdered his family and after he avenged them. This movie occurs two years later, in 1946. Korpi’s home is now in Soviet territory, so he decides to rebuild in Finland. To do this he takes down the house and carts off all the lumber in a truck. The war is over, so this should not be a problem, right? Right? In order to get his sequel (instead of the wiser decision to do a prequel), Helander comes up with the idea of the Soviets wanting Korpi dead. They decide the best way to kill this unarmed old man is to release a Nazi war criminal from prison to finish the job he started when he killed Korpi’s family. Draganov (Stephen Lang adding some juice to the sequel’s cast) is sent after less than a minute of set-up. Hey audience, just roll with it. In fact, that is good advice for everything coming up.

                 The sequel follows the same template as the original. It is divided into chapters that give you an idea of what kind of mayhem is coming up. The set pieces include a motorcycle chase reminding of Mad Max, strafing fighter planes, a tank (this time driven by Korpi), and a train. In the first film, Korpi is being chased for his gold, in this one he is trying to get his lumber to its new site. Of course, it’s just an excuse to see Korpi kill bad guys in a variety of gruesome ways. And survive a variety of deaths. I made a note every time Korpi should have died. I counted 11. There were eleven times that either Korpi should have died or the bad guys should have easily killed him. This is the kind of movie where an opponent passes up the chance to simply shoot this killing machine in the back in favor of tackling him. Or Korpi escapes certain death through some amazing forethought. Don’t bring logic to this movie, if you want to enjoy it. If you liked the first one, you can expect this one to top it in ridiculousness. And graphic violence. And torture. And body count. And Korpi’s ability to hold his breath under water.

                 I predict film schools in the future will debate whether the Sisu movies are comedies. As part of a larger discussion of whether combat porn films are supposed to make you laugh. I can’t speak for Helander. He might be offended by the suggestion. However, there is a scene where Korpi walks barefooted on broken glass, then rolls on it with his bare, flogged back, and then gets his hand caught in a mouse trap. Hilarious! And Draganov suffers a death that Bart and Lisa Simpson would laugh at.

                 Is it better than the first one? It does have a 95%  on Rotten Tomatoes, so whether you think that is incredibly overrated, it is considered to be equal to the first in the minds of critics. If you want more brain rot, this one tops the first. They have equal amount of dog. The hero is even tougher to kill and even more creative in his killing. However, if you care about plotting (I know, just humor me here), chasing a man and risking grisly death for gold is more compelling than watching a guy try to get lumber across a border. The first had more and better villains. If you are into dialogue, Korpi had one line of dialogue in “Sisu” and zero in this one. Speaking of zero, there are zero women in this one. I think most would agree that the female subplot in the first movie was a nice touch. So much for giving machine guns to chicks who have more reason for revenge.

                 Should you go see it? Yes, if you liked the first one. Or if you think the critics are good judges of war movies. No, if you are more interested in movies that make sense.

GRADE  =  C

TWO WOMEN (1960)

               ”Two Women” was co-written and directed by Vittorio de Sica (“Bicycle Thieves”). It was based on the novel The Woman from Ciociaria. It was originally to star Anna Magnani with Sophia Loren playing her daughter. Magnani did not want to play mother to Loren and backed out. Loren was recast as the mother although she was only 25 years old at the time. This means she would have been 13 when she gave birth. Her performance was lauded and she became the first actress or actor to win an Oscar for a foreign language film. Jean-Paul Belmondo was cast because French investors insisted on a French actor playing a prominent role. His voice was dubbed for the Italian release. The film was a big hit.  

               The film starts in Rome in 1944. The Allies are nearing the capital. It is coming under increased air bombardment. Cesira (Sophia Loren) is a war widow who runs a shop. She decides to leave with her 12-year-old daughter Rosetta (Eleonora Brown). The walk to Cesira’s hometown of Ciociaria which is in the mountains. Along the way they are strafed by a plane, but the town is a calm in the storm. She meets the local intellectual. Michel (Belmondo) falls in love with Cesira. He is a pacifist, but will be dragged into participation with tragic results. The war finally comes to the idyllic town and the two women decide to return to Rome, which has been liberated by the Allies. That rape scene that the movie has been forewarning about will occur on this journey.

               “Two Women” is a dominated by Loren. She is outstanding in what may be her best performance. She won 22 international awards, including the best performance award at Cannes and the Best Actress award at the Academy Awards (an event she did not attend because she feared she would faint when her name was called). Belmondo and Brown are fine. The film is best enjoyed as an acting showcase. It is very much a woman-oriented war movie. Cesira represents all the women impacted by war atrocities. In particular, Italian women who were commonly subjected to rape by both sides. You also get a taste of civilian life in war-torn Italy. In this respect it is a companion to “Rome, Open City” and gives the rural perspective.

