redacted Reviews and Ratings


  • kanokaan
    November 7, 2009
    kanokaan
    The most shocking movie i have seen since i born.And i have watched "Requiem for a dream" too.But "Redacted" effected me more.I think rape is the most unhuman act of the mankind.And when Brian De Palma mixes this with tragedy of Iraq and documentary camera,it blows your mind and ...( read more)you are starting to swear to rapists and war and Bush.And story telling isnt with only documentary camera,sometimes De Palma takes you to YouTube's web pages or security cameras.After a moment you are feeling like at is real.So thats why it is the most effective movie i have seen.
  • PattyCsU
    September 30, 2009
    PattyCsU
    A very shocking film critical of the war in Iraq. It depicts soldiers stuck on foreign soil with no real sense of obligation or a clear mission. Eventually they crack and do some very horrendous things to the local Iraqi people.

    DePalma does a nice job but definitely not up to ...( read more)his standard of film making, but this film is done in a unique style. There were a lot of slow moments and the acting overall was poor.
  • Phonex
    September 28, 2009
    Phonex
    A 17 years old girl rape case by American soldiers in Iraq.
  • tristansantos2004
    September 12, 2009
    tristansantos2004
    This movie shows the true tales of war in iraq...its sad how demoralizing US soldiers take advantage of innocent people. The US has gained nothing from the war but enemies....who wants justice.
  • jmlanlo
    September 9, 2009
    jmlanlo
    Un film qu'on a envie d'aimer, mais le jeu des acteurs est théâtral, le travail de De Palma laborieux... et le résultat manque cruellement de réalisme.
  • paulparsons2
    August 4, 2009
    paulparsons2
    De Palma can be a terrific film maker when he wants and he is an undoubted master of the set piece. He knows his stuff and it's really frustrating that he can't maintain consistency in his films.

    This is interesting stuff and the way that the story is told via numerous differ...( read more)ent types of media is unusual but it's not particularly effective. The acting is ok but not particularly memorable. Having said that the closing scene is nicely played and gives the film,a little depth which is good. The montage at the end is also well placed, especially the last photo which really brings the story home.

    Certainly not his best, but an experemental De Palma is better than no De Palma.
  • Micoz15
    July 19, 2009
    Micoz15
    un ritratto fedele (credo) della guerra, senza eroi ma strabordante di vittime, esaminata dal punto di vista dei soldati americani, ma non solo. Originalissimo infatti il modo in cui il signor De Palma ci mostra la guerra dal punto di vista dei cittanini iracheni, delle mogli dei...( read more) soldati e dei terroristi, sfruttando quello che ormai sembra uno dei pochi strumenti su cui l'informazione libera può poggiarsi: internet e i vari siti di forum, o del più popolare YouTube e via dicendo...
    Consigliatissimo, ma da tenere presente che ci si potrebbe imbattere in qualche scena piuttosto cruda, soprattutto se si tiene cont della "chicca" finale.
  • deadmansshoes
    June 19, 2009
    deadmansshoes
    The first casualty of war is the truth, or so the trailers and the posters for Brian De Palma's controversial Iraq War drama, Redacted, claims.

    I would have to say that, after watching the film in question, the first casualty of war is not the truth. It is art. This movie genera...( read more)ted some heat after it screened at several international film festivals, a great deal of controversy and a sizable amount of debate.

    Redacted is a narrative created from several video sources; a soldiers video diary, a French documentary on the war, news footage, security cameras and streaming video from internet blogs, an Al Jazeera-esque website of insurgent activity or web chats. These video sources connect together to depict the events leading up to and following a group of American soldiers breaking into an Iraqi families home, raping a 15 year old girl and then slaughtering the entire household.

    The subject matter is understandably hard hitting. If you have been buried neck-deep in a pit in a jungle for most of your life and never seen a movie about the Vietnam War, particularly the overwrought Casualties of War, also by Brian De Palma which is basically the exact same film only told with a coherent narrative, conventional filming techniques and shares the exact same number of credible performances as Redacted, so that would be none at all.

