Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Bea Swanson This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

Maleeha Vincent It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

tkchess They definitely could have made this much better. For a movie made in 2005, it felt like it was something out of 1985. The music, which was annoyingly and eerily played throughout the movie, sounded like it was out of the 80's. The graphics looked 80's-like. Production was very poor. I have seen some low-budget documentaries, and they were produced much better than Beyond Treason.These things made watching this film very difficult.Sicko, Michael Moore's documentary on the health care system, focusing a lot on the ailments sustained by 9/11 first response rescue workers, was a lot more...entertaining. Its hard to use that word as exposés like documentaries are not meant to be entertainment, but I use more in the sense that the film is made watchable from start to finish, which is not the case with Beyond Treason.I stopped the movie half way through as the material they were presenting just became very repetitive and not presented in any new interesting way.This is not to take away from the information presented. The information is rather accurate and credible. The main focus is the Gulf War as that was a large scale representation of our Government involving our military in a war where we used arms hazardous to both our enemies and our own military. But it was not really presented in an interesting way. It was not aided by the fact that the central points are made by scientists who are rather boring and rather stoic.While the information was definitely credible, there didn't seem like much organization to it. It seemed like it was all over the place, rather feeling like a big mish mash of information thrown at you about how our government covered up the use of toxic substances on our military.Overall, it gets its point across, rather early in the film for that matter, but it was produced very poorly making it very difficult to watch from start to finish.

coco108-2 Well you tell me why so many of you people can't see beyond your nose? I would say that at least 80% of what is said in this movie and many more are trying to tell you how much the governments are not telling as the truth about many things that is going on behind our backs. Just one good example look what Mr. G. Bush said about the weapons of mass destruction, that was all a lies and just look at all the young men and women we have loss because people believed Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney, sorry I think people should really start opening there eyes. Another thing just take a real close look at the World Trade Center pictures and videos, also why in the name of GOD would people listen to Fox News? Its another government run organization, just check it out and you well see who runs it, check the records if you can find them.

mal_constant Whoa! talk about factually incorrect, wallabee2003? Did you even watch the movie? This documentary isn't propaganda its anti-propaganda.They do focus on incoming Iraqi chemical weapons and explain how the troops were inadequately warned or protected if you watch the film you'll see that for your self.The U.S. military outclassed Iraq and would have achieved victory without the use of DU due to advanced computerized targeting capabilities. Most of the KIA in '91 were from friendly fire.I think the purpose was to illustrate a precedent and transcend the false left right political paradigm.Yes their are other documentaries that focus more on the implementation of DU and I recommend everyone watch this or another documentary detailing the effects of DU contamination.What type of military commanders fail to offer proper protection to the chemical & biological agents which they were involved in selling to Iraq (Iran-contra affair) and then expose the troops and the poor civilians to the additional permanent hazards of DU?

wallabee2003 It doesn't matter if you are conservative or liberal, when a movie is poorly made and factually incorrect, it shouldn't be given much merit. Don't just listen to the "this movie is great" comments, because these people are just blindly accepting propaganda. They don't pay attention to what the movie is saying, because the arguments presented there are terrible: 1. There is NO alternative to depleted uranium that is as effective. The closest thing we have is tungsten, which isn't even guaranteed to pierce the armor in tanks. The video doesn't mention this, it would hurt their position.2. This video doesn't take into account other reasons why soldiers could be sick. They blame every problem a soldier has ever had to DU. It could also be the poor health care, lack of adequate or clean water, STD's, viruses, enemy chemical attacks, shell shock, or poor hygiene. But none of these things are considered. 3. Most of the advocates against depleted uranium, admittedly have a problem with the US government as far as health benefits and disabled pay are concerned. They are incredibly biased. Documentaries need to have sources that are not only credible, but don't have an agenda. This movie is just terrible, total waste of time. Everyone I watched this movie with, (democrats, republicans, and a libertarian), thought it was horrendous. Do yourself a favor and go watch a different Depleted Uranium documentary. There's bound to be another one that is actually done right.