Cool News
Massawyrm enjoys the flawed heavy-handedness of GREEN ZONE
Hola all. Massawyrm here.
If there is one thing that can be definitively said about Paul Greengrass’s GREEN ZONE, it is that it holds few to no surprises. It is a film that is exactly what it looks like: a heavy handed political war time actioner shot in Greengrass’s infamous what the hell is going on, I can’t see shit visual style. That’s not to say that the film isn’t any good - just that if you’re imagining that this isn’t the marriage of Greengrass’s paranoid BOURNE movies with the gritty realism of his UNITED 93, you’ve got another thing coming. It is exactly like that. Unfortunately, for something trying to achieve such lofty goals, it proves only to be a momentary palate cleanser of action mixed with a healthy dose of “I told ya so.”
Structurally it is sound. The film opens up with a tense run through Mid-invasion Iraq, just days before Bush’s infamous MISSION ACCOMPLISHED speech, as we follow Roy Miller (Matt Damon), a Chief Warrant Officer leading a mission to clear out WMD sites and come back with proof of Sadaam’s weapon cache that we all know is really there. Fortunately, Greengrass knows that this is kind of like watching Leisure Suit Larry try to pick up chicks at Lilith Faire and gives us just enough of this to keep it entertaining before it just gets frustrating. Once Miller starts asking questions and finds himself further down the rabbit hole, the movie begins a breakneck pace that never lets up. The film becomes a high speed ticking clock and never gets boring – unless you are the type who gets bored by action or lengthy chase scenes.
If you are, you might actually find this film pretty damned hard to take. And that’s not unheard of. As I walked out of this I heard one teenager loudly proclaim “You know why that film sucked? That really long chase scene,” which to me sounded a lot like “You know why I hate my girlfriend? She always wants to give me really long blowjobs.” But whatever. This is Greengrass. There’s a lot of running, a lot of chasing and occasionally cars and helicopters get involved.
The film’s only real problem is its moral stance and the presentation of its content. The film is entirely about the corrupt reasons we went to war in Iraq and the deceit behind the weapons of mass destruction. A noble point that needs to be made, and one so apparent in this day and age that even rabble rousing warhawks like Bill O’Reilly concede publicly that the war was a mistake built upon fabrications. How complicit the administration was in these fabrications is the real question – but not exactly the question Greengrass wants to ask here. Instead, he’s concerned with the initial intelligence, where it came from and who was involved on the ground.
And all of this makes for a very compelling narrative.
The problem is this: Matt Damon’s Roy Miller is supposed to be a good soldier with America’s best intentions at heart. However, he spends the whole movie going off mission, defying orders from superior officers, putting his unit at risk and ultimately getting American soldiers killed in his against-orders search for the truth. The movie is played very much like a renegade cop film – but this isn’t a simple matter of turning in your badge and investigating things on your own; this guy is running around with a Humvee and machine guns, kicking in doors, avoiding US troops and possibly even consorting with the enemy. At times the film strays into some very debatable territory on just who in Iraq we should have been dealing with; the type of material that may leave a bad taste in some audience members mouths.
In other words, this isn’t going to play to the heartland as well as it should. It is exactly the type of film I want to watch with my dad (a 26 year Veteran), but exactly the type of film he’ll start grumbling about the moment Miller goes off mission and does the types of things he should be immediately bounced out of the Army for – if not spending a few months in the brig first. Typical of the heavy handed political thrillers of the day, it spends so much time preaching to the choir, that the message gets lost for those that need to hear it most.
The action is sound enough to carry it along to an entertaining conclusion, but there is little memorable to be found amid the gritty fast cutting and breathless running. There are no incredible action set pieces – just well-constructed sequences that do their job and entertain you while you’re sitting there. It is philosophical cotton candy; a high minded diversion that has very little to leave you with. Fun and worth a view, you’re really not missing anything if you decide to take a pass on this one.
Until next time friends, smoke ‘em if ya got ‘em.
Massawyrm
Got something for the Wyrm? Mail it here.
-
+ Expand All
-
I found some.
-
And how do I go there? Do they come to Belarus because on my irthday my wife gives me one free time to have sex with whoever I want and always the one I want says no but maye I can go with your friend Larry next time?
http://tinyurl.com/ye3tl78 -
Mar 12, 2010 8:40:14 AM CST
But does he fight a guy hand-to-hand, then chop him
by idrinkyourmilkshake
in the neck with a book? Or beatup a guy with a rolled-up magazine? If not, I could care less.
-
I watched the first one, and it was good, but I was never compelled to watch the other two. I have no idea why, just not interested.
-
Maybe someone who works on this site should mention the fact that Hugo Weaving has been cast as Red Skull.
