Very Inaccurate Movie

Let me begin by saying I'm basing everything in facts. Just so you know the validity of my claims let me begin my telling you that my anti-Communist position is because I come from a lineage that has included 5 generations of military men. For starters my dad rose from a lieutenant, to 3-Star General during the 12 years of the war, ending his career as Minister of Defense. He began as a "grunt" in the 100-hour War against Honduras. I'm the next in line and after graduating I'm enlisting in the Military Academy, next year.

Not every civilian killed was innocent, some "civilians", according to official documents were in fact terrorists posing as civilians, with various documents, such as maps and letters in their persons. Some even had sidearms such as Tokarev/Makarov pistols on their persons.

Let me also remind you of some massacres the guerrillas perpetrated. For example the ERP and FPL had a territorial dispute in El Mozote, after the first one that occurred in 1980 when subversive civilians poisoned the water supply killing a platoon of soldiers. During this other dispute another 300 or so civilians were killed and the FMLN, had a weapon the Government did not have, excellent international relations, through facade organizations such as Amnesty International and Socorro Rojo (read any articles by Joaquin Villalobos or see if you can reado Mena-Sandoval's book). You must look at the five factors of Guerrilla Warfare to see that in many cases the Government was desprestiged by the FMLN. The factors are: Political - Social, Economical, Military, Masses, Disinformation. This all based on the Maoist, Leninist and Troskist doctrine that Cubans, Nicaraguans, ETA terrorists and even Soviets imparted to eac guerrillero (believe me I have a mass-printed book made in Sandinist Nicaragua at home highlighting this). Mao said "lie, lie and lie until the lie becomes true". Also note that some civilians were pro-communists and for example in this occasation in the town of Arambala in the Department of Morazan, my dad was almost killed by a ten year old boy hiding behind a couch. What does this tell you about "innpcent civilians"? What about all the violent manifestations, in which Governmetn forces were instigated by protesters. Did you know that the policy of the Armed Forces was that during protests soldiers and policemen had to steer clear of the protests? I'm not making this up, look at any Doctrinal Manual from the '60s right up to the '80s and also read El Salvador Blazes and Quo Vadis Central America by Jean-Louis Clairond.

I can give you personal accounts from my life. During the 1989 Offensive Guerrillas infiltrated my neighbourhood, you see I lived in the Military Colony in San Salvador, infront the UCA. Most houses were sacked until soldiers responded by heroically reppelling the cowardly terrorists. The terrorists came from the UCA, I know that as a fact because you could see the green tracers, left by Soviet-made weapons, coming from the university and also you could hear terrorist yelling that they should run back to their base at the UCA. So much for innocent Jesuits. ALso I was born in San Miguel during an offensive, when terrorists cowardly attempted to attack the hospital I was born in (The Military Hospital), which in reality had a higher number of civilan patients than military.

You are also missing to take into account the 500+ Welfare operations the Armed Forces, carried out and the monthly Civilian-Military Health and food distribution campaigns. Did the guerrillas do any of these? No they just proceeded to extort and murder for their "war" tax. Remember that hey also forcefully recruited boys and men during the latter half of the 80's when they were attempting to mimic conventional forces.

I do not know what your background is, but you surely demonize the Government too much. You must remember Westmoreland's famous quote "The military don't start wars, politicians do". Just think about that. Also think about the universally accepted fact that 90% of the Armed Forces was made up of volunteers . All the information I am using comes from a 1000 page book dealing only with crimes perpetrated by the FMLN and the personal accounts of my father nad many other acquaintances, not all of them are former-militray, mind you.

I hope this extra bit of data helps you see that you probably have not understood the facts well or you were somehow misguided.

"Not realistic and sensationalist, 28 January 2005
1/10
Author: ipanemagirl777 from El Salvador

I saw the movie and hated it, first it does not represent El Salvador at all, they didn't even change the Mexican license plates of the buses to make it look at least in that part as if it were El Salvador. The movie shows ONLY one side of the story, I lived the war too and lived the suffering under the guerrilla leaded by the FMLN. The army did recruit men, but over 18, I never in my whole life saw an army soldier that was a boy, but I did see terrorist guerrilla of no more than 8 or 10 years old holding weapons almost their height, drugged and committing crimes that the outside world cannot imagine. I suffered the other side of the story which is not told in the movie, and I'm glad it was not nominated for the academy awards. It is sensationalist and does not tell even half of the truth of the conflict in El Salvador. Hopefully it will not make it too far as North Americans tend to believe what it is presented to them in movies, this is misleading and false."

