It always amazes me to see people who have endured great oppression and pain smiling so freely. The film makes it pretty clear that Iraqis have an indomitable spirit. I was struck by the almost unanimous level of support for America and "democracy" presented in the film - especially since an Iraqi poll released yesterday reported that in some areas 65 percent support attacks on US military, and less than one percent think the occupation is improving security. Even if a cynical view held that the film's American editors introduced their spin, the pure joy expressed by the children and twenty-somethings being filmed and filming was clearly genuine.Included in the film are archival clips - shocking examples of Sadaam's torturers at work. A few seconds of these is almost enough to turn any skeptic into a True Believer Bushite.One grumble: Is there a special motion picture school out there that trains sadists to create captions for foreign language films shown in the US? Those in "Voices of Iraq" have to be the absolute most painful to endure - they are tiny, often projected with little contrast with the background and flashed on and off so fast that one would have to be a champeen speed reader to follow wot the h they said.2nd grumble: Next time they do another film like this, hopefully they will hand out tripods along with the cameras. With the camera movement almost constant and the bleepin captions blinking on and off, it is a challenge to concentrate - but seeing the people up front and close and speaking their minds, made it well worth the minor irritation. Check it out.

I'm glad I saw this. It was heartening to see dozens Iraqis express such optimism and determination. I'd recommend the movie to pretty much anyone, along with "Control Room," "9/11" and pretty much any other documentary or reportage on America's roles in the post-9/11 world.Just make sure you have some idea of who made the movie and why, and with whose money.Given what we know about Armstrong Williams and Jeff Gannon, is it really so hard to believe that Bush administration or some arm of the US government was involved in shaping the message in "Voices of Iraq"? One IMDb user suggested this and got shouted down with something like "Michael Moore something something something U.N. Oil-For-Food Program something something something anti-Bush liberal media bias." Come on, guys, if you want to talk about bias and undisclosed motivations, you've got to do more than call names. The PR firm pushing the movie did the same thing for the "Army of One" commercials. That may not be damning evidence of a connection, but it does seem interesting enough to check out.One of the producers, Archie Drury, is a Democrat and a former Marine, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. If you want to read into his motivations, I suppose you could go in either directions with him. What I found suspicious was several Iraqis repeating the theory that democracy in Iraq would spread throughout the Middle East. That's not a harebrained pipe-dream, and it's possible that dozens or even millions of Iraqis believe it, but it's also strikingly similar to what the Bush administration is saying. It's similar enough at least to make me want to do a little more research.And what's up with, like, 95% of the people in the film saying that America's so great? Jeez, man, the U.S. gets even better ratings in Iraq than it gets here at home. Sure, it's plausible. Iraqis are right to thank the U.S. military for freeing them from Saddam's regime. The important questions here, though, are whether they ARE actually thanking the U.S. for this, and whether or not they THINK they're better off. Obviously, at least 50 people out of 20 or 30 million say they're better off.But a lot of them think that Saddam was great and the U.S. sucks. They may be wrong or even delusional, but you've at least got to put their comments in your "Voices of Iraq" film alongside the positive comments if you want to call it a real documentary. A survey conducted by Gallup in April 2004--the same time as the cameras were going around--found that the numbers of Iraqis who said the U.S. presence had improved their lives was about the same as those who said it hadn't. (Unless you're convinced that the Christian Science Monitor is a front for Michael Moore Inc., you may want to brush up on recent history at www.csmonitor.com/2004/0429/dailyUpdate.html).A film that includes those voices but explains why they're wrong is a documentary with a clear point of view. A film that leaves them out in a wildly disproportionate way is propaganda. Including only one or two complaints in a propumentary doesn't reflect reality, guys. Somebody had an agenda here. That's fine--it was Somebody's prerogative. I just wish Somebody had revealed his own identity. "The People of Iraq" starred in this film. They probably did so at some risk to their lives. Bless them. But the producers and editors, presumably the ones who chose what interviews to include, were named "Drury," "Kunert," "Manes," "Robison," "Mark," and "Russell." Iraqis? Give me a friggin' break.

There is, of course, some controversy over the legitimacy of this film as far as whether it has a political agenda or not. It is indeed strange that they distributed 150 video cameras and, if each camera was distributed with only one tape, that's about 150 hours of footage, which was then whittled down to a meager 80-minute film. If there were two tapes per camera, about 300 hours of footage, etc. It's a clever marketing device to claim that this film was directed by the Iraqi people, but that is, of course, nonsense, because the person in the editing room could have made any film they wanted out of the footage that they had to work with. The fact that at least 150 hours of footage was cut into a film that doesn't even run a full hour and a half should immediately dispel any idea that the people of Iraq had anything to do with directing this movie, but you can't help but respect the goal of giving the Iraqis a medium through which to try to tell their stories. But in order to allow them to truly direct the movie, it would have to be 150 hours long. Whatever the case, the film does give unprecedented insight into what normal life in Iraq is like.What I love about the film is that it does try to show every side of the issue. There are some people who say they wish they could go back to the way things were before the Americans came to Iraq, even if it meant going back to the Iraqi regime, there are people who mourn the death of loved ones lost in battle with the Americans, there are people who sit together and have serious, concerned conversations about the occupation, understanding the damage that it is doing to their country and their fellow Iraqis, but also understanding how important it is that the Americans stay there to maintain security. There are people in this film that claim that the Americans do nothing but harm to their country and there are people who call us saviors, and of course, peppered in the middle of all of these normal people voicing their concerns about the state of their union are various videos from the insurgents, displaying their sheer brutality and total lack of humanity. I remember when Saddam's sons were killed and their corpses displayed all over the covers of magazines and newspapers all over the world, I was shocked that a sovereign nation like the United States would display something so grotesque and brutal about the family of the leader of another sovereign nation, even if the broadcast brutality involved a vicious dictator like Saddam Hussein. But man, once I saw the videos that were shown in this movie, I wanted to go over there myself and start shooting. Of course, I'd last about 30 seconds in Iraq with my white skin and blue eyes.On the other hand, when I think about it, it doesn't surprise me that people are accusing the makers of this film of being involved with the Bush administration. To be sure, I wouldn't put something as sneaky as that past Curious George and his minions, but I think that the film does a good job of showing all sides. Because while the vicious and sickening videos of Uday Hussein and the disturbing melodies chanted in the Taliban videos by far overshadow everything else, the film also vindicates Michael Moore (Did you notice the children laughing and playing? See? It really does happen! Even in Iraq!), and would any company working for the Bush administration want to do something crazy like that?

I saw this, but I think the best commentary is from my son - who is currently stationed in Iraq. He'll be home soon - he's been there for over a year. I got this e-mail from him today:----Original E-mail Message---- We have done so much good over here, but it is time for a break. I would like it if everyone could find a copy of a movie called "Voices of Iraq" and watch it and then pass it on to a friend and let them watch. "Voices of Iraq" is shot by the Iraqi people of the Iraqi people and allows you to hear how they feel about the war in Iraq. It was shot between MAR 04 and OCT 04 which is when we were doing most of our operations. I have been to several of the places in Baghdad where parts of the film were shot. It gave even me a new outlook at some of the stuff happening over here and I have been living it for the past 13 months. Please check out this video and let your friends know to watch it, particularly the ones who say we shouldn't have come over here or that we should leave now. Well I better get back to work. Hope to see you all soon.Frank Novak SSG, USA --------------------- P.S. from armymom - he'll be going back again within the year, and my one nephew has been there and returned, and my other nephew is currently also over there. And yes, we support what they are doing, and their Commander-in-Chief.