Issue date: 4/2/08 Section: Aggielife

Media Credit: Chad Stoermer [Click to enlarge]

It has been several years since the American occupation of Iraq. With each coming year, more protestors gather in the streets to decry the evils of the war. Due to the amorphous nature of this particular war against an elusive enemy, the American military has had to adapt and evolve. With this adaptation comes the implementation of various military policies, such as the stop-loss policy.

Sergeant Brandon King (Ryan Phillipe) is a decorated war hero. Having just returned from the Iraqi war with his comrades, Steve Shriver (Channing Tatum), Tommy Burgess (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and Isaac Butler (Rob Brown) in arms, King prepares to return to his normal life. Upon reporting for his last day of duty and honorable discharge, King discovers that he has been stop-lossed; a process by which the military can extend a soldier's tour beyond the intended date of termination. Feeling unjustly treated, King goes AWOL in an attempt to flee his circumstances. But his family, friends, and country need him.

"Stop-Loss" is an interesting piece. As a film, the movie is well made. It's not superlative, but it's very much a solid piece. Each of the actors has excellent onscreen chemistry with one another, allowing the audience to appreciate their troubles. While several of the principle characters may have needed a few more dialogue lessons in regards to their poorly spoken Texas accents, the story, nonetheless, manages to hold together fairly well.

The big buzz around the film of course is its anti-war theme. Proudly joining the ranks of several other Hollywood anti-war diatribes, "Stop-Loss" is most decidedly an anti-war film. As such, it ends up being a film that leaves a bad taste in one's mouth. "Stop-Loss" depicts the principle characters as all suffering from extreme symptoms of PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder). While PTSD is very real and something that many soldiers struggle with, not every soldier returning home from combat is doomed to flashbacks and endanger themselves or those around them. Nor do they all have severely increased risks of suicide. But by depicting only these conditions in returning soldiers, the film implies that all soldiers returning home from war suffer from these extreme symptoms.

Also, the stop-loss policy is also nothing new. And what the film fails to depict is the fact that each and every soldier who signs on the dotted line is made well aware of the stop-loss policy as well as the IRR (Individual Ready Reserve) policy -- a period of usually two to four years after discharge in which the military can call a soldier back to service.

The problem with the film is that its facts are incomplete. The movie shows only one side of the issue and in the end offers no real solution. The movie is so concerned with making its statements, it leaves its characters in the dust. As such, it's not a very good movie. Beyond that, it's not even a very strong anti-war discourse.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools