哈迪塞镇之战

HD中字

主演:尼克·布鲁姆菲尔德,Marc Hoeferlin

类型:电影地区:英国语言:英语年份:2007

 量子

缺集或无法播,更换其他线路.

 红牛

缺集或无法播,更换其他线路.

 非凡

缺集或无法播,更换其他线路.

 剧照

哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.1哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.2哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.3哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.4哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.5哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.6哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.13哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.14哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.15哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.16哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.17哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.18哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.19哈迪塞镇之战 剧照 NO.20

 长篇影评

 1 ) 哈迪萨事件的英文wiki资料以及IMDB影评

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Haditha
Battle for Haditha (film)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haditha_killings
Haditha killings

google translate
http://translate.google.com.hk/?hl=zh-TW&tab=wT
-------------------------------

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0870211/reviews
影评

 65 out of 83 people found the following review useful:
Powerful & Provocative Film, 12 November 2007
8/10
Author: Black Narcissus from Maida Vale, UK

I saw this film at it's London premiere at the Odeon West End as part of the London Film Festival.

I guess Nick Broomfield was getting sick & tired of seeing Michael Moore ripping off his Documentary style so made this his Second feature film in as many years. Like the earlier film, Ghosts (www.imdb.com/title/tt0872202/), the Battle for Haditha is based on fact.

The film tells story of the events of November 19, 2005, when a troop of US Marines exact revenge for an earlier attack which killed one of their number in the Iraqi town of Haditha.

The Film focuses on three different viewpoints, the first of Iraqi insurgents, which in this case isn't some mad Mullah but an old man, who we learn is an ex-Army officer and his son. The second focuses on a Corporal Ruiz, a young Marine who you feel wants to be anywhere but Iraqi and the finally the film focuses on a young Iraqi couple and their extended family.

The film is shot Cinéma-vérité style and at times is very harrowing. But it's to Broomfields credit that he to my mind he doesn't simply demonize the US soldiers. Instead you get to understand how young men put in a situation that you the viewer couldn't understand let alone cope with, could just lose it after a comrade is killed. Likewise, in the films portrayal of the insurgent fighters Broomfield manages to make you think what would you do, if, as in the film, your a professional soldier made jobless by a an Occupying force. How do you feed your family, and wouldn't you feel some resentment to the occupation forces for making you jobless. But it's in the Iraqi families, caught between the US forces and the Insurgents that the film is at it's best. They can't do the right thing for doing wrong. It is they who bear the brunt of either Insurgency retaliation or US Forces heavy-handedness. They who ultimately will and are the losers in Film.

This is a powerful film which deals with all aspects of the problem fair mindedly, but doesn't shy away from the truth. Don't let those who haven't watched the film put you off seeing the best portrayal of the War on Terror to date.

Black Narcissus

--------------------------------------------------
 71 out of 95 people found the following review useful:
Made me cry., 21 March 2008
9/10
Author: bluelionk

Made me cry.

Only issues I noticed are: That the translation of the spoken Arabic is sometimes misleading and has no relation with what they actually said.

Some of the actors' accents are not Iraqi (Palestian, Egyptian, and others...), but most are Iraqis.

It's still a great movie that shows what happens in Iraq, and that war is ugly.

It's one of the rare movies that show the issue from the other side.

The acting is great, so is the scenery (it does look a lot like Iraq).

I say it again, it made me cry, a lot.

--------------------------------------------------

 48 out of 75 people found the following review useful:
If You Liked Bloody Sunday & United 93, 19 September 2007
9/10
Author: Movie-Jay from Toronto, Canada

I just saw this movie at the Toronto Film Festival, and it's going to create much controversy as the weeks pass until this film finally opens. I think those who are against a movie before they even see it are saying something about themselves, not the film. Watch it, and then make up your mind. This movie, like United 93 or Bloody Sunday, is told moment to moment, keeps it's head down and just moves forward without judgment or commentary. The movie isn't aware of the past or future, it only knows what it knows through the characters we follow, some of whom are American soldiers, some are innocent Iraqi families, others are terrorists. This movie does a wise thing by simply showing things from all points of view. I can't wait until it's released because it needs to be talked about.

