I dont completely agree with you, Nadezhda. On the one hand, you are right to say that the film does not provide the true image of an American soldier in Iraq. And that they would never sacrifice their lives for saving the lives of the local people by going after explosives within the city limits. However, I believe the goal of the film was just to show the hidden lines of americans in Iraq: they truly are looked at as bad people who do not respect the locals; but they are human beings who like you mentioned only think about the day of discharge. So, the bottom line: try to approach the movie from a different viewpoint keeping in mind that it is not about the war in Iraq, but about individuals...

Be patient, be strong. History has shown that (eventually) every oppressor pays a price for thier cruelty. In time the USA will be forced to leave Iraq. The British have already left in humiliation and this sign must give the Iraqi people at least some hope of future freedom. The USA in thier greed, arrogance and cruelty will one day be called to account by a higher authority, and this too must give the Iraqi people some hope and strength. The suffering endured by the people of Iraq at the hands of the US military (and the discusting mercenary army which roam the country like bandits) is of epic proportions - the likes of which have not been seen since the second world war.

I support my country overall, but agree with many of the things you have said about how Americans seem to want themselves portrayed. Please believe me when I say not all U.S. citizens want to be viewed this way. Many, many people here protested the Iraq war and are still against it. We're still asking our government why we're there. I think it is because of all these questions and discussions of the war that this movie had any chance at all. It seems to serve as propaganda - take away the identity of the Iraqis while making the U.S. soldiers' personalities larger than life. And I agree with Jim's post - there is a lot of greed, arrogance and cruelty in the U.S., but it lies mainly in the large corporations and news media. Most citizens here are good, kind people. We ask questions and demand explanations. We're just not getting answers. The media does not report all the deaths of U.S. soldiers or Iraqi citizens. A lot of people in our country don't know what it's really like over there right now. I also know many people who refused to see "Hurt Locker" for the same reasons you list in your article. I don't believe it deserved any awards. Please don't allow this movie to change your view of people in the U.S. We still care about the world, and while it's happening slower than we'd like, our country is trying to be better.

I think the writer has written a wonderful review of this film. Indeed the film is nothing more than propaganda, how it ever won an Oscar is beyond belief but then Obama winning a Nobel Peace Prize is also beyond belief? It is a reality view however when you see the disdain the American troops have in relation to the people of Irag, same disdain as they had for the Vietnamese of which they killed about 5 million, nothing has changed there. Today the world knows who the real terrorists are, and it is not only Saddam Hussein, but his former master (USA) as well, who had him hung for the hell of it. There is a light at the end of the tunnel, the unraveling of the corrupt us backed Color Revolutions, one by one. Bravo people of Kyrgyzstan in getting rid of yet another American lackey.

Dear Nadezhda! It seems to me, that what you wrote is rather a hate speech on America than a sophisticated article by an eloquent journalist. What you say has of course truth in it, mostly. Yet it shocked me as a blind oversimplification that, ostensibly, every US raid on civilian homes with the task of finding OpFor combatants or armament end in bloodshed. Come on, how as a professional journalist can you write that. Really every? This is as much a lie, as to say that every Russian raid on Chechen homes, tasked with finding terrorist end with every civilian getting killed. That is just impossible. So overall nice story for marking "The Hurt Locker" as a tool for US Army propaganda. Unfortunately your style was too simplistic and full of blind hate for a, one should think, RT journalist. I mean a student of the 1st course of the journalist faculty of the MGIMO could write more sophisticated and still achieve the aim of blaiming the US in virtually everything. Thus it also a shame on RT as a whole for pulling down the quality of its broadcasting with so poorly hidden hate speeches. My advice to you is to learn on the enemy (CNN, BBC, CBS, Fox etc.) and how they achieve modern propaganda... Yours sincerly

I thought bootleg dvd''s were of regular occurrence in Iraq. It seems the author just assumes otherwise. As for the film, well hopefully just as many people watch Collateral Murder.

