Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Cristal The movie really just wants to entertain people.

jmbwithcats Objectively as a person who reviews thousands of films, I have to say this was a terrible movie.On the one hand, while I knew about stop loss already as everyone who signs the dotted line does, I found it to be unconstitutional as a concept.On the other hand, this movie was pure propaganda from bleeding hearts. It has the clichés running straight through it from start to finish, and it wouldn't have been so bad if the directing, script, dialog were any good.I think the actors did a decent job with what they had to work with, and there were some intriguing ideas, but they weren't new ones and they weren't done skillfully.In the end we wonder what he learned if anything from his actions. It seems it was all full of sound and fury signifying nothing.If you want to see my favorite movie about war, watch The Deer Hunter. Now that's a movie that will change your life.

museumofdave I enjoy making up "double-bill" evening nights with films that match in some way--both versions of The Maltese Falcon, for instance, or two films about pianists. An evening spent watching both Stop-Loss and The Hurt Locker comparing their strengths and weakness was fascinating,comparing brilliant and committed performances from the two lead actors, Ryan Phillippe and Jeremy Remmer. The latter film seems to center on the kind of man who is addicted to war and does his job well, but Peirce's film shows a bright young man from Texas who experiences some brutal battle, has done his time, and then is called back, simply because the war is eating up the other volunteers. It is curious that what was once a strictly male director's province, i.e., war films, has been usurped by two women: both Peirce and Kathleen Bigelow delve deeply into the male experience of battle, the former also connecting with what the people back home are feeling and experiencing. Both films question the validity of war from different viewpoints, and while not luridly political, deliver some scathing commentary on its effects on the human mind; while Stop-Loss is no Paths of Glory, it is effective story-telling, perhaps enlightening viewers clueless about those who are shipped overseas more than once.

tanelteder Stop-Loss is quite a controversial movie. It's not your regular war movie. It has few scenes which the story happens in Iraq, but mainly it goes in US where the soldiers have returned from the mission. They are trying to conflate back to civilian life which actually seems harder than going through battles back in the far east. It's intriguing because the movie has a point against the government system which has a fail spot. But for me, what I really enjoyed, was the story more important than the vital factor for which the movie wanted to point the finger to.I liked the cast. Young and talented actors such as Ryan Phillippe, Channing Tatum, Joseph Gordon-Levitt give all good performances. And also we got good-looking Abbie Cornish. Stand-out performance - Joseph Gordon-Levitt.I suggest to see the movie because of its talent. You see the future and probably you like it.

badajoz-1 This film is never going to make money in the USA because all films and politicians have to make Amnericans feel good about themselves. This leaves one with the queasy feeling that not all is well - the US might not be doing the best thing by the Iraqis, after all whose country is it? Who invaded whom? And under what pretext? But the film is in favour of all those guys fighting on the ground, but they may be fighting the wrong war in the wrong place - and to conservative US that is not acceptable. So this film divides opinion. 'Hurt Locker' of course portrays US heroes so is going to be far more acceptable. The film has a fifties/forties feel in that a decent man makes one mistake, and becomes a fugitive. Montgomery Clift would have made this then. The film portrays a good man caught by duty and his own feelings of justice - a classic theme - well played by Ryan Phillippe, who does manage to show a good range of emotions, and who doesn't get the comfort of getting the girl into the sack - that was left for real life! The script shows the strain of loyalties and the effects of killing in a war that the West brought down upon a largely civilian population - sounds like Concord and 1776 to me! The supports act well and do not drown out the main action and character. But the film has a problem in that the spur for the action is played down too much - eg Brandon King refusing to be 'stop lossed' - and it does not want to make events too dramatic (something the more visceral 'Hurt Locker' engages). Therefore, the film tends to meander as it tries to be too understated. But it does get in several wry observations about an immigrant army, a creepy, smiling officer class, and promise all politicians. A good effort, but ultimately it gets caught between too many stools. A pity because the acting deserved more recognition than being tarred by the rabid, blind patriotism of Americans who see an anti-war and anti-US film!