At the premiere for the film, we learn that many of the actors on the American front are actually soldiers who fought in Iraq. The head of the platoon is especially good, and could go on and have a career as an actor.
--------------------------------------------------

 30 out of 41 people found the following review useful:
A story that needed to be told, 13 August 2008
8/10
Author: insomnia from Australia

It's almost impossible to be totally objective regarding a subject about which one is truly passionate. The war in Iraq is a subject that divides people like no other in recent times. As with any conflict, the war in Iraq has its supporters and its detractors. There is no middle ground. There are no grey areas: everything is just black or white. Either you believe it's a justifiable war, or you don't. This brings me to Nick Broomfield's new film, "The Battle For Haditha". The subject of the film is controversial as it deals with an incident in the city of Haditha, allegedly involving the US Marines. Broomfield uses actors, some of whom are former US Marines and Iraq veterans, as well as Iraqi refugees, to fashion a film that successfully straddles the gap between a regular documentary and a straightforward feature film. The film encompasses three points of view: those of the Marines, the insurgents, and the families who lived near where the roadside bomb detonated. This film is a fictionalised account of what actually happened at Haditha. It shows quite graphically, the horrors of war and what the Americans as well as innocent Iraqis have to go through almost on a daily basis. There are deaths on both sides, but it's Iraqi civilians who are caught in the crossfire and who have to bear the brunt of dealing with men who have been stretched to breaking point. The film in no way condones the actions of either the insurgents or the Marines. It just shows the audience what might have occurred on that fateful day, and it's for those in the audience to make up their own minds as to who was in the right and who was in the wrong. When reading some of the comments posted on the message board for this film, I find it somewhat puzzling that some contributors write that "Battle For Haditha" is anti-American. Just because the US Marines are shown in a less than sympathetic light in this film, does not mean the film is on the side of the insurgents. What the film does demonstrate is how quickly things can get out of hand, in a situation such as that in Haditha. By all means criticize a film on its merits, or lack of them. Please, though, do not label this film as un-American just because it doesn't fit a blinkered view of the way the world is.
--------------------------------------------------
 26 out of 39 people found the following review useful:
better than i expected, 1 April 2008
8/10
Author: SEVEREcritic from Bangladesh

i personally never heard of Mr. Bloomfield, so i had no real intention of watching this film till i saw it mentioned in the message boards for other films. that said, i must say this was the best in the recent slew of Iraq war films (like Redacted, Home of the Brave, etc.) i half expected it to be like Redacted and was pleasantly surprised to find it much better. i think it really brought out the fact that there are multiple sides to a story, and did so without too much bias. being a Muslim myself i must admit that it seemed a little inclined towards Iraqis, with Marines portrayed as undisciplined and emotionless (though one of the protagonists feels guilt and in reality this incident caused an uproar). there are no A-list actors, which in a sense, actually made the movie better because you almost see the actors as the characters themselves (especially since a lot of the dialog is improvised). i think it was well made, and well thought out. better than expected. i wonder what the US reaction would if/when it has a release there? unlike Moore's work (as stated by another user here) neither party is shown as completely innocent or completely evil. i'm not sure if this is exactly how the incident took place, but if it is, then there is certainly some food for thought in this movie.

 2 ) 这就是一场屠杀

弱智的美国大兵在马路上遇到了炸弹袭击,二死一伤,没有任何证据证明炸弹是路边村里人埋的,就冲进村子里去乱杀一通,根本就是一群屠夫,算什么士兵,连一个恐怖分子都没看到,还说什么按规则指影办事。以前蛮喜欢看美国陆战队的电影,看了本片之后,美国政府及其军队还有美国人的价值观,在我心里大打折扣。这根本算不上一竟战争片,说美军屠村记更合适!从这几十年来美国的美国至上的国际行为准则来看,美国人以美国国籍当成了一个种族,其行为和言论其实跟希特勒很像,希望我国有识之士要认清这点,不要被美国的一些假像所迷惑!

