More Controversy to be Brewed

Next Friday, yet another film will be released on the current conflict in Iraq and how US forces have dealt with it. However, unlike "The Hurt Locker" which has been generating controversy over the content and depiction of an Army Explosive Ordanance Disposal unit in Iraq, "Green Zone" (starring Matt Damon among others) will show the actions of a 'rogue' Chief Warrant Officer from the US Army who is working with the CIA to hunt down and find weapons of mass destruction in the early days of the Iraqi war. Now I say that this movie will likely stir controversy as well because it deals with a subject that is even touchier for many people and that is whether the hunt for WMDs was cause enough for the nation to go to war. But not only that, the film is loosely based on the book "Imperial Life in the Emerald City" by Rajiv Chandrashekharan.

Now I purposely mention the fact that it appears to be loosely based on the book because I had read the book when it first came out and I have seen the trailers for the film. Now I know it's not fair to jump to a conclusion on a film without having seen it and I'm sure that it will be a decent film given that it's the third time that Matt Damon and director Paul Greengrass are teaming up, but I still can't help but feel that people will come away from this film with a different expectation as well. The controversy surrounding "The Hurt Locker" stems from the fact that many veterans of the war are worried that the public is going to look on this film as a true depiction of what life was like for many of them in Iraq and unfortunately it is more Hollywood's version of it rather than the honest truth.

I had previously written about how Hollywood needs to fit lots of story into a short amount of time if the audience is going to buy it and enjoy it. That being said, the movie has to have something that will sustain it. Now as the case with "The Hurt Locker", "Green Zone" also appears to be taking some liberties with the story and the source material. That's not to say that it may not be realistic or interesting; but to say that the film is based on Chandrashekharan's book is a bit misleading. I say this because the book dealt more with the transition of the interim government to the Iraqi government and how life changed for the Iraqi people after Bush declared the 'mission accomplished'. While some mention was given to the hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, it was not given a place of prominence in the book.

In the film however it seems to take on the role of the central theme. Now again, that's probably not a bad thing. It probably makes for a more interesting film to have a 'rogue' Army officer going out hunting weapons and trying to prove that there either was or wasn't faulty intelligence that led to the US invasion of Iraq. Still, if Hollywood has learned nothing else from the furror surrounding "The Hurt Locker" these days they should at least know that they should make it clear that this is more of a fictional work than a true one. I say this only because the unfortunate thing is that there are plenty of people out there who don't understand that when filmmakers say that a film is 'based on' something, it doesn't necessarily mean it is completely true to its source. I'm curious to see the movie though I know that it will undoubtedly have its fair share of ire too.