I have little doubt that some graduate film student somewhere is doing a dissertation on this film and leaning heavily on Said's Orientalism to do it. It may even be an interesting dissertation...more interesting than the film.
Oh, the film's alright, I guess, if blood porn is your thing (I couldn't help think of Clinton Portis talking about Michael Vick's alleged involvement in dog fighting for some reason). It's just that I'm suspicious of films that are more interesting to talk about than to watch because they reference interesting ideas rather than develop them.
Much like Children of Men there are dishes in this smörgåsbord (thank you, spell check) that are directed at different audiences and ideologies, some of them directly opposed to one another. That makes it nice because it becomes a film that can be grafted onto your ideology of the moment to illustrate whatever point you want--pro war, anti-war, it's a glorious death, it's a pointless death. The film is whatever you want it to be.
The art design captures the comic book look, which allows it to be more graphic than your average R rated movie because it is so stylized. I imagine it will have passionate defenders and passionate detractors, but it doesn't really strike me as the sort of film anyone would ever go back to other than for nostalgia's sake. It reminds me of The Matrix in many ways, only a bit more bloody rather than using explosions and bullets.
Can't really say I "enjoyed" it, but as an exercise in art-design, it was pretty to look at.