 3 ) 他朝干戈若寂了,定有人间好时节

2005年11月,伊拉克战争已经进行了整整2年8个月了,萨达姆已经被捕,国家正在进入重建历程。然而,伊拉克民众并没有迎来和平的曙光,似乎也看不到什么发展的希望。冲突和对抗还在继续,战火仍未熄灭,销烟依然弥漫。

哈迪塞镇,一个似乎没有什么特别的伊拉克城市,或者称呼它为“城镇”应该更为恰当一点。在这里,起码,在电影里,我们看不到它有什么特别的自然资源,它应该也不是什么政治焦点,也不存在着特殊的宗教意义。在这里,美军为控制而控制,武装分子为反抗而反抗,平民,只有平民,为生活而生活。

美军士兵甚至不知道自己为什么要到这个地方来,每天重复一样的巡逻、警戒、检查、抓捕。他们可以听摇滚,可以寻求娱乐,也像在世界上其它任何地方一样,开着同伴的玩笑,也开着自己的玩笑。这似乎也算是一种生活方式。然而,他们知道自己为什么会到这个地方来,把别人当成猎物,自己也是别人的猎物,把别人当屎包,而自己,也是一个屎包。他们知道为什么,因为还有一个“至高无上”的国家利益。

袭击者甚至不认同那些武装组织的观念和行为。他们是小业主、小商贩,他们会喝酒,即使这样做有违伊斯兰教义,他们会认为枪杀英文教师是疯狂的行为。完成袭击后,他们有的要回去照看商店,有的要回家爱抚自己的孩子。在生活的这一面,他们似乎也并不极端。也许他们有怨恨,就像当兵20年,最后却只能得到50美元的遣散费,他们心中的不平似乎也有理由。

而平民,与我们有什么不同呢?买菜做饭、谈论家事、聚集取乐,我们都过着一样的小日子。有所不同的是,当袭击者在他们家门口埋下一个炸弹的时候,他们需要做出选择,是承受来自武装分子的报复,还是承受来自美军的抓捕审讯。

鱼与刀俎,这是一个三方视角下的惨案。不管是基于金钱、真主还是国家,袭击者总能找到借口;不管是基于安全环境、战友还是国家,控制者也总能找到发起行为的动机。只是对于那些平民,可怜无定河边骨,不是执枪披甲人。

袭击美军的伊拉克武装分子逃脱了抓捕,对伊拉克平民进行报复屠杀的美军兵士们也没有得到公正的审判,死去的只有无辜的民众。他们似乎成了克林顿口中的“恶棍”,他们更是成了武装分子口中的“烈士”。但是他们什么都不是,他们只是母亲、妻子、父亲、丈夫、女儿、儿子。然而他们什么都不是,现在他们只是一具具尸体。

从来都没有什么救世主,但是恶会永存。


不知道这种题材用纪录片的形式来表现会不会更有力一点。从改编电影的角度来讲,我不觉得这部电影有什么出彩的地方,这种三方视角(当然也很难说是“视角”,摄影机的角度和运动基本上不是基于个体的视点,从而也不太表现其心理活动)的叙事模式显得很凌乱、浮于表面。只从一方,或者重点表现一方的方式会不会更好一点,起码应该可以为观众提供更多的诠释可能?但是,它起码让我知道了在这个世界上曾经发生过这么一件荒诞的事情,这也许只是众多大荒诞里的一个小荒诞,但那谁谁不是说过吗,百分之一可能的悲剧落到个人头上,那都是百分百。

 4 ) 什么才是真实

    对这样的一部电影来说,任何的拍摄手法都显得次要了,重要的是题材和真实性的命题。我是比较讨厌美国这个国家的,但是美国人倒是挺讨人喜欢,虽然我一个都没接触过。伊拉克的问题我也关心不过来,我更关心的是大米是不是真要涨价了。可别人家的问题外人死皮赖脸的非要进去插一脚,换做是谁谁也不会乐意。看了这部电影你会对美国大兵异常反感厌恶甚至产生当人肉炸弹的冲动,拿来作为基地组织的宣传影片还非常不错,可事实真的是这样么?恐怕不是这么简简单单。晚上看奶茶刘若英为某品牌电视打的广告,说“知未明,观未见”,那需要的是怎样的一种高度?豆瓣上居然现在还不到三十人看过这部电影,少见啊。四星。