    The politics behind the movie are going to ignite a fire in people on both sides of this debate for whoever sits through it, and it is the divisive political nature of this film that is one of the major contributing factors behinds almost every positive and negative critique I have seen for this film. It seems that the message now outweighs the means of delivery. That is wrong. A message, for all its good intentions, is irrelevant if the delivery of that message is flawed, and this film is beyond flawed. It is poor. It is bad.

    The acting is embarrassing, nobody in the entire cast acts or reacts naturally, like a real person would under these circumstances. They behave like people who are acting as if they are a real person. You will see better acting in your local theaters am-dram society. Stiff, unnatural acting is unforgivable in a movie that aims to project stone cold, ugly reality on screen. To produce acting of such poor quality instantly discredits the intent of the film.

    The writing across the board is filled with cringe inducing dialogue and with an obvious political agenda flowing through its veins. A political agenda with nothing new to say on either how war affects the men who fight it, or also on how the media reports on the war.

    A movie of this nature will not change anyone's minds, all it will do is reaffirm your beliefs. Beliefs that did not need reaffirming in the first place. It feels irresponsible to tell stories such as this, the movies depicting the atrocities of Vietnam were made after the war had ended, and at this point is there anybody in the world that is not aware of the terrible things that occur during war? Redacted is doing nothing more than the beating of a dead horse filmed on a digital camcorder.

    Go into the movie awaiting to have your hatred of the war and your disgust at the atrocities of that war confirmed and you will find yourself satisfied. Go into the movie believing that the liberal bias of Hollywood is betraying the troops and tarring the men and women who lay down their lives for their country and you will find yourself vindicated and infuriated. Go into the movie avoiding the politically charged nature of the movie, and you will find a bad movie. Poor acting, a terrible script and low rent photography. Cheap shock tactics do not make a good movie, they make a cheap movie too weak to stand on it's own two legs. There are cable TV dramas that look more polished than this, and there are a lot of documentaries out there that also look more polished than this. A movie that is neither shocking, interesting nor profound. A movie that fails to achieve everything it sets out to and squanders an innovative narrative style.

    Redacted was one of the worst films I had seen in 2007 and may well be one of the worst movies I have ever seen. The furious right-wing detractors who decry that Brian De Palma is betraying America with this film are almost half right; Brian De Palma is actually betraying cinema. Then again, should this be a surprise from the man who gave us The Black Dahlia? Where did the real De Palma go? Can he go back to cribbing from Hitchcock and produce something good again? Here's to hoping.
  • bmcguir
    April 15, 2009
    bmcguir
    i can respect the intent but the movie fails to deliver. even at a brisk ninety minutes i have absolutely no desire to sit through it again.
  • lilaleesingsrockofag
    April 15, 2009
    lilaleesingsrockofag
    Brian De Palma has remade Casualties of War in Iraq and it gone trash. Not a bad film really, i liked the french stuff.
  • benjaminguilbert2
    April 13, 2009
    benjaminguilbert2
    During the whole movie you feel that De Palma is dragging the obligation of making THE great film about the conflict in Iraq. The result is poor, annoying and striped of the last remaining ounces of imagination this director once had.

    Just take for instance, the fake documentary...( read more), it is ugly, irrealistic and down right idiotic. Really a shame, so bad, the film actually looks European.
  • jfvirey
    April 5, 2009
    jfvirey
    Many of Brian De Palma's movies tell the same story over and over again: they are centered on a good man's inability to save a woman from an evil man. Take
    Obsession, Blow Out, Body Double, Mission: Impossible or The Black Dahlia. "Redacted" does it again. In fact,
    it looks l...( read more)ike a remake of De Palma's own "Casualties of War". Only the war and the filming technique differ:
    while "Casualties of War" was about a rape committed by American soldiers during the Vietnam War and was shot
    in De Palma's brilliant, operatic style, "Redacted" is about a rape committed by American soldiers during the war in Iraq, and consists in a collage of video documents that have been "redacted", i.e. censored, by
    the U.S. government.

