MovieChat Forums > Live from Baghdad (2002) Discussion > A good movie but a little too much made ...

A good movie but a little too much made out of it


The experiences that the CNN crew in Baghdad during Gulf War I had make a good story for television. I thought that Michael Keaton did a good job as the lead. I also liked Helena Bonham Carter as his putative love interest (she almost always plays intriguing characters!).

The only thing is that I just can't accept the subtext of this movie which seems to be that the CNN staff were somehow "heroic." They were in Baghdad only because they chose to be, but that does not make them heroes. I think the heroes of the Gulf War were the soldiers who fought it.

Other gripes that I had were with the depiction of Peter Arnett in a positive light. Given his disgraceful interview on Iraqi television during Iraqi Freedom and his involvement in CNN's "Operation Tailwind" debacle (the fraudulent claim that the US used nerve gas on defectors in Laos during the Vietnam War), I have very little respect for the man.

Finally, while I think David Suchet did a good job playing the Iraqi information minister (who I am not certain was in real life the "Baghdad Bob" of Iraqi Freedom), I think the movie was less than honest about who and what that person was in real life, namely an apologist for one of the nastiest and most brutal regimes in recent history.

Still, it's a pretty good movie, but I would not view it as anything other than entertainment.

reply

With respect, it is easy to tell that you are an American. Open up your mind to the fact that maybe the truth you hear on American media isn't the absolute truth, just as Saddam filtered information to the Iraqis.

reply

You have got to be kidding me. Saddam's propaganda minister and the American media are equally deceptive? Give me a break. Have you ever read some of the things that the Saddam-era Iraqi media put out? I have. If they had said the sky is blue, I would have looked up to check.

reply

[deleted]

Anyone in the U.S. who is deceived by the news media has no one to blame but themselves. Freedoms we have here allow the reader/watcher/listener to cross check for themselves to find the facts. If you rely on any one source and you get a false story, the only one at fault is YOU. As for Iraqis, they too have no one to blame but themselves. Like the German people of the of the 1940's, Iraqis allowed themselves to be taken in by a shyster and ruled by him for too long, if a draconian presence like Saddam Hussein takes over a country, you have the power to revolt or run (the classic "fight or flight" response), or accept the oppression, it seems that most Iraqis opted for this third option.

In the U.S. we have fought at least two wars on our own soil (Revolutionary War (1775–1783) and the War of 1812 (1812)) to stop foreign oppression and one to fight internal oppression (our own Civil War (1861-1865)), it would seem that the Iraqis chose oppression over rebellion, and response to the U.S. removal of Saddam, it would seem that the Iraqis still opt for that choice.

reply

I'm not trying to say you're wrong, but there are a few things i think you might want to know :)

If you disagree with the information in the film, i think its more the book it was based on (which was written by Robert Wiener) that caused the problem, not the movie or moviemakers. All information in the film was got from the book. It may have been embelished and hollywoodized a bit, but the ideas are all originally from the book. Just thought you might want to know :)

And also, by depicting the CNN crew as heroes, no one is saying that the soldiers werent. Both the soldiers and the journalists were heroic in different ways, they were heroic in relation to their respective positions in the war. But, its a matter of opinion, so its all good :)



-Nil

reply

I would just like to say, as a journalism major in college and also a future Naval officer, BOTH soldiers and journalists are heroes. To risk your life for information that you believe is a important for people to know is a noble thing, and I'm really tired of people dumping on the media as a whole for the inprorieties of a few idiots. These people were there, in the middle of a war without a weapon. That takes guts.

And, by the way, everyone is the hero of their own story. I'm sure there were heroic Iraqis. Just as there were heroic Americans, and heroic journalists.

Oh, and another thing, the idea that you have to carry a weapon and risk your life to be a hero is rediculous. Heroes that don't carry weapons: Teachers, Peace Corps, Doctors, Nurses, Fire Fighters, Journalists (some of them, celebrity stories don't count, I'm talking REAL journalists), Public Defenders and Prosecutors

reply

The Soldiers and Marines followed orders. When you swear in to the military, you swear to follow lawful orders. If your commander tells you to fire your weapon, you better be DAMNED sure that if you refuse, you have about a thousand reasons why you didn't squeeze the trigger.

I'm so sick of people dumping on GIs and Marines for simply performeing their duties.

Let's review American Government 101: Civilians make policy. The military is the instrument of that policy. The military is subservient to Civil Authority. Any questions?

reply

"Let's review American Government 101: Civilians make policy. The military is the instrument of that policy. The military is subservient to Civil Authority. Any questions?"

The one problem there, aside from being simplistic, is that it ignores the variable of corruption, which seriously pollutes every single piece of Am Gov 101.

reply

SS Einsatzgruppen also followed orders and "simply performed their duties".

No comparison, but...

reply

What the %%*^%# are you talking about? Not a single person on this thread has been dumping on GIs and Marines. They are just saying that soldiers aren't the only heroes in this world.

reply

[deleted]