-
Funny,I loved first one too.Then,went to theasters to see 2nd one, fell asleep a good 5 times.To this day,I almost remember nothing(except the SILLY-ASS moment where he beats up someone with a rolled up magazine, to emphasize how "badass" he is).From then on out, snooze time.Although I did see the 3rd one.ALTHOUGH there was NO plot advancement in 2nd or 3rd one, the 3rd one was pretty fucking good.The action, the pacing were pretty incredible.Forget the story(they never really bothered to have a good idea after the 1st Bourne), but the rest is all there in part 3.
-
A lot of people would still be alive if they had asked me.
-
And the Bourne movies just play to his strengths. He and Greengrass have not disappointed me yet. I look forward to seeing this tomorrow.
-
Over in Beaks talkback, he and some other talkbackers made it sound like my impressions of Damon from the trailer- that he was a super-soldier doing things on his own, defying orders, butting heads with superiors, etc- was not true? Now it sounds like I was right? Damnit.
-
How is the sound design. Is it all explodey and boomlike, or can I just wait until it hits DVD?
-
Guy: "So... you're married?" Damon: *JUDO CHOP!*
-
pass. I like my head the way it is, thank you. I'll avoid beat over it with anti-war rhetoric thinly disguised as an action movie.
-
Throatchopped Summer. Dude, you know me so well.
-
That is all.
-
Ha! Pwned!
-
Haha deflected your pwn!
-
I'm going home!
-
Slade and Jim put the smackdown on Vicki while Donn just looked on. I'm no fan of Vicki but you don't stand idly by and let two guys hammer your woman like that. Unless you're into that sort of thing.
-
Your Pwn-Fu is mighty!
-
Mar 12, 2010 9:29:17 AM CST
I'M BRINGING CAPITAL LETTERS BACK
by isleptwithkathybatesandallthatigotwasthi
YES I FUCKING AM!
-
Very nice.
-
David Kelly knew the weapons weren't there, and look what happened to him.
-
Mar 12, 2010 10:05:21 AM CST
beating up bad guys with magazine=$100,000,000 opening weekend.
by idrinkyourmilkshake
It's true.No really, it is.
-
His style of action combined with a smooth-looking sci-fi setting and complex story structures would be orgasmic!
-
Mar 12, 2010 10:18:29 AM CST
Paul Greengrass must direct: SHAKY-CAM:the documentary
by idrinkyourmilkshake
but obviously,MUST include 1)mutton-chops. 2)fight scene where character beats up another w rolled-up magazine 3)Matt Damon narration (and/or fighting a guy with a book)
-
Coming soon in 3D!!
-
Does anybody here really think our troops should be in Afghanistan and Iraq? If so, fuck you.
-
...lesbians. Lots and lots of lesbians.
-
Good review and I will see this, I am an unabashed fan of Greengrass's style and love the Bourne movies. One tiny complaint I have in Your review: It's You have another "think" coming not another "thing". That is all, thank you.
-
It always amuses me how liberals and conservatives are so much like each other. Obviously their viewpoints are different, but the way they express them are the same. For example Bill O' Reilly, if you actually ever watched his show, is not a "war hawk". He has been against the Iraq war for sometime. But since his show is on Fox all the liberals have to automatically hate him and paint him as the prototypical cliche'd conservative. The conservatives do the same thing. It's just all so boring and typical.
-
he says, "which to me sounded a lot like 'You know why I hate my girlfriend? She always wants to give me really long blowjobs.'"
Sir, you have hit a new high with that one. -
Massachusetts has nothing to do with this... that I'm aware of.
-
Mar 12, 2010 11:33:10 AM CST
Do Liberals Know The Difference Between "Lie" & "Mistake"?
by dirkbelig
Both here and in Moriarty's HitFix review, the smear that the war was waged based on "fabrications" and "lies" has been tossed out as if it was a fact, which it isn't. There is a hella difference between making decisions based on flawed or mistaken intel and just making sh*t up and then forgetting to plant some WMDs to make the story stick.
Imagine a crack house. People pull up, run in and come back out a few minutes later at all hours. Undercover cops have bought from it. People busted after leaving have dope in their possession. Based on all this, the judge issues a warrant to bust the place. The narcs bust down the door, a shootout occurs, and people - dealers, cops, kids stuck in the house, whoever - get hurt and killed. Problem is, no drugs are found. Perhaps they were tipped. Perhaps they ran out and hadn't gotten the shipment. No drugs are there at that moment and people are hurt.