    It must have required a lot of self-discipline on De Palma's part to shoot this mockumentary, but to the trained eye, this patchwork of falsely amateurish films
    evinces the same kind of visual brilliance as his more impressive-looking works. Deprived of the cinematic language he has mastered like no other, De Palma

    focuses on directing his actors and getting from them a performance that does not look like a performance but
    like a real slice of life that perfectly captures the banality of evil.

    The film is full of very strong language and has a few rather violent scenes (like a soldier being blown to bits by a mine, or the rape scene itself) but it did not hit me to the stomach like some of De Palma's
    earlier works. Maybe it is just me getting jaded, or maybe De Palma himself is realising that there is something wrong in inflicting P.T.S.D. on his audience, the way war does to his more likable characters.

    "Redacted" is an interesting film, whose form shows the impact that the recent technology revolution has on the
    cinematic language, just as "Cloverfield" and "Diary of the Dead" did before it.
  • xxxcli213xxx
    December 15, 2008
    xxxcli213xxx
    no thanks not my thing
  • johnegallagher
    November 22, 2008
    johnegallagher
    ok I suppose. The fly on the wall feel (camerawork) was good. Ok storyline.
  • bort16
    November 5, 2008
    bort16
    Redacted is an interesting and well intentioned film, even if it is heavy handed.
    This is a tough and unpleasant film to watch at times. Its style is unique and works quite well at times, while at others bogs the movie down.
    Redacted is shot from different points of view, mostl...( read more)y through the video camera of private Angel Salizar, who was denied entrance into film school so he joined the army. He is obviously one of the central characters, but he's rarely seen on film; he's the one operating his camera and we hear him often speaking from behind it. This is his ticket into film school, a combat veteran with a video diary: who's going to deny him now? He tapes his buddies as they patrol Summata, play cards, and talk. When we're not watching his camera, we're watching either security cams, a documentary by a french crew on the soldiers, a news crew, or what appears to be videos posted on youtube. It creates an interesting appraoch to narrative, and at times creates the sense that you are actually watching a documentary - which i'm sure was DePalma's intention. I'm sure that everyone by now, given the massive controversy surrounding the film, knows what will happen. US soldiers go on a revenge raid after one of their comrades is killed by an IED. Drunk with rage, sexual deprivation, and sadism they storm a house they raided - for no apparant reason then either - days before and found nothing, but arrested the male head of the house anyway. They go back to rape the man's 15 year old daughter, and one of them kills her and her entire family. Salizar is one of the soldiers who goes, rigging his camera up to his helmet so as to be the fly on the wall, documenting what happens. Another soldier goes as well to make sure nothing happens, but is forced at gunpoint to not interfere.
    I dont' think that redacted is a anti-soldier movie at all in reality. Most of the soldiers are disenchanted with the war, just want to go home and wnat nothing to do with the rape and wnat nothing more than to see justice done, but are forced to stay quiet.
    We get to see some scenes where one solier is being persuaded by his father, an army man, to keep quiet, and an attack on his story by military superiors when he attempts to tell them. These scenes, especially the latter, I would have liked to see more of. Afterall the film is supposed to be about the way stories are suppressed and diverted when they are deemed unsavoury to the credibility of the USA. The film gets bogged down in showing us how its being made, when it should be showing us more of the "redaction," if you will.
    The use of non-actors, or inexperienced ones, works to the advantage of the attempts to create a documentary like feel. When people know they are on camera, they get uncomfortable and the way the actors are not able to give movie star performances works to this end. However there are other times, particularly moments of big speeches that it works against it. It doesn't help that these speeches are sometimes over the top and heavy handed.
    There is no actual problems with the message of the movie and it does not villify the troops as a whole. I would even go so far as to say that it is quite even-handed when you consider the facts surrounding reality.
