Very well executed

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Some may argue that this movie was boring- it didn't have any special effects, it didn't star any celebrities, and most of what it contained came from hand-held cameras and pictures taken by an amateur photographer, but I think that's what made this movie so effective and gave it so much impact. Regarding non-fictional documentaries, I think that if too much focus was given to make the movie aesthetically pleasing, rather than getting the message across, the film would become somewhat discredited. It would imply that the directors and producers of the film put more stress on making a name for themselves in Hollywood than giving a meaning to the movie and making audiences aware of the event.That's how The Devil Came on Horseback was- it was more of an actual documentary than a movie. But because none of the pictures of films were dramatized, it actually had more impact than other movies that did- you know that, when you watch this, that this is the real thing. However, I got the feeling that it documented more of how the Sudanese government was trying to suppress information about what's happening in Darfur than on what's happening in Darfur itself. It also described a lot about how Brian's journey in trying to spread awareness about the genocide and get the government/ UN/ International Criminal Court to take action. I suppose whether it's good or bad is up to the audience and what they're looking for. This was a good documentary, but I thought that I should have focused more on the genocide itself. However, it did shed a lot of light on how governments are very reluctant to act on something if it doesn't involve them, even if there is a moral obligation (especially if the government in question is the United States- the current world superpower). It also showed how non-binding the UN truly is (there have already been two arrest warrants for the president of Sudan, yet non of the countries Al-Bashir visited were willing to arrest him and extradite him). Despite this, however, there were a scenes of anger (Sudanese officials and citizens denying the genocide in the Holocaust museum), grief (mostly the interviews of the black Africans targeted by the Janjaweed, who told their stories of suffering), and scenes that urged us to take action.Overall, I do recommend this movie, but not if you are looking for facts regarding the genocide in Darfur, but rather a fellow reporter finding it hard to get his story out, or to get people to care about his cause.

Those who have any doubt about the position that oil plays in World politics need only to see this film to know why the Bush administration has done nothing in Darfur.The atrocities are graphically displayed here in a region that is devastated by the Sudan government with the aid of the Janjaweed militia to keep the oil money from China coming in.Burned bodies are just part of the evidence presented by a former Marine Captain, who is now part of the UN peacekeeping mission. The cries of the people are heartrending. The fact that IDP camps are attacked is further evidence of genocide.A handful of Israelis are killed by rockets and it is all over the news. Over 400,000 Darfurians have been killed and over 2.5 million driven from their homes. When is the last you have heard anything in the media? This excellent film shows the stain on our souls from allowing it to continue.

Don't get me wrong, I am all about assisting in Darfur, but having said that this documentary was shifting more towards propaganda than objective cinema. And perhaps that is what they wanted, my friend showed me this film and it was shockingly graphic. I personally enjoyed the part where Brian comes back to present this story and it is treated as nothing more than entertainment. It goes to show how things are perceived by the masses.This film seemed to dig too deeply into Brian the marine officer hero, and not enough into the sociological implications of what this occurring means to our world. I felt the camera was too often on Brian, while I know it is important to show him since he brought the photos back I wasn't interested in seeing him transform into a passionate spokesperson, I would rather focus on what is happening over there.I am a film goer who likes to think for himself, and this film doesn't allow me that luxury, it barks its orders at me as to what I should think and feel and do. It would be better if they let me digest this on my own. It is a tragedy over there, but I am interested in Darfur, not in the guy who photographed the insanity that is darfur.But I suppose this film wasn't meant to be looked at as a "film" per se, but rather as an educational video.

When he finished in the field with the US Marines, Captain Brian Steidle turns away from a desk job on his way up the ranks and instead takes a job as a military observer of the ceasefire in Sudan. The access he is able to have within the country ultimately leads him to be in no doubt that he is seeing Government-backed genocide against the African citizens of Darfur. With no weapon but his reports and his photographs, Steidle charts all that he sees in villages razed to the ground. This film charts his growing frustration at the lack of movement that this approach seems to create.Normally I would criticise those who praise a film for its subject rather than judge it on the basis of the film itself. Normally this film would be one of those and on these terms I would not be as kind to it as it really deserves. The reasons for this are clear from watching the film because really it could have been better structured and delivered. I thought the film would use Steidle as a device to explore the subject but somehow it tends to make him the subject too many times for my liking. This is a niggling irritation and it is not helped that the delivery of the subject is structured around his experiences – which is not always the most effective way of doing it because it does not build the case in the manner that would be most impacting and informative.Having said that though, it is difficult to watch the film and not be moved and sickened because of the subject and because most viewers will have seen so little of what is happening in Darfur. The photographs are disturbing and graphic. Whether it be charred remains or humans with eyes gouged out, it is not easy to sit and watch without reaction. The lack of intervention is also difficult to watch and this is the one aspect that the focus on Steidle contributes to well because he feels the frustration firsthand.Overall then this is a compelling and sickening film but it is nearly despite the film, not because of it. The structure is not strong enough and the focus on Steidle distracts and detracts as much as it adds – it should have used him more as a way in rather than the centrepiece of the film but these are minor complaints versus the shocking truths that the film puts in front of us. The images are sickening, so is the lack of action and the exposure the film gives to the subject is worthy of praise and makes this worth seeing even if it could have been better.