Hero Worship
[The Tillman Story ]
Directed by Amir Bar-Lev
Runtime: 94 min.
"Fratricide is the word used in Amir Bar-Levs doc [The Tillman Story] to describe the 4/22/04 incident in which Pvt. Pat Tillman was killed while on duty in Afghanistan. It is a sign of Bar-Levs political bias that his film favors that moralizing term over the military designation friendly fire to describe gunfire discharged by allies and colleagues. Bar-Lev wants the tragic implications of a taboo act and is not above structuring this investigation into exactly how Tillman became a celebrated casualty of the afghan campaign into lurid melodrama. The Tillman Story is really about the chicanery of the U.S. Militaryfirst in covering up the facts, then presenting a version to the media who used it to promote the war to the public. The Tillman Story is another example of how contemporary journalism and documentary-making have lost credibility.
Bar-Lev starts from a slanted assessment of military duty, based on the partisan dispute that an unjust war invalidates a soldiers commitment. The films premise is that Tillmans decision to give up a lucrative NFL career and join the military after 9/11 was unfathomable and then dishonored by the militarys self-protective behavior. Wrought-up in the Tillman familys disillusionment and confusion, Bar-Lev cant separate institutional critique from anti-war protestand doesnt want to.
The Tillman Story exemplifies the folly in new advocacy documentary. It forfeits scrutiny and understanding for spleen. From Josh Brolins narration (intended to evoke his role as George W. Bush in [Oliver stones W.] and the shame liberals wanted to infer from it) to the frequent complaints about media complicity, Bar-Lev confuses the point of his disapproval. He shifts from the Tillman familys investigations, aided by an activist blogger, to superficial allegations about lazy reporting that took the silver star narrative of Tillmans supposed braverycarried by all major networks, abridged, relied upon, told over and over againand then indicts the military chain of command, all the way up to the White House.
We are decades past the 1979 primetime network TV movie titled Friendly Fire starring carol Burnett, which introduced that phrase into American homes during the Vietnam era. A fact-based drama strikingly similar to the Tillman tragedy, it grappled with the difficulty of comprehending that conceptwhich included parsing the meaning of war democracy and duty. Instead, Bar-Lev indulges a Michael Moore-level cynicism. this doc injects negative emotional values into a story of why solders fight, what they risk and how they are remembered. Preston Sturges examined those issues in the 1944 Hail the Conquering Hero, but without the demoralizing cynicism of Bush-era media. its not the military that has changed but filmmaking standards.
At one point, Tillmans friends from the platoonRussell Baer and Jason Parsonscontradict their own motives (I wanted to serve myself, get money for college, blow things up, ones says) and Bar-Lev uses their anguish to obnoxiously indicate foul play or some envious homotriangle envy. One crucial flaw takes a soldiers testimonyI wanted to stay in the firefightand continously misrepeats it as, I wanted to be in the firefight.
The Tillman Story devours itself as it goes along, becoming an example of the futility that Tillmans parents, siblings, wife and friends eventually suffer. The questioning had run its course, Tillmans mom, Dannie, sighs after sitting through dissatisfying congressional hearings. I dont think theres much else that can be done. But, yes, there is: This is a propaganda film that exploits war without explaining the experience. Bar-Lev himself seems unsure if the real subject is men, war, government or media.