    If you are out of tune with reality, and still adhere to the false reality that the USA can do no wrong, then I'm sure you'll find it offensive.
    There are a couple shocking moments in the film. One includes an IED explosion, the killing of a pregnant Iraqi thanks to a misunderstanding at a checkpoint, and another scene involving a kidnapped soldier. The ending however is probably the most powerful, and grumesome portion of the film.
    The final moments, under the heading "Collateral Damage," show the bloodied, dismembered, and dead bodies of Iraqi men, women and children - the only doctoring done, is the digital covering of their faces. On that note, I will take the same course as the film, and end this review.
  • kilicpinar
    October 26, 2008
    kilicpinar
    I don't believe s.o can make a good movie about an absurd war.
  • iamthethinman
    October 12, 2008
    iamthethinman
    I remember the time when De Palma was a groundbreaking, trendsetting director. I hope this was just his excuse to take Mark Cuban's money and make an experimental message film. This movie had no pulse and no one to really relate to. Not even the protagonists or evil ones. I reall...( read more)y only liked the single take shots being first person from him.
  • wihyena
    September 29, 2008
    wihyena
    I already know that most of the public's knowledge is based almost solely upon what they see on the television. The American media rarely shows the whole truth of what's really going on in the world. You're better off watching the BBC.
  • gor41
    September 20, 2008
    gor41
    Flashy production and faux multiple media sources don't make this feel authentic and the points about Iraq have been better made elsewhere (Battle for Haditha).
  • scottydgibbs
    September 17, 2008
    scottydgibbs
    inspiired by events in irak, life for u.s marines and a incident where a 15 year old girl was raped and murdered, by marines, and why events got to be that way, it doesent show marines in a good light, and is a interesting watch, a nice return for bryan de palma, whos been strugg...( read more)ling lately, but if you want to see this, check out a better example, battle for terabitha, a similier type of film.
  • roijacobson
    September 12, 2008
    roijacobson
    Probably THE worst movie i've seen in recent years. badly directed and horribly performed, it is disgracing its immensely important topic
  • jmanard52
    August 24, 2008
    jmanard52
    This just didnt flow very good and i just didnt like the movie. And hell i hate the war too but it felt forced and cliched.
  • rebvodka042099
    July 23, 2008
    rebvodka042099
    What a futile effort to portray the truth by such a great director...
  • GlenTheRinger
    July 6, 2008
    GlenTheRinger
    Honestly, I would have to say that I expected more from a DePalma film. It's not that this isn't a powerful war film, because it is. The main thing lacking here, as in many Hollywood films is that there isn't really enough originality in it to validate the film. This is a decent ...( read more)anti-war film, and there is at least one moment that I felt was decently educational. However this anti war film is certainly no Dr.Strangelove or Paths Of Glory, it's not even remotely in their league. Hell, it doesn't even seem like the same sport. It is a worthy watch, but don't expect much for surprises because we've pretty much seen this movie all before, arg!
  • jes25924
    June 27, 2008
    jes25924
    Redaction in literature means "edit" or editing together several sources into one. The military use a lot of "objective" words like this, as war euphemisms. Rendition can mean for instance "kidnap and torture", and I'm sure were all familiar with "fri...(read more)...(read more)e...( read more)ndly fire". All of the material in this film looks as if it was found on the internet, because supposedly De Palma found out about this story through the internet; blogs, youtube postings, Arab, and American sites.

    The story if you haven't heard yet is about 4 American soldiers who rape a 15 year old girl, execute her family, and set her house on fire(based on true events). It's also the second film De Palma has made about US. soldiers in a foreign occupied country raping and killing a young girl and one deciding not to participate in his Vietnam film "Casualities Of War" . In Redacted 3 out of 4 soldiers remain to see what happens, one of them with a camera, observes, and eventually flees. Implicit however by his passive observation(like our gentle viewers back home).