The movie was great. One of the better movies about the war in Iraq. You want to see REALITY? Go watch what the US soldiers themselves film in their daily work. Or go watch what the iraqui insurgents do, they both love filming the action. But an anti-war communist`s rant won`t do it any justice. This is a movie, not a US Army advertisement. The movie was not about right or wrong, who`s a war criminal and who is the victim, it`s about people in war, people under stress etc. The camerawork was simply awesome, the atmosphere was great, the movie gets two thumbs up from me. It`s perhaps a modern answer to "Apocalypse Now". It`s far from being as psychologically deep and as good as Apocalypse was, but besides the OTHER movies about Iraq this one is just great. Ms/Mrs Nadezhda Kevorkova, its good you have a work at RT. Because noone at IMDB would ever hire you as a film critic. Go watch Alexander Nevsky and eat a cookie.

You've made me laugh today, Razkolnik, thank you so much! It was funny to read your referral to CNN,Fox and all that other rot that you're praising so much (even if your praising has a pitch of irony), but it was even more fun to read your accusations about simplicity of the article and hatred towards USA allegedly expressed by a reporter. Was not it the whole point of the article: the latest US military adventures cause hatred to the US in many countries including Russia. Since the journalist is Russian, what else did you expect? In regards of simplicity: compare to your post the article can be considered as very deep and even analytical :)

I completely agree with Razkolnik.Though the Hurt Locker did smack of something strikingly similar to a war propaganda film, this article was so poorly written that I wasn't inspired to do much other than laugh. I have scarcely encountered such biased reporting. Please RT--A grammatically incorrect diatribe of unsubstantiated accusations and hateful blather does not a powerful, thought-provoking article make.

There is no single source of truth, especially when it comes to movies, art or literature. Any of them can be politically charged, but movies are probably the most so. Since truth becomes irrelevant when it comes to politics, the criteria of evaluating politically charged movies is always eroded by people's preferences and convictions. It means that arguing is loosing any sense in some cases. Hypocrisy of Western media that is considered here as sophistication and depth by some is simply used to disguise certain prejudices and its sponsor's preferences. When hypocrites don't like an alternative opinion they won't admit their dislike explicitly, but rather personally attack an opinion's bearer. Anyway, I don't think that I want to know about that world of "people at war" more than about deep psychological world of a cockroach. After all, nobody forced them to join the gang of thugs, it was their voluntary choice. Nadezhda's review will save me some time and money. Somehow, I trust it more than BBC, CNN, Fox or IMDB combined together and I hope that the author is not going to switch the employer any time soon. Stay where you are, Nadezhda, and disregard primitive brain-washed people that are trying to bash you here:)

Grizzly Bear, you're the one being brain-washed if you refuse to watch the movie because you read a negative review of it. You should definitely watch it and then form your own opinion. Perhaps then you'll understand why some of us disagree with what the author said and, especially, how he said it.

I'm not sure where get the idea that Americans get $100,000/yr. Maybe the private contractors but the actual soldiers aren't making that much unless I'm mistaken. Here is a link to military pay tables: http://www.dfas.mil/militarypay/militarypaytables.html Also, The film wasn't very popular with audiences so if it was meant to be a propaganda tool it failed. From Box Office Mojo: As of March 21, 2010, the film grossed $36,800,000 against its $15 million production budget and the domestic total of $16,400,000 places it at number 117 of all films released in 2009. Finally, many of the US criticism of the film focuses on the lack of realism and silly psychotic characters. I hope that RT readers don't think that Americans were influenced by this film one way or the other. The Academy Award was primarily a political win for a female director.

Akaki Akakievich, I appreciate what you say and will watch the movie and then formulate an opinion. The movie recieved little attention in the USA other then by the critics, but this movie site unseen, most American movies are for entertainment purposes and not to make political statements as most people outside the USA seem to believe. But there are some glaring inaccuracies in this article.......... Regards