"nnocent voices are "that of those you no tell the History of.....", 6 August 2005
2/10
Author: ruth4657 from United States

It is a bias history of ONE SALVADOREAN, about what he did see around him, There is also another side of the history; the one of people that survived the atrocities of the GUERRILLA, It is sorry that the main character went thru all this, but if you want to tell the truth, be that, and confess also the dark side of the fighters in the leftist Guerrilla. FACTS ABOUT EL SALVADOR, UNTRUE, VISIT THE CITY BEFORE SHOWING SOMETHING NOT EVEN CLOSER TO WHAT THIS PLACE IS. CHECK YOUR SPELLIN "CUSCATANZINGO" IS NOT SPELL WITH A "z" IS A "C" ALSO IS NOT AN ADOQUINADA, BRICK LAY STrEET CITY. OVERALL FULL OF XTREME OVERPLAY SINCERELY A COMUNIST POINT OF VIEW. And what can you spect with Ofelia Medina included in the Cast. "

"Good movie with Serious Flaws, 26 September 2005
3/10
Author: David Valdez from United States

First, kudos to the creators. The movie is well made, the characters appealing, the cinematography more than competent. there was a lot here to make this a very good movie, even a great movie... The young actor Carlos Padilla ("Chava")delivers a brilliant performance, all the casting is right, the movie feels immediate and its characters feel like real live people. If I could just ignore what spoiled this movie (see below), this is a very entertaining, visually satisfying movie, keeps you interested while moving at a very good clip. No wasted scenes.

Where I believe the movie lost it's way is in trying to be a movie about "the struggle of the international proletariat against its oppressors as embodied by the Salvadoran army" , as opposed to what the movie promises at the beginning, which is to allow us to see war through the eyes of a child. The scenes where the boys are on the roofs are precious. However ...

I would stake a lot on the facts as I know them: that it was never the policy of the Salvadoran government or its army to recruit 12 year olds. That in isolated occasions young children may have been impressed into service, I cannot categorically discount. I believe the guerrilla much was more guilty of including under age boys in its ranks. By the way, Salvadoran law at the time was universal conscription at age 18 for one year of military service and i know that kids around this age (give or take) were impressed systematically when numbers deemed it necessary usually taken off buses. The scene where the boys are lined up in school and where the kids who had turned 12 are up for recruitment is not only not based on fact as presented, it is offensive. Given that this is a central (if not "the" central) plot device, the movie is tainted with dishonesty.

I think the filmmakers chose to make a cheap political statement with all the old fashioned 'marxist Leninist' clichés. I believe that this greatly detracted from the movie. To cite one example, the cliché "the imperialist Americans", for example. Does anybody believe that any one of the 57 military personnel that where allowed by congress & deployed during the entire duration of the conflict trained platoons of 12 year olds? There was a lot more pressing and higher value added tasks to do then this, including setting up helicopter medical evacuation, training in weaponry introduced during the conflict, etc.

The biggest problem I have is that the movie makers presenting all of this as factual and based on a real person. It is seriously flawed in its 'facts'. I guess that the creators decided that make the story relevant (and credible) it had to be placed somewhere in space and time and the movie had to be true to the person's story, which I assumed they paid rights to.. This choice only reflects lack of imagination.. I think this would have been a much better movie if it had taken place in some undefined place, where everybody would recognize the kind of warfare that happens in these poor countries, without marring the film by adopting plot devices that ran up against fact. This made it a dishonest movie unnecessarily. If you haven't read "Waiting for the Barbarians" by J M Coetze, I highly recommend this short and precious book. It soars above the banality of whether its plot happened in South Africa or anywhere else, and delivers a universal statement.

It is also personally disturbing that this reaction is only based on my experiences in El Salvador at the time. If the movie makers had presented me with a "factual" movie about Bosnia Herzegovina, I would have swallowed everything line and sinker.

All in all, thumbs down for this tainted movie. They could have given us a story that made us think and changed us, but they chose to do the propaganda along with it. I hate it when the artist sells out to a cause. I'd rather see them make tons of money in Hollywood. "

"Good, but..., 3 March 2005
7/10
Author: Emilio from Spain

It is really a good film, touching. Good acting, well directed, good screenplay. Takes your interest from the very beginning to the end. You will laugh, you will cry. A film about war and its atrocities that you will never forget, and over all a history about those innocent voices (voces inocentes) in every war: kids. The main character, Chava, an eleven year boy, does a great work, remarkable for his age. From that point of view, I truly think that this film is a must see. But... as usual, it only tells part of the truth (and half a truth is not a truth). It tell us about the cruelty of the Army from El Salvador in those days, but everybody knows that the guerrilla (the goodies in the film) was as cruel as them. "

