Powerful

Captivating movie !

Admirable film.

The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

I don't have to say anything else. This movie supports terrorism and ignites terrorism against the United States.They interview only American Amry personnel that are all, to a man, express views that are:1.) Lazy 2.) Anti-American 3.) Pro-terroristNow it shames me to to see these people operating in our Army. But of course these are the people that these terrorist "film-makers" chose to focus on. These so-call film-makers are terrorists in that they give material support to terrorist activity. Then i realize that it is our Marines who really do the real fighting.

In case you haven't noticed (and why should you), the United States has been engaged in a massive war for almost three years and over 2,000 American lives lost. There have been several documentaries made about the war, but sadly most of them have been about the White House and Pentagon and what the filmmakers think of them."Occupation: Dreamland" is different. It tells the story of the war not from a politician's or reporter's eye-view, but through the stories of our troops. There is none of the clever editing or voiced-over partisan hyperbole that you get from propagandists like Fox News or Michael Moore. All we see is the war as it happens and the soldiers' comments on what is going on.The soldiers do not all agree with each other about the necessity of the war or support for the current President, but they all agree that they have a job to do and a duty to do it to the best of their ability. What I also like is that there were Iraqis willing to talk to the filmmakers about their perspective about the war, and you realize that these are not just a race of drooling assassins (the way they would be portrayed in a Hollywood action film), but frustrated human beings who resent having to have foreign troops in their neighborhoods.Watching this film, you see how these men deal with boredom alternating with fear for one's life. And in between battles and the doldrums, there are USO shows and scary retention meetings, where recruiters basically tell the soldiers they are losers who can't function in civilian society.Pro-war zealots will not like the fact that the troops are not shown to be super-patriotic he-men, but imperfect young men barely out of adolescence who find their job all too daunting, implying that this war has been planned poorly up to this point. Anti-war activists will not like that the movie clearly shows that these young men are the only thing keeping Iraq from total chaos, implying that an artificial timetable for bringing troops home will lead to disaster.I think that it is criminal that this film has not yet gone into wide release. If I had my way, every American--especially those fair-weather patriots who say they support the war, but who do not serve in the military and/or will not allow their children to enlist--would be made to see this film. It might make everyone think twice before giving easy answers to the war.

This is yet another winner from Garrett Scott and Ian Olds, who also did Cul-De-Sac: A Suburban War Story, but this one will be available on DVD at some point.Scott and Olds follow seven or eight squad members of the 505th battalion of the 82nd airborne around Falluja in the weeks before the final siege that destroyed the city. We get to see these guys how they really are, not how Black Hawk Down or Saving Private Ryan portrays soldiers (in idealized Hollywood robot super patriot tough guy fashion).Scott and Olds go on patrols and missions with the guys to arrest suspected insurgents or defend meetings of important Iraqis, and you see how difficult it is for them to do their jobs. They spend 5% of their time supporting reconstruction, and the other 95% trying to hunt down attackers who are merely opposed to the presence of occupation forces.They are from all points of view, some who support Bush and the war, and others who don't, but they all seem intelligent and think a lot more about why they're there than most of the politicians who sent them (of course it's their lives on the line and they won't simply take someone's word for it that there is a good purpose behind it). They question what they would do if they were in the place of the Iraqis who shoot at them almost every day, they know there is a better way to solve Iraq's problems, but none of them has the power as low ranking individuals to do what they know works better or undertake anything massive to help the Iraqis who plead with them everyday for jobs, electricity, gas, water, food, school supplies, and so on. Disillusioned, they forge ahead with their mission with a sense of duty and but no sense of accomplishment.Most of the guys seem genuinely concerned with Iraqs, and some of them confess that after being shot at so much and seeing friends die they just can't like them, and even hate them. All of them are open with their opinions of the situation, their own circumstances regarding their original recruitment, continued enlistment, and hopes and dreams, which is something we can't get from scripted town hall meetings via satellite between President Bush and the troops.Just as interesting, we get to see Falluja as it was, and all interaction with Iraqis is subtitled so we hear it directly from them, men and women and children of all ages. There is no evidence of the Islamic fundamentalists the Marines just weeks later undertook to destroy. Some of those arrested are clearly insurgents, and some...you never know for sure. There's a depressing parallel between the lack of jobs and education in Falluja and the lack of jobs and education that prompted most of the squad to join up and what they will face when they are demobbed.According to the director, all of them squad members featured have seen the film and love it, and some folks at the Pentagon have even watched it to get insights into what their men are really feel about the war. In the viewing I attended, there were Iraqis, former soldiers (both Vietnam and some more recently demobilized guys), and at least one Afghani, and they all seemed to like the film. It's a service to the troops because it lets them speak for themselves for once at length, unlike in short articles, and it's an excellent record of the reality of the war from an undeniable point of view, not filtered through papers and news correspondents and politicians with pro-war points of view or at least a fear of being called unpatriotic. Ironically enough, it's probably the most pro-troops, anti-war film of all because it's honest and deals with the men as human beings like us or our friends and family.

i went to see "occupation: dreamland" not because i'm interested in iraq or US foreign policy but because i'm interested in the psychology of soldiers & people at war - in particular, what allows someone to hurt, damage & kill someone else - and i really enjoyed getting up close & personal with the soldiers of the 82nd airborne. their candid reflections on what they're doing there & what the war is about are equally charming & terrifying ("i have confidence the government wouldn't send us just to protect oil"; "it's all about adding another OPEC country") and some of the footage detailing army practices (the reenlistment scene, for example) are just plain terrifying. the film is also a useful companion piece to the fresh-faced army press officer of "control room". quite frankly, these guys seemed a lot more clued up, despite being (as one review puts it), "21-28 year-old high school dropouts and failed junior college liberal arts majors whose enlistment stems more from a lack of options than patriotism or ideology."speaking of reviews, one of the most interesting things for me, as a non-American, were comments like the following from the reviews: "In this sense, then, the greatest accomplishment of 'Occupation: Dreamland' is showing those of us on the home front that it really is possible, Republican howling to the contrary aside, to support our troops without supporting the war itself." um, sorry? sure, you don't need to spit on them from a great height, but you either support one country invading another or you don't. the soldiers conscientiously carried out their instructions to spread a little good pr, but no one was fooled, least of all the soldiers themselves. shame, really, that they weren't being used on true peace-keeping missions in places that could use a little first-world intervention. darfur or the ivory coast, anyone?