Matcollis This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

Roman Sampson One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Frances Chung Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

MisterWhiplash Let's face facts folks, especially at this point if not the should-have-been start: American invaded a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. This isn't the core message of Control Room, but it's certainly all encompassing for what Jehane Noujaim wants to say in her documentary Control Room. The argument could be made- and of course has- that Al Jezeera is a militant television network playing to an Arab base, that it shows people damning America all the time and praising Alah and so on and so forth. For the latter I can't say how much is truly shown, even by the documentary's scope. But for the former, the context can't be taken lightly: whether or not it is propagandistic isn't quite the point. When a country gets attacked by another country, it's hard to continue to find praise for the offensive side (and, as we see later in the film, Al-Jezeera was attacked by American planes specifically). Is her perspective meant to show bias? Maybe, maybe not. It's there in plain sight, how much to s*** things went following the American invasion, and yet side has to be taken into question, media, military, civilian.There's plenty of questions to ask by the end of the film, even in a form that isn't with the best production values or the firmest visual hold. Control Room is also terrifying in hindsight- if this is where we were at in going into Iraq (I saw this film in cinemas as the time one week before Fahrenheit 9/11 was released), what about today? It might be even more intriguing to see a follow-up documentary to Control Room, where one sees what has happened some half a decade (and deceased hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives later and thousands of Americans) down the line. But for now, it's a story set in the midst of a conflict established by the Americans to get Sadaam Hussein out of power - and thus throwing the country into a tailspin. And all throughout we're put through the prism of media, of inquiry, of a search for the facts in the midst of two systems shown in the film: American journalism (we see American military interviewed) and Arab journalism, and each side in dialog and argument, with location footage interspersed.In a way it's a dense film in just its 84 minutes. This might be Noujaim's main strength is the accumulation of points of view, of perspectives. It's not just pat a statement to make that Control Room takes the side of the Iraqi's and that's it. There's also accountability taken in. There's an fascinating cross-section that reveals some of Bush's hypocrisy (not hard to do, and there's such an abundance, but just one instance for example), where Bush says that "the people of Iraq will control their own destiny... they will not just say they were following orders." Cut to some footage of Americans, in possible dire straits, being asked by Iraqi's why they're in Iraq. "I'm just following orders," they all say. Is it America, or just Bush? Is it just Sadaam, or a whole mix of Iraqi's that have to be seen through the prism of the media coverage? What is really propaganda? Control Room, ultimately, isn't the greatest of documentaries, mostly in a form that bounces around with the only structure with Bush at the start with his message of "watch out, Iraq, we're attacking now!" to the disgusting message on the Aircraft carrier at the end. But it is an important one, almost like an early, crucial appendage to the more recent No End in Sight. If only for a moment can we have a view into the first huge cluster-f*** of the century, Control Room has a purpose.

wfjgcinet The earlier reviews of this film were quite rich and detailed. There is little to add.Except it is now more than three and a half years after the historic span depicted in the film. By coincidence, I viewed this for the first time today, the day after Donald Rumsfeld had to fall on his sword. Mr. Rumsfeld's verbatim remarks in press conferences were included in several key sections of Control Room.I think it is particularly worthwhile to view this now, if one is interested in growing insights into how history really unfolds. I don't think the film will look the same now as it did to many who viewed it (and commented on it) two years ago. It struck me as quite extraordinary. See how it strikes you.

