MERIN: How so?
Well, when I followed the wounded home--that’s what really struck me. The wounded. It’s so important that this film get the reality across that there are tens of thousands of wounded, and they’re going to be with us for decades--for half a century or more. That's the most important element. As one doctor at Walter Reed tells us right off, “there’s nothing normal about war. You have to be ready to take care of these young men and women for fifty, sixty years.”
I thought that message is the kind of goal that comes up for the film.
I shot 150 hours, and whittled it down to 89 minutes of the most emotional material. It’s a very, very powerful film. I thought maybe it’s too powerful for some people because it’s so--well, not that it shows a lot of blood. I think I was restrained in that I didn’t want to shock people. I just wanted people to know that terrible things happen in war, and that war is horrible.
MERIN: Yes, that’s a very clear impression that’s made, although the film‘s focus is on military medical personnel--men and women who're heroes. So, very much to your credit as a filmmaker, there’s a gut-wrenching conflict that occurs between praise for the military and the complete condemnation of war.
SANDERS: That’s right. I think that confuses some people. The fact is--I mean, the film is called Fighting for Life--these are military people, but they’re not combatants, they’re life savers, not life takers. Live savers. Doctors. Healers. And it was very important that that confusion be dispelled. And one doctor says in the film, “We are not combatants. It makes us very nervous when there are stories of physicians who cooperate in torture of prisoners.” I mean, I could have kissed him when he said that. That’s the kind of thing that’s so important to understand--that you can be in the military, but you can be a healer. You can love your fellow man, and all that. On the other hand, obviously, if you wage war you need doctors and nurses to support that, too. So, in a way, it is part of war. But it’s the flip side.
The tradition of military surgeons goes way way way back--there’s one sequence about Napoleon’s surgeon, who said that to be a military physician you have to scorn fortune and be absolutely devoted to your patients, and so forth. It’s a great tradition. And I love having the Civil War sequence in the film because the Civil War is the war that was totally tragic from every aspect. It was just ghastly. But was it patriotic, that war? The south was patriotic, the north was patriotic, and the war was ghastly. So, I liked having that Civil War there.
The main challenge, Jennifer, in making this film was to avoid politics--to not have a right or left perspective, not talk about whether the war was necessary or not. In fact, as one doctor points out in the film, it doesn’t matter who the president is or who’s in the congress--but that these are our kids. And I think that puts it into perspective.
MERIN: I agree with you, and that brings me back to my initial question, which has to do with objectivity. Because, now, even more than from just having seen the film, I understand that you do have a decided point of view. It’s manifested in the film in a very balanced way, but it is inherent in the way you’ve put the film together. We are seeing Terry Sanders’ point of view.
SANDERS: Well, I think that humanism, sensitivity to what we’re seeing, respect for people--for everybody until they abuse that respect until they hurt you or do something to lose that respect--is a hopeful approach. I mean we hope that people will get along in this world. You’ve got to hope that or else…so many movies, particularly this year, are such downers, you know. They really--I don’t know why you’d go and see them. Just give up…and I‘m not talking about documentaries.
MERIN: Yes, I know.
SANDERS: They’re showing Fighting For Life and A Time Out Of War (1954, a dramatic short about the Civil War, directed by Denis Sanders, Terry Sanders’ brother) together in Los Angeles, and I think that’s interesting--because they’re decades apart, but they’re showing the same thing: the sorrow of war.
MERIN: Might one draw conclusions from this? Is this an antiwar film?
SANDERS: Yes. Anyone who’s pro war is crazy. In fact, no one is more anti war than soldiers. They’re the ones who have to die. It’s the politicians who’ve never been to war that treat it lightly. I call this a patriotic antiwar film. I’m totally patriotic. I don’t believe that anyone should disrespect the American flag. It’s our flag, and our country and our traditions. And I don’t want to be intimidated into not being patriotic--to me being patriotic is standing up for the best of what’s the best of what’s America. Which we should all do.