               The movie is appropriately titled because it is the story of the relationship between two women and how they are impacted by war. Cesira and Rosetta are very close, so you dread what is coming for them. It is clear that something is going to happen to them because the movie is strongly anti-war. You just don’t know when the trauma is coming or how it will occur. In fact, aside from two strafings, the two manage to avoid the war until deep into the film. When it happens, the movie takes a jarring turn. The two women react differently to the trauma. One theme of the film is the loss of innocence as portrayed by the Rosetta character.

               Although not a true story, the movie is based on the Maroccinate. This term applies to a series of mass rapes by Moroccan Goumiers. They were French colonial troops who developed a reputation for horrible atrocities against Italian civilians, women and men. The most infamous incidents occurred after the Battle of Monte Cassino. In the aftermath of the battle, the Goumiers took the harshness of the battle out on villages in the vicinity. The movie comes nowhere near the incredible debauchery committed by these undisciplined soldiers. While possibly exaggerated, the atrocities undoubtedly occurred. The movie gives no context to its rapes. It appears to be a wrong place at the wrong time situation. I theorize that the French investors were not keen on financing a movie that emphasized atrocities by French troops. But black French colonial troops…

GRADE  =  B-

THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION (2025)

                 The eagerly awaited documentary series “The American Revolution” premiered tonight. It has been long in the making. Directed by Ken Burns and Sarah Botstein, it covers the American Revolution starting with the British actions that led to the rebellion. The shooting lasted 165 days and took place in 150 locations. 100 new maps were created. The largest replica of a redoubt in America was built. The series is narrated by Peter Coyote and has an all-star roster of voices including Tom Hanks, Meryl Streep, Jeff Daniels, and Ethan Hawke.

                 The first episode is entitled “In Order to Be Free”. It starts off shaky by trying to link the Iroquois confederation with the Revolution. Ben Franklin did use it as a template for his urging the creation of a union. While true, it’s a stretch to link the Iroquois to the American republic. It comes off as an attempt to force Native Americans into the series. And yet, when it covers the French and Indian War nothing is said about most of the Indians siding with the French. However, it does focus on the anger of colonists when the British government prohibited settlement west of the Appalachians. This was one log on the fire that will become the revolution. Having taught the Revolution, I would not put relations with the Indians high on a list of causes of the Revolution. The series takes a similar approach to slavery in the colonies. This of course is used to up the irony that the colonists were fighting for liberty and yet they allowed slavery. That is certainly inexcusable, but I do not view it as a cause of the Revolution. This information would have been better placed in the discussion of the Declaration of Independence, specifically its reference to “all men are created equal.”

Early in the series we are introduced to George Washington. He will obviously be a central figure in the series. It will be interesting to see how many negative aspects of his personality and actions will be covered in the series. Most Americans will learn for the first time that Washington started the war and later came close to being killed with Braddock’s force in the wilderness of Pennsylvania. Washington’s bitterness about not being offered a commission in the British army is used to foreshadow his participation in the rebellion. Washington will be one amongst many key figures that are quoted in the series. Burns has managed to find some common people who left primary source material. I think we will see these individuals pop up occasionally to give a different perspective. I predict Joseph Plumb Martin will be a frequent source for what Continental soldiers went through.

The first episode covers from 1754 to 1775. It is outstandingly educational and covers all the greatest hits like the Stamp Act, Boston Massacre, and Boston Tea Party. It concludes with Lexington and Concord. This segment is excellent as it blends Burns’ famous location shots with reenactors. But the real strength of the series is the paintings that play the role photography played in the Civil War series. The paintings include portraits of all the historical figures. I did not realize that you can find numerous paintings for a power point on the Revolution. Another strength are the maps. The effort put into them is clear. The maps are animated with arrows showing movement. They are great.

The series will not disappoint. (Unless you are British.) So far it has not been overly patriotic. In fact, it has emphasized some negative aspects of the Revolution. It is not interested in making the British the villains. So far, I have not noticed any link to our current political situation. The series does not make a great case for the rebellion. Taxation without representations get a shout out, but the episode does not debate the causes. Perhaps this will come in the Declaration of Independence segment. Based on the coverage of Lexington and Concord, I look forward to the other battles.

GRADE = A