Dennis Littrell (Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon.)While this is not by any means a prize-winning documentary it is still worth seeing because of the perspective gained. To see the war through Arab/Muslim eyes is what is gained. It is a bit chilling. Most of us watched the war through the eyes of CNN or Fox or PBS or one or more of the networks, and we saw a biased view. The real carnage was withheld from us because it was believed that to show the bleeding and mangled bodies was to (1) inflame opinion (2) give assistance to the enemy.It was almost impossible for an American news source to present the war as it really was. No American network executive could do that. But for Al Jazeera, no such reluctance existed. And that is the value of this documentary: it allows us to see what our own news media dared not show, although that too was only part of the story.Filmmaker Jehane Noujaim uses interviews and footage from inside Al Jazeera's "control room" and footage from the communications center of the coalition forces to show how the reporters worked. Reports from the US authorities, Rumsfeld and the generals, the media officers in the field and at the communications center, are contrasted with actual footage and reports from Iraq. It is clear that the news was managed by both Western services and by Al Jazeera to conform to the expectations and interests of their differing audiences.Frankly I was surprised that the bias wasn't greater (on both sides). I came away feeling that, given that modern wars are won or lost to some extent by how well the combatants manage the news, this war within a war was a toss up. And indeed despite Bush's declaration of victory aboard the aircraft carrier, the war on the ground as it exists today is still very much a toss up. Coalition forces roared into Iraq and found very little resistance. And then began the insurgency. What does it mean to win? How does one side lose? As in Vietnam, victory or defeat is to some extent in the eyes of those watching. In the field there was and is no victory. There is only carnage. And so the combatants try to spin the war to their advantage, because it is in the spin that one may find victory regardless of what happens in the field of battle. In this case, Saddam Hussein and the insurgents had no media. But the Muslim/Arab world needed such a media, and thereby arose Al Jazeera to spin the other side. This documentary affords us a quick look at that network.However I don't think this documentary was very effective. It lacked focus and continuity. It seemed hastily thrown together. We are shone some interviews, some on-camera reportorial and editorial activities, some footage from the field, from Baghdad, from Mosul. An Al Jazeera reporter is killed by an American missile. The people at Al Jazeera are deeply saddened and outraged. They think it was on purpose, to "punish" them for reporting what Rumsfeld doesn't want reported, and they may be right; but somehow the loss seems almost trivial compared to the rest of it: the tens of thousands of people dead, the uncounted maimed and wounded, the hundreds of billions of dollars spent like buckets of water poured upon a vast and seething desert. Somehow the "news" of the news reporters themselves seems somewhat irrelevant, almost, I thought, a vanity show. We have the power to report what happens, they are telling us. Therefore we have the power to create what happens.As was famously said, "In war, the first casualty is truth." One thing this documentary does do well is demonstrate the truth of that adage.

mesaj When watching the news a person will get only what the media wants to give out. The media wants the people of their country to have pride and to do this the media will only show certain events that would make a person feel great about their country. But not every media network feels that way about leaving facts out about the news.Control Room shows the Al Jazeera news and how they want to show the both sides of the U.S., Arabs war. The U.S. on the other hand only wants to show their side of the war and only their's. Al Jazeera really wants to show the world what is happening in this war no matter how upsetting it could be. Al Jazeera believe that the people have the right to know what is going in their world not just some pieces of a story that the U.S. calls news. The movie portrayed the was not as entertainment but facts that a person should know. "Control Room" shows this through Al Jazeera. But in reality "Control Room" can not seem to be equal on both sides. "Control Room" leans more on the Arab side and seem to discard the U.S. The U.S. only shows one side of the war which I know is wrong but to some extent can not help it. The U.S. is not fighting on their own soil which can be hard to get coverage of the war. The U.S. in fact has never fought on their own soil so the Americans have never been on that side and have know idea what citizens feel or how it affects their country. So the media does not think that they should show that side of the coverage. Also an American news reporter would have a harder time trying to interview and Iraqi than and Iraqi interviewing an American. The fact is just that Iraqi's feel more upset about the war which they have the right too because it is affecting them more. "Control Room" tends to leave that part out. "Control Room" tries so hard to show Al Jaeezar and how they try to portray both sides of the war. But gives no credit at all to the U.S. media. The U.S. media is mention but not in a positive way and that is not the whole facts. Maybe the U.S. media does not know better or believes that they are giving the whole truth of the war. The fact that "Control Room" did not mention that makes me feel like they are not showing both sides fairly and is leaning towards Al Jaeezar. And the "Control Room" should lean more to that side because it is the right way to give news but the fact that "Control Room" does not acknowledge the U.S. American media makes it seem wrong for "Control Room" to complain about the U.S. media when "Control Room" just did the same thing. "Control Room needs to realize that the U.S. media will always be different because the U.S. never had experience what other countries have faced in the war. So then of course the media will be different because that is all they know."Control Room did make really good points about the media. It shows how the media wants to just entertain an audience rather than give the facts of the topic. Sandra Silbertein author of "From News To Entertainment" stated that media is really entertain the public rather than informing them of the news worthy events. How the media of the 911 would only take the drama part to make people be more entertain and want people to keep watching the news. "Control Room: portrays this one hundred percent. "Control Room" wanted to inform the people of the truth of how media is different in other countries and that showing the whole truth of a story especially the war is better than just parts of the news to make their country sound great.