Human Terrain reviews
Review by on 25 Sep 2010
i enjoyed the movie. good to see some minor dissent from the us war machine media. even if there was a lot of propaganda too. as a film it showed people very raw without any editorial comment....apart from the structure of the movie itself. leaving it all up to the viewers kind of stuff. which is always a bit odd i find, as the filmakers cannot help but show their ideas in the creative process, so why not be a little more blatant.
maybe i'm a bit slow! but the whole thing really loses steam and tries to create some drama from the death of a fella. it kinda falls flat, the presentation anyway.
but worth seeing, just to see how narrow the debate is on the attacks on the middle east, and the only reasonable mainstream journalism comes from the UK!
maybe i'm a bit slow! but the whole thing really loses steam and tries to create some drama from the death of a fella. it kinda falls flat, the presentation anyway.
but worth seeing, just to see how narrow the debate is on the attacks on the middle east, and the only reasonable mainstream journalism comes from the UK!
Review by on 23 Sep 2010
The US military is mobilising academics in the social sciences to provide its troops with a cultural education it hopes will enable them to better understand the populations they encounter, giving them the edge in the now-familiar “battle for hearts and minds”.
This “Manhattan Project for the social sciences” is being played out both on the ground, by academics embedded in regiments on counterinsurgency missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and in classrooms and mock villages at military training bases. HUMAN TERRAIN combines insightful footage from these training programmes with judiciously selected interview material, exploring the intricate questions posed by military demands on an academic field which, in a post-colonial world, has moved beyond the idea that culture can simply be transcribed, “grammar book” style.
The latter part of the film examines the work of Michael Bhatia, an anthropologist killed by an IED in Afghanistan. At times, the narrowing of focus creates a sense of frustration, a feeling that we have been (albeit understandably) distracted from the film’s original project. However, Michael’s story not only reminds us of the shifting circumstances that must be deftly negotiated by documentary-makers, but also reveals the ethical tensions within the social sciences, not least through the reactions of his family, friends and colleagues, many of whom struggle to reconcile his personality, ideals and academic background with the use to which his learning (and, ultimately, his life) were put.
An honest and thoughtful film, HUMAN TERRAIN is a skilful depiction of the precarious status of the objective academic.
Nicola Runciman
This “Manhattan Project for the social sciences” is being played out both on the ground, by academics embedded in regiments on counterinsurgency missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and in classrooms and mock villages at military training bases. HUMAN TERRAIN combines insightful footage from these training programmes with judiciously selected interview material, exploring the intricate questions posed by military demands on an academic field which, in a post-colonial world, has moved beyond the idea that culture can simply be transcribed, “grammar book” style.
The latter part of the film examines the work of Michael Bhatia, an anthropologist killed by an IED in Afghanistan. At times, the narrowing of focus creates a sense of frustration, a feeling that we have been (albeit understandably) distracted from the film’s original project. However, Michael’s story not only reminds us of the shifting circumstances that must be deftly negotiated by documentary-makers, but also reveals the ethical tensions within the social sciences, not least through the reactions of his family, friends and colleagues, many of whom struggle to reconcile his personality, ideals and academic background with the use to which his learning (and, ultimately, his life) were put.
An honest and thoughtful film, HUMAN TERRAIN is a skilful depiction of the precarious status of the objective academic.
Nicola Runciman
Review by on 19 Sep 2010
Strangle evenhanded in its approach, human terrain is a film which leaves you with a strong sense of the senselessness of war, combined with a deep suspicion of the motivation of the people behind war and the 'human terrain system.' Which feels, like less of a system and more of a joke (or at least it would if the context weren't so tragic.) That said there are moments of outright hilarity (both intentional and unintentional) as well as some real and interesting questions raised by this thought provoking and intriguing film. Well worth catching whatever your thoughts on the conflicts at its heart.
Review by on 19 Sep 2010
This film deals with an interesting topic that was well and truly beyond the filmmaker's capacity to interpret or present. The filmmakers had some interesting footage - I loved the footage from the training camps and training computer games - but most of the film was presented in via awfully boring footage at a terribly slow-moving pace, with far too much reliance on long, boring diatribes from academics and pseudo-academics talking their characteristic filler. Groan. Given that much of what these people had to say is already available online, often in fairly well-circulated articles, the film's reliance on their words meant that the film did not have much to add to the whole debate. This is a shame because there was a great potential here to add to the debate in new ways through the medium of film. Very disappointed.
Review by on 18 Sep 2010
A timely and compelling exposé on American military strategies in Iraq and Afghanistan, HUMAN TERRAIN delves beyond coalition lines to investigate an experimental counterinsurgency campaign initiated in 2005- the Human Terrain System. The HTS encourages non-violent conflict resolution by conscripting ‘cultural consultants’ to extend the reach of central government by sharing their expertise with marines in the field- the self-righteousness of the military is revealed in their assumption that civilian animosity is a result of mere miscommunication.
James Der Derian dissects the scenario with unbiased clarity both from the perspective of his colleagues at the Watson Institute, and of those deployed abroad. The debate yields to an intimate focus on idealistic anthropologist Michael Bhatia, a friend of the filmmakers who was killed by a roadside IED whilst embedded in Afghanistan- the access granted the director in observing the military’s training exercises is staggering. In part a critique of the system’s over-simplification and optioning of social science to serve flawed foreign policy, HUMAN TERRAIN also indicates the need for a greater diplomacy in military strategy, given the departure of modern warfare from the battlefield.
The HTS appears to be as much about altering the American public’s perception of its military as recasting the Iraqis’- a spin story to give the war effort an air of legitimacy, or a front for harnessing intelligence. HUMAN TERRAIN succeeds in asking the most pertinent questions which, rather than provide definitive answers, compel the viewer to reassess the true motives of this war.
Julie Hrischeva
James Der Derian dissects the scenario with unbiased clarity both from the perspective of his colleagues at the Watson Institute, and of those deployed abroad. The debate yields to an intimate focus on idealistic anthropologist Michael Bhatia, a friend of the filmmakers who was killed by a roadside IED whilst embedded in Afghanistan- the access granted the director in observing the military’s training exercises is staggering. In part a critique of the system’s over-simplification and optioning of social science to serve flawed foreign policy, HUMAN TERRAIN also indicates the need for a greater diplomacy in military strategy, given the departure of modern warfare from the battlefield.
The HTS appears to be as much about altering the American public’s perception of its military as recasting the Iraqis’- a spin story to give the war effort an air of legitimacy, or a front for harnessing intelligence. HUMAN TERRAIN succeeds in asking the most pertinent questions which, rather than provide definitive answers, compel the viewer to reassess the true motives of this war.
Julie Hrischeva
Review by on 17 Sep 2010
Documentary on use of social science advisors alongside US military, starts shakily but improves as it becomes more personal
Film details
Human Terrain
DOCUMENTARIES
Director: James Der Derian, David Udris
Director: Michael Udris
Director: Michael Udris
United States, 2010.
82 mins.
Back to the film page