I suppose Ponce would explain the El Mozote massacre as a firefight and would claim the Jesuit priests and their housekeeper were murdered by guerrillas or bandits. Those are not the conclusions of the UN Truth Commission on El Salvador, which may be found in its entirety at several locations:

http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/salvador/informes/truth.html
http://www.usip.org/library/tc/doc/reports/el_salvador/tc_es_03151993_toc.html
http://www.creighton.edu/CollaborativeMinistry/truth-com.html

The report's conclusions and recommendations could hardly be clearer:

"III. The Armed Forces

The vast majority of abuses studied by the Commission were committed by members of the armed forces or groups allied to them. In order to promote the urgent need in El Salvador to professionalize the military, bring it under civilian control and instill it with a respect for human rights, the Commission makes the following recommendations:

1) Immediate removal from the military of all officers cited for human rights and other major violations.

2) Steps to assure civilian control of military promotions, the military budget and all intelligence services.

3) A new, legally backed, provision permitting military personnel to refuse to obey unlawful orders.

4) Steps to cut all ties between the military and private armed groups or other paramilitary groups.

5) The profound study of human rights at the military academy and in other officer training courses.

IV. Death Squads

The Commission finds that death squads, often operated by the military and supported by powerful businessmen, land-owners and some leading politicians, have long acted in El Salvador and remain a potential menace. The Commission received testimony on more than 800 victims of death squads. This problem is so serious that the Commission calls for a special investigation of death squads in order to reveal and then put an end to such activity. The Commission is especially concerned by the close relation between the military, hired assassins and extremists within the Salvadoran business community and some affluent families, who resorted to killing to settle disputes. This practice must end. The Commission also is concerned that Salvadoran exiles living in Miami helped administer death squad activities between 1980 and 1983, with apparently little attention from the U.S. government. Such use of American territory for acts of terrorism abroad should be investigated and never allowed to be repeated."



No doubt Ponce will assert the UN is communist-controlled or otherwise prejudiced against the heroic army of El Salvador. El Salvador would do well to emulate its neighbor, the most sensible country in Central America. Costa Rica abolished its army in 1949 and has lived happily ever after.





A discussion of the U.S. role in El Salvador's civil war can be found at

http://www.newint.org/issue385/truth-and-fantasy.htm

Well said, lynchboy.

This film was suggested to me and I thought I'd read the discussions about it before viewing it. In reading all of this, I am reminded of the movie "Heaven and Earth" which depicts one woman's perspective of the Vietnam War. It shows how the people of her village were caught in the middle of the war and were pressured by representatives of each side. She personally suffered at the hands of both sides. While I am no expert in the details of the war in El Salvador, I have read of atrocities committed on both sides and I know enough about war in general to know that such is usually the case in war. Give people license to kill and some will follow the rules (when/if there are any) and others will run wild, including taking advantage of the situation for personal benefit. There is often no remaining neutral and the innocent frequently get hurt.

To me films such as this open the dialog. The best thing we can do when seeing a film with a historical theme is to research the subject and learn more about it from all points of view. I appreciate that people are posting here so viewers can begin to do that.

I havent really read up on the history so I am not sure whether it is accurate or inaccurate. It was still an amazing movie and even if it wasnt accurate about Salvador, things like this would have happened elsewhere.

Buburina, there seems to be a few innacuracies in your statement. First off to answert your first statement, El Salvador had at the time as it had been for a while was a corrupt brutal dictatorship, and no it was not a great place for nearly anyone at all.

Next, I'm not aware of any Cuban presence in El Salvador at all, I know they (FMLN) got aid from Cuba, but I dont remember any Cuban military presence, Washington would have loved to have uncovered something like that, a way to legitimize its military presence and terrorists attacks on Nicaragua, and would have bailed them out by saying they needed to invade the two countries because of Soviet influence (like they did Grenada in 83). Do you mind citing me your source for that statement?

And second, of course Cuba always, as a "Communist" state would support any revolutionary path in Latin America, but US presence was not there because they were "defending their ineterpretation of democracy and freedom", if so then why would they support Somoza throughout every democratic tendancy that arose from 1933 onward, or the brutal and genocidal (according to the World Court and the UN) Guatemalan government, or the Brazillian dictatorship, or prop up Pinochet, or Noriega (before we toppled him for becoming to independant of the washington consensus), or Argentina during the 70s and 80s during the Dirty War, or Batista in Cuba, or Mexico and Venezuela during their undemocratic rule or any other of the various undemocratic governments and unfree societies.


Custer had it coming, Cortes will get it soon.