THE BATTLE FOR HADITHA

UK, 2007, 93 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Nick Broomfield.

For many decades, Nick Broomfield has been making feature documentaries many of which have had considerable cinema commercial release (Soldier Girls, Aileen Wuernos, Kurt and Courtney, Biggie and Tupac). More recently, he has been reconstructing true stories in documentary style. This is especially true of his previous film, the excellent Ghosts, about the illegal Chinese migrants who were drowned off Morecombe in northwest England while collecting cockles. He has now done it again, focusing on three days in November 2005 when a group of marines in Haditha in Iraq went on a vengeful rampage killing innocent Iraqis after one of their comrades was killed by a roadside bomb.

With his years of experience (since the early 1970s) of filming actual events, he brings a powerful sense of immediacy to his cinema verite filming of the reconstructions. For most of the film (unless you pause to give thought to the question), you feel as if you are in the middle of the actual events. This also means that the performances of all the cast also give the impression that this is the real thing.

Since, there is still an investigation in progress about what really happened with these trigger-happy Americans and their seemingly callous commanders who interpret this exercise of might as going by the book procedures, it is a critique of the American presence in Iraq and raises questions about how marines should be trained to be a peace-keeping occupying force. These men show little respect or consideration for the locals. They are racist in their presumptions and epithets and not allowing for locals who do not speak English. It is occupation by bullying despite the real provocations of insurgents.

The film also raises the questions about the actions of insurgent leaders and their seemingly cold ambitions and quick saying that the dead are martyrs while they seem to have little intention of immediately dying for their cause - and someone saying that when the Americans leave someone worse than Saddam could assume power. There are also the insurgents themselves who may or may not be in good faith – and who may not have thought through the consequences of their actions.

There are three main strands of the film. The first is the introduction of the two bombers and the detail of their obtaining their bomb, hiding it at checkpoints, burying it and exploding it – and the aftermath. The second strand is a portrait of some of the local people of Haditha, especially families, extended families, and the celebration of a child’s circumcision. This puts faces on the victims so that they are not merely headlines and statistics. It shows how this kind of slaughter will never win the hearts and minds of the Iraquis.

But most attention is given to the third strand because this is the marine group itself and its leader, Ramirez, who is already suffering battle fatigue, can’t sleep and is refused permission to see a doctor until his tour his over. He is only twenty and has served several tours already. What is this young American doing in Haditha? What does he really know about the people and the issues? He himself says he doesn’t know why he is there. Some of the other marines are much more offhand and callous. They congratulate one another on sniper accuracy – on innocent targets. While the Americans have a good deal of surveillance equipment, they are not always accurately informed and make rash decisions.

With the moment-by-moment attention to detail over the three days, Broomfield takes us into the ordinary/extraordinary reality of these years in Iraq. There is plenty to discuss, plenty to question.

At the same time, Brian de Palma made Redacted, a companion piece well worth seeing, quite like this film in many ways, close-ups of the Americans, the victims and the reprehensible behaviour of vengeful marines.

1.The work of Nick Broomfield? Over many decades? Documentaries? Social perceptiveness? Creating docudramas? The visual style, the documentary style, cinema verite?

2.The reliance on facts, the fiction? November 2005, the period of three days? This screenplay based on an actual incident? The aftermath, the inquiry? This incident as a symbol? For the Americans? For Iraqis? For the insurgents? World opinion?

3.The impact for an American audience, for Iraqis, for allies of America, for the rest of the world?

4.The use of Jordan for the locations, actors, professionals and amateurs, the extras? Authentic atmosphere, the town of Haditha, the streets, homes, the US headquarters and their surveillance?

5.The state of Iraq by 2005? Two years after the invasion? The occupation? The insurgents? The pro-US stances? Anti-US stances? The importance of Islam, religion, the fundamentalist interpretations, the nationalism, the fanatics and the terrorists? The consequences?

6.The American strand of the film: Ramirez as a symbol, aged twenty, three tours of duty, his attitudes, minimal training, little empathy with the people, no sense of Iraqi language, considering people as terrorists, the superiority, the racist attitudes? Taking this into action? The effect on him, asking why he was there? Inability to sleep? The refusal for him to see a doctor until he had finished his tours? The glimpses of the other men in the squad, personalities, backgrounds, race? Their jobs, the snipers and their delight in picking off Iraqis? The military training?

7.The terrorist strand: the military going into the shop, the DVDs, the young man going, the buying of the bomb, concealing the bomb through the checkpoint? Burying the bomb, waiting? The American trucks going on the other side? The motivations? The explosion, their running away, getting away? Going to see the leader, his fanatical speeches, anti-American? Nationalist? His attitudes? The fanaticism? The men and their hesitation, the old man going to his own family, seeing his children, realising the consequences of his action and the deaths of Iraqis?

8.How were these terrorists typical of the unseen and unknown insurgents? What they represented? Their action? The punishment?

9.The family strand: the extended family, the celebration of the circumcision, the dancing, the food, shooting the rifles in the air? The scenes of the homes? On the hillside? The prayer leader? The woman and the man and his love for her, the explosions, his search, going through the hill, his being shot, her going out to see him, being ordered away? Her refusal? The film putting faces on the victims of the American reprisals?

10.The bomb exploding, the reactions, the American gung-ho reaction to the dead comrade, getting the ambulance, his injuries? Their anger, wanting revenge? The houses, the commanders, ordering procedures, the surveillance techniques? The information about the houses, the hill? Going up the hill, throwing the grenades into the house, shooting, the snipers and their picking the victims off? Innocent victims? Going to the house, the killing of the children, the prayer leader, the women, the woman and her grief and defying the Americans? The satisfaction on the part of the Americans?

11.The aftermath, the American justification, the effect on Ramirez, his being commended, getting medals? His reaction? His puzzle? His feelings of guilt? The other members of the group – and their offhand approach? The officers and their commendations? The American reaction?

12.Iraqi grief, taking the footage of the surviving girl, her expressed hatred of the Americans, comprehensible?

13.The situation in Iraq, the glimpses of President Bush on the television, the situation of Saddam Hussein, his being toppled, the American occupation, for better, for worse? The insurgency? The long-time solution?

14.The glimpse of ordinary life in an ordinary Iraqi town, the changes, people living their lives – yet the imminent danger, explosions, reprisals, injustice?