 5 ) 观后感

以纪录片的手法拍摄了真实事件改编的哈迪塞镇之战。因为对真实事件了解不多,不清楚电影与事实到底有多大出入。虽然电影情节与内核是老调重弹,但是还是有几处使我反思。重金属音乐一直反复的lies仿佛在告诉Marines这一切都是政府的谎言;最开始出现的主人公批判基地组织是一群疯子,但讽刺的是他与基地组织合作在路边埋炸弹,间接害死了无辜的平民;内心有负罪感的marine在事件发生前已经向上级表达了自己精神上的问题,但并没有得到重视与解决,后来在冲动与刺激下屠杀平民,自己深受噩梦的困扰;万恶的政客们发动战争,军队高官当时批准行动并表扬marines的出色表现,最后在事情暴露后又寻找替罪羊。就像主角marine说的一样“they don’t give a fuck about us.”最后看到新闻里的布什觉得他就是一个虚伪的war criminal,他的决定让多少人失去生命或是生不如死,不知道他自己会不会看伊战电影,夜深人静时会反思和自责吗?

 6 ) 鹬蚌相争,渔翁得利!

看完这部13年前的电影发表一下我个人的看法。 第一:从美国人角度上来说,一群被恐怖分子激怒了的美军冲上民宅肆意杀戮平民,显示出在那些镜头里风光的美军作战素养之差和心理素质是多么的不堪一击!从美军平均20岁的年龄来看,他们都是群心智还未成熟的小伙子。只经过正常的教官训教但是还未经过实战磨炼就上战场,看到一个队友被杀就沉不住气想要报仇雪恨,见人就杀。这反映出了美军基层士兵的普遍不遵守纪律和心理素质较差。也从大量下了战场就容易得精神疾病的数据就可以看出美军基层士兵真正软弱的地方。当然,也侧面反映了美军士兵要是没有强大的武器和科技,这种士兵很难有所作为,要不上战场就不听指挥个人英雄主义严重,要不打完子弹或者被包围没有空中支援和后援就会崩溃投降。 第二:从恐怖分子的角度上来说无疑这样做是很成功的。用最低的成本就可以激怒美国大兵。然后利用美军杀戮平民既能在国际舆论上打击美国人,又能利用伊拉克民众对美国人仇恨的种子壮大自己的实力。可谓一箭三雕!站在恐怖分子的角度来说十分完美!

第三:从伊拉克被屠杀的平民角度分析,我觉得这群人活该!虽然这样说很不人道。但是,事实就是这群没有战争观念的平民百姓,明明看到了有人在路边埋炸弹,却装作什么都不知道。就像鲁迅先生骂自己国人那样,——麻木不仁!是的,你可以选择给美国人告发也可以选择收拾东西逃跑。但是他们偏偏装作什么都不知道。既不想得罪美国人也害怕恐怖分子报复!这样的不作为最终害了自己,害了家人。成了恐怖分子的利用工具。对于这种没有明显战争观念,自己的国家被外族占领,他们还在慢悠悠过日子的民族和平民,我是真的没有一丝同情。他们的麻木不仁,自私自利,也注定了他们需要付出生命的代价!

再说个题外话,看完这部电影其实我想的不是美国人是多么的“虚伪”,伊拉克人是多么的"可怜"。我唯一想到的就是,鹬蚌相争,渔翁得利!正是因为伊拉克战争的泥潭拖住了美国人,才有了中国发展的10年黄金期。中国应该感谢伊拉克这群恐怖分子和广大人民的牺牲,为自己争得了这宝贵的战略发展期。现在正逢中美科技战贸易战,美国已经腾出了手开始和中国全面对抗了!中国应该冷静分析,总结教训,如果未来哪天中美爆发热战,中国应该多多利用美军基层士兵的软弱心理和作战素养的差劲来痛击美军!当然,美军也有王牌部队。我们一定要提前研究美军,除了研究他们的武器装备和信息化作战体系外。我们更应该研究"心理战"!

