aryan-40242 This film angered me so much, I've written a review on it even given the age of it now.It appears after reading other reviews that are clearly written by people with hatred for the British Army or by people who have no idea what war is like, or even what life in the army is like. With people honestly saying that this is an accurate portrayal of what happens in war and that it paints an honest picture of what went on in Iraq. That's either seriously misguided or biased thinking or just downright slanderous lies.As somebody who has served in Iraq and Afghanistan, this film does nothing but insult me and every young man and woman who has served and those who are still serving. It paints the army to be a bunch of young, sadistic, idiotic thugs, it couldn't be any more wrong if it tried. Utterly disgusting and s***s all over the efforts in Iraq of both the living and the deceased . The director should be ashamed of himself for this steaming turd.

Charlie This isn't a war film per se, but rather a film about the conflict between loyalty and morality. The question is where do you draw the line between loyalty to the regiment and the morality of your actions? This film is powerful stuff but I can't help but feel that this film is somehow unrepresentative of the British Army in Iraq. I have to say that it has left a rather foul taste in my mouth, but this may well be down to my refusal to think about the examples of brutality in custody that have taken place rather than the film's depiction of those crimes. So in regards to the effectiveness of the film at portraying its subject the film is most effective. The acting is strong throughout as is the cinematography and the sparse soundtrack. I won't watch it again as I have nothing further to gain from it. I think, in retrospect that it is still too recent an event to gain any further wisdom from. Although it is not 'based on true events' there have been instances of abuse that have culminated in criminal cases. But would we gain anything from watching a feature film about the abuses at Abu Grahib only three years after the events?

bob the moo Once the mission was "accomplished" in Iraq and the end of major combat operations was announced, parts of the country were handed over to the armed forces for the purposes of enforcing the peace and winning over the hearts and minds of the newly free Iraqi people. A group of British soldiers are stationed in Basra to this end under a steady commander. However when a patrol is ambushed and their commander is lost, the decision is made to enforce justice fast and hard to send a clear message out.This was originally down to be screened in the week that the British sailors were being held after being captured supposedly in Iranian waters. Channel 4 folded under pressure and pulled the screening because it was said it may "inflame" the situation and make it harder for the UK to find a democratic solution. I'm not sure if this was true (as it turned out they were actually released on the day this was postponed) because it was only ever going to be watched by a million or two if that, plus the story was already contrasting obviously with footage of how the US and UK treated prisoners (which I assume was why Iran made such a big show of how they hold our prisoners).Anyway, although it is stated up front that this is a work of fiction, it is clear that it has been very well researched because it does strike home as very convincing. This is most evident in the first half as the squaddies patrol the Basra streets, innocence is lost, violence is sudden and the soldiers react in different ways. This much is very well done and the script rings true. The main scene of action is really well delivered and it is well used as it folds into the changes in the characters and what they end up doing. This is rather lost near the end where I wasn't sold on it. Suddenly the script becomes clunky with characters speaking in "moral arguments" and speeches rather than sounding like real people. This also coincides with the narrative becoming weaker as well.To me this occurred where we went too much into the court case and had too much said that didn't need to be said. It would have been better to have had a much more subtle touch but it doesn't manage it. It is a shame and not even the performances of the lead two can totally convince in these later stages. This is saying something though because I thought the cast was mostly very good, with particular credit being owed to Kearns and McNulty. Gregory and Dooley are also strong and it is only some of the actors playing the brass who are a bit weaker.Despite the flaws associated with the final third, the film is actually very strong and convincingly written and delivered.

iceq-2 Alright . I have just finished watching the movie, and I am glad we finally got something showing the real thing of whats going on in Iraq. Can I say the movie is real ? No, because in fact its showing the tiniest part of reality; as Iraqis are not only tortured as the movie shows, they are killed tens of times while they're alive, not to mention the crimes of chastity, which Muslims protect most, through the liberation troops' sexual assaults of Iraqi girls, particularly before their fathers or brothers, or husbands. One thing is important, and the movie suffers because of it, is not having subtitles. Indeed British English is hardly understandably, and the more important is the Arabic spoken by locals, as the Arabic speeches during the movie are very important to understand what is going on, and basically, you would not recognize how much the locals involved in the movie's plot suffer, unless you understand what is said by them. Thanx for the creators .. of course a very good movie , fair and just