    I don't think the redundancy of watching the same true life event play out again and again in your own lifetime is lost on De Palma, the difference is that now anyone can view what's happening.

    From the computer where I sit, I can watch videos of bombs being planted for US soldiers, be-headings, Arab TV cameras interrogating grieving families and dying citizens. If I really wanted to I could bring up a gallery of atrocities, but we don't because what would be the point, what are "we" gonna get out of it? I don't think De Palma is attempting to demonize the US military, but emphasize that as history shows, men with guns under tremendous stress can and will do horrible things, and if they are going to be put into this kind of wild situation...well, why? There are no diatribes about leaving Iraq, or reasons why the war is important, from a soldiers point of view these are irrelevant anyway, you follow orders as best you possibly can and that's that. But before the end of the film, the question of "why" it does manage to rear it's head.

    The performances which everyone keeps commenting on as being so bad, we'll I think Roger Ebert made the best case for them, "The acting is curious. Some of it is convincing, and some of the rest is convincing in a different way: It convinces us that non-actors know they are being filmed and are acting and speaking slightly differently than they otherwise would. That makes some try to appear nicer, and other try to appear tougher or more menacing. That edge of inauthentic performance paradoxically increases the effect: Moments seem more real because they are not acted flawlessly." Anyone whose ever been under camera understands this anxiety and artifice.

    That being said this is not an enjoyable film, I can appreciate it, but I did not enjoy it. We often go into war films, as this one points out, expecting action, justice, catharsis, excitement, and what Redacted gives us is tension, suffering, revenge, and confusion shot through prism both global and immediate. There is no "beauty" in this film, because there's nothing beautiful about this particular situation, nothing redeeming, because we so want redemption, we want to be told everything will be alright, worth it, just, and it may not be. This is not a film about why the war is bad, it just shows us one case of "horror" that has happened before and will happen again, and asks if this thing is going to happen, "why?". Two questions that American media has stopped asking itself, since exit and entrance strategy are no longer options relevant to debate.

    It's heavy handed, and unabashed, we may be it's biggest weakness, but then again real people in real situations react and talk about things in direct ways, stories can be subtle, real life does not have to be, it can be messy, and obnoxious, and yes unpleasant, but it's still real.

    Not a fun night at the movies, but a complex, and thought/argument provoking, emotionally draining film(the repetitive music as the soldiers stand at the checkpoint suggests at once immense heat, tension, and boredom, all ready to boil over at the same time).