————————————————————————

最后谈谈这部电影,我觉得这部电影用纪录片的形式叙述这件惨案过于冗长。导演用了几乎1/2的时间交代背景。最后的重头戏,战争场面镜头才区区10来分钟,既没有渲染出战争的残酷,又让人看的很平淡无聊。我基本上是快进往过看的。要不是真实故事改编,这电影拍的也确实够"无趣"。

 短评

伊拉克哈迪塞镇,I.D.E工厂..IDE使陆战队车队一死二伤,失去兄弟的MC疯狂了,接下的搜索任务中15名伊拉克平民无辜死去。被幕后黑手煽动的伊拉人纷纷拿起步枪,造成平民死亡的陆战队员们也面临审讯...这场战争到底谁错了?值观?宗教信仰?谁最无辜?伊拉克人民?士兵?当权者之间的矛盾导致了这些悲剧

6分钟前
  • 雷斯特雷波
  • 推荐

对比1999年的《夺金三王》,2007年的《哈迪赛之战》。前者是部喜剧片,对萨达姆军队的贪婪残暴戏谑调侃,伊拉克百姓喜迎天兵。后者是部严肃纪实的电影,突出了美军的残暴猖狂,伊拉克人对美军充满敌意,游击队对美军不停的袭扰让其精神崩溃。拍这部电影的时候还在调查阶段,直到2012年参与屠杀的美军只有一人被判九十天监禁(没执行),其他人无罪,伊拉克部分死者每人陪了两千五百美元,有敌意的死者未获赔偿。

8分钟前
  • wrzyy
  • 推荐

这两帮人天天都要把人脑打出猪脑才算完,却还要生活在同一个城市中,伊拉克到底是一个怎样的国家啊。

9分钟前
  • fallingraining
  • 推荐

这片让我想起《鬼子来了》。当年抗战时,民众真的像宣传的那样很支持游击队打仗吗?小老百姓只想活着罢了。顺便吐槽一下短评顶最高的一条,平民不一定无辜,高官不一定冷血,而冲在前面的也不一定都是被洗脑的傻逼。

14分钟前
  • Homer
  • 推荐

想起了南京大屠杀,全世界人民都应该看清美国的嘴脸

16分钟前
  • 质哥
  • 推荐

仇恨滋生仇恨,冤冤相报何时了?战争是泯灭人性的苦难,不义的战争是苦难的巅峰。交战双方那些为了个人利益不顾他人死活操纵民众、士兵的政客和煽动者是最可恶最该死的!拍得很真实很震撼!给战争下了一个绝佳的定义

18分钟前
  • 开心小眯猫
  • 力荐

战争就是这样一个人性的黑洞,它逼迫你放弃代价高昂的准则,以换取失去了意义的胜利。

22分钟前
  • 猪头妖怪
  • 还行

阿拉伯人的命就比美国人贱吗?路边炸弹这么多是阿拉伯平民造成的吗?那些滥杀无辜的美国陆战队员有错吗?复仇复仇,杀戮杀戮,这样的恶性循环,错在何人、何处?

27分钟前
  • 庐陵
  • 推荐

其实就感情而言十分理解美军在战争中犯下的错,还算不上罪行。毕竟战争本身就是残酷的,会将人逼疯。身处在其中也多身不由己,把问题拿出来大家一起解决而不是隐藏才是解决问题方法。

28分钟前
  • 雨滴在心头
  • 还行

就这片子还能看出反战意味来?还有说士兵和平民都无辜的,圣母这个词转为你造的,真是佩服。从战略上讲这tm是洗衣粉战争,是侵略战争,从战术上讲这是对手无寸铁的平民单方面的屠杀,跟主反省两句,流下两滴鳄鱼的眼泪,象征性的被追究下责任,就洗清罪恶了?拍个电影都要拿反战当遮羞布,美国佬最近打脸已经打出新高度了,你把他以前说的话说一遍都相当于在骂他。

