- It is set in Iraq
- It takes place during the early days of the Iraq war, just as the initial invasion is wrapping up, and the Green Zone is being set up
- It's a military adventure
- It's a spy cloak & dagger movie
- It's about political intrigue, deception and underhanded double-dealings
- It is a taunt, fast pace thriller
- It features Matt Damon as Chief Warrant Officer Roy Miller of the U.S. Army; a specialist in WMD ordinance handling and disposal.
On the one hand it is movie is very engaging, and even fascinating. In the early going it does a nice job of recreating the break down to chaos that Iraq experienced as the Ba'athist party disintegrated to nothing. Paul Greengrass does a tremendous job of orchestrating combat scenes. The tension and the interest level rises extremely well in each of these scenes. The best scenes here can be compared to a more faster-pace sequence from The Hurt Locker.
On the other hand, the climactic chase sequence becomes so jerky-jerky, so helter-skelter, so chaotic, that it makes the shaking camera of the Bourne trilogy look like Driving Miss Daisy. I found it extremely difficult to follow the sequence of movements at the end.
The critics on RottonTomatoes.com are complaining that this a well-made movie stemming from a cliche script, filled with stock, off the shelf characters. What do they mean by that? Well, the entire point of the movie is that the Bush administration knew full well that there were no WMDs in Iraq. They simply trumped up a case out ex-nillo, saying there were, and used it as a justification for war.
Kinda reminds me of the Donovan McNabb trade rumors...
So how many times did you hear that case made between 2003 and 2008? About 1,000 times. Until Obama was elected we heard nothing but this case over every Lefty channel around. All that went to bed the moment Bush left office. The 'bad' man was gone, so the Lefties moved on. This is what the critics are referring to when they speak of the cliched script. The problem with cliched scripts is that they are predictable. We didn't really have much doubt about how this one was going to end.
The characters are a bit stock, but not that bad. Damon is the excellent, loyal, self-sacrificing, dutiful, responsible soldier. Amy Ryan plays a sell-out journalist who works for the Wall Street Journal. Greg Kinnear plays Dick Vermeil... er... sorry, a NeoCon political appointee from the Bush administration who is responsible for everything that goes wrong after the invasion is finished. Brendan Gleeson plays the morally gray, but ultimately correct, CIA agent who always knew there were no WMD in Iraq, and wants to cut a deal with the Ba'athists to avoid civil war.
This is considered 'stock' because each complex political factor in Iraq is wrapped in a single character who proxies for the entire complex. That is a simple stock trick used by a lot of novelists and screenwriters.
What do I think? I think the story they tell about how we flunked the early days in Iraq is fascinating, even if it is somewhat fictionalized, cliche and stock. My biggest problem is that the movie moves so fast, they give you no time to evaluate the complex political differences between:
- The CIA's vision of what must happen in Iraq
- The Bush Administration's vision of what must happen in Iraq
- The Ba'athist goals after the invasion
- The desires of every non-Ba'athist Iraqi after the invasion
It is hard to appreciate the multi-player chess match that is going on in this film unless you are introduced (in a little detail) to the goals and objectives of these factions, not to mention where they contradict.
Ultimately, I am going to tell you that this is a pretty good movie; more than good enough to watch. However, this is no masterpiece. This does have flaws. Further it shows the hand of a Universal Studio corporate-corporate project. This one seemed like something ordered off the menu by HQ. Still, it turned out pretty well.