    Most war films are records, or hero/action myths wearing war clothes, some yes manage to be beautiful, profound, even endearing. Redacted is none of those things, it is an accusation, a question, it's the elephant in the room that everyone ignores being shot from multiple angels at multiple lenses. Not perfect, but impressive, and challenging in a time where a lot of questions aren't being asked anymore, and certainly not in ways that can be made emotionally compelling to the average person. I rented this cus I wanted a movie that would fight with me, rather than coddle me to sleep, and this did just that.
  • pooyk
    June 27, 2008
    pooyk
    Love it, hate it, but be sure to watch it, because this odd and disturbing picture is as different as the war it reflects, and that difference is vast enough to seem profound.
    De Palma is extreme, visceral, usually in bad taste but almost always riveting. De Palma's Redacted, a n...( read more)o-budget fake documentary that imagines the circumstances behind a real rape and murder of a civilian girl committed by US troops in Iraq, is a piece of anti-war propaganda whose aims I don't agree with, but it jolted me nonetheless.
  • rndenisee
    June 27, 2008
    rndenisee
    was okay...kinda boring..mostly dialogue between soldiers in Iraq
  • xtremeandy
    May 20, 2008
    xtremeandy
    different way of looking at it and it feels very real... looked at the interviews and found them very sentimental and inspiring!! thanks for letting see it another way!!!
    A fictional story inspired by true events, "Redacted" will force viewers to reconsider the filters through w...( read more)hich we see and accept events in our world, the power of the mediated image and how presenta...( read more )tion and composition influence our ideas and beliefs. A profound meditation on the way information is packaged, distributed and received in an era with infinite channels of communication, "Redacted" utilizes a variety of created source material--video diaries, produced documentary, surveillance footage, online testimonials, news pieces--to comment on the extreme disconnect between the surface of an image and the reality of ideas and the truth, especially in times of strife. Centered around a small group of American soldiers stationed at a checkpoint in Iraq, "Redacted" alternates points of view, balancing the experiences of these young men under duress and members of the media with those of the local Iraqi people, illuminating how each have been deeply affected by the current conflict and their encounters with each other.
  • alimovie2002
    May 16, 2008
    alimovie2002
    A Burtal Movie About A Horrible Truth That Happens In Wars ... But This Movie Which Balances between An Actual Movie And A Documentery ...IS Touching It's A Good Political War Movie ... Doesnt Annoy U .. Doesnt Look Fake ... It Should Be Seen ... Cause sometimes We Just Ignore A ...( read more)Lot Of Truths ...
  • fuzzbuzz25
    April 14, 2008
    fuzzbuzz25
    This was a really hard movie to watch but having said that it was a brilliant movie. Dealt with a difficult subject well.
  • shwanzi
    April 13, 2008
    shwanzi
    Another film I couldn't stand that I ended up stopping about halfway through. Supposedly based on a true story of a bunch of US soldiers in Iraq who snap and rape and kill a young girl. Sounds like it could make for a very dramatic film. Well, it doesn't... not when it's been ...( read more)handled like a high school stage play complete with horrid acting and a gimmicky Blair Witch twist with the main characters filming each other with handicams. First off... no soldier would be allowed to bring a camera with them on duty to film his fellow officers while on post. Secondly (and this is because I know my cameras) the POS handicam used by the soldier to film would produce footage that looks like ass... not full HD (you can actually see the shadow of the REAL camera used to film a few times). It's so bad that it's painful to watch, and it baffles me how someone with such a great track record as Brian de Palma of all people could make a film that's so bad on so many levels. Ugh, color me one disappointed fan.
  • sabrina2011
    April 7, 2008
    sabrina2011
    an unthinkable plot. ^_^
  • simonryder93
    April 6, 2008
    simonryder93
    horrible.
    nothing compared to cloverfield or blair witch.
    the camera sucked.
    everything sucked.
  • SonnyLighstrome
    March 28, 2008
    SonnyLighstrome
    An interesting experiment of a film that tries to tell the story of the Iraq war through various media means. It works sometimes, and sometimes comes off as staged. Still....bonus points for trying, as this is probably DePalma's best film since CARLITO'S WAY, IMO.
  • fede5
    March 24, 2008
    fede5
    Sickening-people-get-what-they-deserve-circle-of-death-and-hate-critic.
  • freakyfriend2001
    March 24, 2008
    freakyfriend2001
    "There has been a bunch of Iraq-war related 'Hollywood' style films over the past few months that focused more conversations in other countries rather than showcasing what's going on in Iraq itself. Writer/director Brian De Palma has jumped right into the thick of what's going...( read more) on in the war in Iraq, documenting it in a fairly original kind of way. But rather than the film being innovative, thought provoking and well made it is in fact in bad taste, exploitative, seemingly sloppily put together and just generally a pretty bad film."