29分钟前
  • 纸会割人
  • 还行

以后下完电影一定要先过一遍看字幕完整不完整,我下的这个版本大概50分钟左右就没有字幕了,幸好战争题材台词成分比较少,还是能看明白个大概,我挺喜欢这种强调纪实性的电影,没有过分英雄化任何人,真实的揭示了战争给人们带来的灾难,有反思,有警示,你不杀人,人就会杀你,就这么简单。

32分钟前
  • Doublebitch
  • 推荐

好的战争片,最终表达的应该都是反战的。这部电影更像是一种还原,对真相的重新演绎,对战争的重新反馈,对平民的重新伤害。战争中受害最深的永远是陷入深渊的无法找到出路的平民。这个村子的人,在看到所谓的恐怖分子埋炸弹时,不敢告诉美国人,因为如果被叛军发现,注定是死。但不告诉美国人,就发生了影片中的担忧,他们作为最无辜的人被失去理智疯狂报复的美国人击杀。无法博弈,在这场战争中没有任何逃命空间。而恐怖分子是,真正的叛军雇来的市民,他们对两边都是无所谓的状态,都讨厌,却会为钱卖命。事实就是这样,人执行命令,人受到伤害,人疯狂报复,人无辜被杀。政治,社会,意识,就这样混乱。而这一切,还是乱入的战争。

36分钟前
  • 熊仔饼干
  • 推荐

真实事件改编,借用伪纪录片风格、去类型化地还原了美军在伊拉克的治安战困境,更具象的体现了家园置身于战火的悲剧,极尽冷峻纪实,让观众看到了是非对错一定程度上处于模糊地带的真实战场,美军和恐怖分子相互地袭击、报复、仇杀,结果付出最惨重代价地却是被无辜裹挟其间的普通人:平民看到恐怖分子埋炸弹却不敢报信给美军,因为怕恐怖分子报复,但攻击一旦成功,他们就像片中那样被失去理智的美国大兵无差别的杀戮,连老幼妇孺都不放过,他们唯一错的就是自己的国家成为了战场,没有任何逃生的出口,甚至连搞恐怖袭击的都不过是极端分子花钱雇来执行任务的主儿。而美军士兵杀人没得洗,但他们也不过是帝国掌权者谋取政治经济利益的工具,敌意像螺旋一样上升,真正的刽子手坐收渔利,战场的真相任强者涂抹,真正的元凶,却从头到尾都没露面。

38分钟前
  • 洛梦蝶
  • 推荐

无解的悲剧,每个人都身处其中,都觉得自己的是无辜的。事实却是别人利益博弈的棋子,既是受害者也是施暴者,没有人是无辜的。

42分钟前
  • shanglin117
  • 推荐

过于的追求技术上的真实与视角的全面,反而显得缺乏真实,而流于表面。

46分钟前
  • 畸小山
  • 还行

279 常看到很多人自豪的说,没当过兵的男人不是真男人,或许从动物本能天性来说确实如此。美利坚海军陆战队算是世界上最牛皮哄哄的兵了吧,是男人就下一百层,地狱

51分钟前
  • 木有
  • 推荐

也算是比较中性的角度,对伊拉克的普通人、极端主义者,对美国陆战队的士兵、将军。尽管不能得到所有的全面的comment,这种多角度考虑的尝试总是有利于世界和平滴,卡卡

53分钟前
  • lmp
  • 推荐

美军禽兽不如

58分钟前
  • ピラミッド
  • 推荐

伪纪录片形式。真实感强烈。美军高层和伊拉克武装分子们虚伪的打着各自的幌子而让他们的同胞——前线的美国大兵和伊拉克平民成为无辜受害者。漫漫长夜你们何以安心入睡?

1小时前
  • HsvEvnX
  • 推荐

老百姓从媒体、教科书上看到的是什么?是事件。是媒体甚至政府想告诉你的事件,是不是真相?真不知道。运气好的话,过一阵或者过几十年,水干了,露出一些河底的真相,运气不好,观众永远做傻子。你以为朝鲜人的智商很低,整天为金正恩哭天抢地?他们只是国家教育下的傻子,我们若在那个地方,也一样。

1小时前
  • 小蚪
  • 还行