“Today ‘again’ he discovered he didn’t have any legs … He does remember our names, the boys, family and many other things … but missing his legs was a whole new thing today and it was not easy for him. His frontal lobe was severely damaged, but it is amazing how well he is doing considering that fact … ”

There is no real gray area. War is a dirty, ugly thing. It is sometimes necessary, but it comes with costs.

The above quote is excerpted from the wife of a friend and former co-worker recovering from the effects of a roadside bomb. It serves as a testament to the lasting impact war has on so many lives. Which is why, when Hollywood decides to do its take on war stories, it should be done with care and caution, for it doesn’t just dwell in the realm of fiction.

Following on the heels of “The Hurt Locker” winning Best Picture, Matt Damon again teams with his Bourne director Paul Greengrass to give us “Green Zone,” the latest Hollywoodization of the events in Iraq, and one that will certainly not please all who see it.

Set early in the military action, the story follows Roy Miller (Damon), a chief warrant officer charged with leading a team into areas suspected of containing weapons of mass destruction. As each raid ends with the same fruitless results, Miller begins to doubt the intel being given him, and starts to question those doing the giving.

What follows is a Michael Moore dream; a tale of forged intelligence and constructed motivations for the invasion.

Storywise, the film doesn’t break any new ground. There are two camps regarding this issue: Those who believe that the information given the government was faulty, and those who believe that the government created whatever information was needed to justify going into Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein from power.

Regardless of the side taken, there can be no question that the search for WMDs yielded no positive results. But this film isn’t about to sway opinions or change minds. How much you enjoy this movie will depend a great deal on what your political ideology is.

The fellow sitting behind me muttering about “towelheads” and cheering with the death of each Iraqi would most likely be the exception. It seems he was there for other reasons.

The movie tries to shock by suggesting that there are corrupt agencies within the government that would circumvent the American idea of justice, and are motivated strictly by power. It contrasts this with the “good” agency that truly wants to discover the truth.

Honestly, is there a person alive who doesn’t believe that government is corrupt on some level? The government, after all, is ruled by politicians. You show me an honest politician and I’ll show you someone who won’t be in Washington very long.

The problem is, the viewer is asked to decide who to root for: The guys who want the truth or the guys who want to liberate a nation. Equally frustrating, we are asked to choose which American soldiers to cheer depending on which side they defend.

Damon fills the role that I imagine George Clooney champed at the bit to play, and he does so well. He is suited for action, and can actually act when called upon, unlike most of whom pass for action stars today. He and Greengrass have found a system that works for them, and together they present a polished and entertaining product.

Aside from Greengrass’s over-reliance on the handheld shaky cams that helped define the “Bourne” films he directed, the film is pretty entertaining. But I’m certain not all will feel this way.

The problem with agenda films is that they can do as great a disservice to a cause as anything else. To suggest that the White House knowingly falsified information and put lives at risk under false pretenses is a pretty grand accusation.

Would it surprise me if it were true? Given the incompetence of the previous and present administrations, not really. But the numbers of soldiers who have enlisted and re-enlisted since the WMD washout would suggest that there are many who are fighting for a cause that they believe in.

As soldiers give their time, and their lives, to defend the freedom not only of their country, but of people that they have never known before, it is important to honor them in movie representations. They pay a price for their duty, as do the families and loved ones around them. It’s a difficult trick to create entertainment out of tragedy.

“Green Zone” manages to honor soldiers while trying to discredit the war. Yet this is a war that many believe enough in to give up jobs and lives to fight. It would have been nice to see that reflected as well.



Address correspondence to Benji Tunnell, c/o The Joplin Globe, P.O. Box 7, Joplin, MO 64802 or benjitunnell@gmail.com.