Michael Tucker, who co-directed Gunner Palace and spent two extended periods shooting footage with the 2/3 Field Artillery Unit in Baghdad, has been touring the country, showing his film to soldiers and civilians alike. He recently won an appeal to the MPAA for a PG-13 rating, despite the movie's rampant profanity. By phone from LA, Tucker talks about what the film has meant for him and others.
How big was getting the PG-13 rating?
We're trying not to gloat about it. On a personal level, it was just a huge win, just because I have so much invested emotionally with these soldiers. I think that was kind of the winning argument. They're fighting and dying every day, and it's a reality check. We screened for six weeks across America in about 16 cities, and only one person ever stood up and said, "I am offended by this language." I think most people, whether they're right wing or left wing or whatever, I think they understand where these soldiers are at. The language is not gratuitous and jumping out on the surface. ... In general, people are pretty—they cut these guys a little bit of slack. It's a landmark, that's for sure, and that would be the worry of the MPAA. But again, the whole argument was based upon context and the times we live in. I personally believe that language is the least of our worries. I'm a parent also, and when I look at movies for my daughter to see, language is not high on my list of things. ... I felt pretty confident that this is something that young adults can see, that they're mature enough.
What do you hope the average viewer takes away from the viewing experience?
I hope that it would humanize these people for them, both the soldiers and the Iraqis. It's just a very difficult situation, and the young guys are just coping with it the best that they can. It's interesting that some of the most negative [criticisms] come from people who don't understand the fact that they're supposed to be laughing with the soldiers and not at them. I don't know what perspective someone could see that. Either they're so removed from the subject matter, or there's such a social disconnect that they just didn't get it. You hope that it humanizes them, and that they just care a little bit more. And caring's not driving around with a "Support Our Troops" sticker on the back of your truck. I think it's actually listening and talking and demanding some accountability. They have been polling people for the two-year anniversary of the war, and more and more people, they don't really know where the goalpost is. They're not quite sure what the objective is, and it's becoming very expensive, both in money and in blood. That's not really making a judgment whether it was right or wrong, but we owe 25 million people [Iraq's approximate population] that we make good on a promise. It's a very difficult situation.
Have you been accused of being anti-war?
Yes and no. I have extremely complicated feelings about the subject myself. I probably couldn't even articulate a position anymore. So if someone criticizes me of something like that, I ask them to take a few steps back and think. Anyone walking into that situation as a civilian definitely looked at it politically. I tend to view it a little bit more emotionally now. Part of the residue of that is I don't think you can share an experience with these people and try to capture a part of it, and then knowing that some of them are dead now, I don't exactly walk away with really rosy feelings about what's happened there. Even if there was a wonderful peace in the Middle East tomorrow and all of this was worthwhile, there's always going to be this loss in people's lives. That's something that happened in these last weeks going on tour, was meeting these families who have lost their sons, and it's really hard. So for those people, maybe they need to go talk to some of those parents, and see that there are really mixed emotions about it.