    Full Review Here
  • KarlyStarthart
    March 19, 2008
    KarlyStarthart
    Acting was so-so. It was hard to tell if it was a documentary or movie at first. I wouldn't go out of my way to see it again..It is very unusual..But the camera work was neat.
  • Quicksilver08
    March 19, 2008
    Quicksilver08
    damn! wghen will interesting films appear!?!
  • hottietiffy
    March 18, 2008
    hottietiffy
    umm..iuno bout this one .lol
  • seblepage86
    March 18, 2008
    seblepage86
    I don't know, the synopsis is vague
  • nic148
    March 18, 2008
    nic148
    Stong comment, strange filming styles, bad acting. Pseudo-docu.
  • MangoChutChut
    March 17, 2008
    MangoChutChut
    Jim: Dwight tried to kiss me.
    Michael: What?!
    Jim: And I didn't tell anyone because I'm not really sure how I feel about it.
    Dwight: That is not true. Redact it. Redact it!
    Jim: Well, I'm not actually making a formal complaint. I just really think we should talk about it.
  • trustharoon
    March 16, 2008
    trustharoon
    Brian de Palma's Redacted ups the ante of protest films, fictionally recounting the rape and murder of a 14-year old Iraqi girl by U.S. soldiers in 2006. Using hand-held camera surveillance footage, Internet videos, excerpts from a French documentary and an Arab TV channel, Islam...( read more)ic fundamentalist websites, and the fictional camcorder diary of a young U.S. private, Redacted lets us know not only about the atrocities of war but about the unreliability of the way in which information is presented in the media and how we cannot trust what we see, even in his film.

    Modeled after de Palma's earlier Casualties of War, Redacted searches for a truth in fiction that is deeper than reality-based documentary. Angel Salazar (Izzy Diaz) carries a video camera around shooting whatever he sees hoping to make a documentary that will be his ticket to film school. We are first introduced to his unit: Gabe Blix (Kel O'Neil), Lawyer McCoy (Rob Devaney), Sergeant Jim Sweet (Ty Jones) and good ol' boys, Reno Flake (Patrick Carroll) and B.B. Rush (Daniel Stewart Sherman). The videos make it apparent that our soldiers have lost their sense of purpose and are no longer on solid emotional ground.

    The hand held video camera is then replaced by a French documentary about the soldier's routine at checkpoints in Samarra. Suddenly, a speeding car is approaching. Interpreting the signals by U.S. personnel to slow down as meaning they are being waved on through, the car is gunned down, killing a pregnant woman and her unborn child as the driver After a member of Salazar's unit is killed by a bomb, the two men who fired on the speeding car, Rush and Flake, invade the home of an Iraqi family in retribution and to enjoy the "spoils of war". In the middle of the night, they rape and murder a fourteen-year old girl, kill her family, and set the house on fire.

    The sensitive Blix does not want to be involved with the mission, and McCoy goes along to try and prevent more harm but fails to stop the violence. Flake and Rush tell the rest of the company that any word of this incident will result in their death. The incident is seen only with a flickering light and the actual assault takes place off camera, but the scene nonetheless elicits a feeling of disgust. As if to try and show that the horrors of war are not limited to one side, de Palma shows the abduction and beheading of a U.S. soldier in very graphic terms. In the final gut wrenching sequence, a montage labeled "Collateral Damage" brings truth and fiction together as we see actual footage of Iraqi war victims mixed with staged deaths and faces that are redacted with black pens.

    While Redacted is flawed by inconsistent acting and overly didactic add-ons, its impact is extremely powerful. De Palma indicts both the stupidity of the U.S. government for initiating the war, the complicity of the media in presenting us with a sanitized version of it, and a culture in which such atrocities are permitted to occur. Like the films of French director Bruno Dumont that show how meaningless violence generates more meaningless violence, the visceral impact of Redacted will stay with you for a long time. Slapping us in the face to show us how we have lost touch with the reality of war, the film is full of elemental passion, untidy, disjointed, and at times over-the-top, but in Dumont's words, it returns us "to the body, to the heart, to truth".
  • celia7492
    March 16, 2008
    celia7492
    Interesting...never heard of this before now, but peaking my curiousity.
  • Aimay
    March 15, 2008
    Aimay
    Sounds like crap.

    Like the cover though.

Summary

redacted Summary