Question: Was the raid based on a lie or was it an honest mistake? I really doubt O'Reilly said the war was "fabricated" - "mistaken intel", sure; fabricated, no. (Funny how liberals demonize people like O'Reilly until they need to twist a quote to their advantage. "Even O'Reilly says that Bush lied!!! Everything else he says is GOP talking point, Fixed News, bullsh*t!!!" Yeah, you're not crazy. -
You're so gullible. I'm not being facetious here - you are a textbook definition fool. Google 'Seymour Hersh Stovepipe' and then post something other than unsubstantiated nonsense. Comparing war to a drug bust ... fuck me.
-
David Kelly was a man of honor and honesty, and as such he was dangerous to the war establishment. He was no less a casualty than all the thousands of soldiers who died, and the hundreds of thousands of civilian dead. Bush (and Blair) lied and people died can be mocked as a slogan, but it's also a fundamental truth about this war.
-
This movie could easily be seen on Blu Ray, the sound in the theatre is good but not exceptional. Like moorE12, I never got past the first Bourne movie. But there's just nothing new or compelling about this movie. Yeah, he's going against orders, Oh shit, is he crazy? Uh oh, who IS behind the intel? Do I really care? Not really.
And the fat father from 28 Days Later does a mediocre job of pulling off an American accent here. Or was he suppose to be Scottish/American? British/American? Zombie/American? -
Have you read Norman Baker's "the Strange Death of David Kelly"? Interesting stuff. There's an unfortunate amount of conspiratorial nonsense in there as well, but the main crux of the book is worthwhile.
-
A "Lie" is often considered to be anything your opponent is wrong about. That's ridiculous, but a common error; and, politically, both sides do it, whenever anybody makes a mistake.
I don't know whether the Iraqi WMD evidence was a mistake or a lie; the bit about yellowcake uranium, for instance, seems to genuinely be a mistaken piece of intel. Seized upon as evidence and given more weight and reliability than it deserved? Certainly. But a lie? Maybe. I don't think it's proven, and I haven't found incontrovertible evidence.
Thinking Iraq had WMD was certainly not an unreasonable position before the war, even if it wasn't certain. -
I haven't but it sounds interesting, as you say. Thanks for the lead.
-
People seem to forget Hussein used WMD's previously and said he had them right up to when the invasion started. Plus he broke over 100 UN resolutions.
To say Iraq didn't have WMD's isn't accurate. We don't know that. To say they weren't found is much more accurate of a statement. -
We just used common sense and some facts to determine he had none.
-
were also in on trying to help Bush so he could make money for oil buddies and Haliburton, right guys? They all agreed before the war that Iraq posed an *imminent* threat. WHO'S MAKING THAT MOVIE?
-
For one thing, we dug up some 7 bunkers, each of which contained hundreds of tons of munitions (such as howitser shells) that Saddam wasn't supposed to have. In 2005, some of those shells were tested and confirmed to have serrin nerve gas warheads.
Now you can blame Bush for the "three stooges"esque strategy when going in and occupying Iraq (going straight to Bagdad as opposed to sealing off the borders first. Anyone ever read about that truck convoy that was headed to Syria in the northwest of Iraq while we were coming in from the south?); you can blame Bush for not communicating and releasing information as to said weapon bunkers and 2005 serrin nerve gas discovery. You can even blame Bush for starting the surge a good 2 to 3 years after it should have been done to begin with, much less NOT finishing Afghanistan FIRST before going into Iraq... but that is the method, not the reason.
In the end, you guys on the left would be taken a hell of a lot more seriously if you would actually make logical arguments as opposed to emotionally insulting ones. There are plenty of reasons to actually hate Bush (devaluing the dollar for his entire 8 years to try to equalize our trade defecit with China; not opening an executive order to investigate Fannie May, Freddie Mack AND Barney Frank and the housing committee after the THIRD time Barney shut his request for an investigation down; just sitting back and smiling like a chimp when gas prices started to inflate beginning March of 2005 on a 100% BS lie - speculators raised oil on information that the National Reserve was low; the government came out with their own results a week later stating that the reserve was "maxed out".. yet oil prices dropped roughly 40% of the overall increase, giving oil a good 50% to 60% increase on a government proven lie. This happened about 3 to 5 times in a row from summer 2005 to winter/spring 2006. Not once did Bush do or say anything about it).
Now who is going to cuss me out first? >:) -
At least the first one actually LOOKED like a professional movie, instead of Uncle Steve's jittery home movies from 1978 blown up to theater size. Greengrass's handheld "gritty" style is RUINING action movie choreography. Look at Quantum Of Solace. Not a great Bond movie anyways, but made EXPONENTIALLY worse by the horrendously inept camerawork.
-
I'm going to watch this with a friend of mine that was in the initial invasion of Iraq... I can't wait to hear all the complaints after the movie.
-
..., the young man was simply unimpressed by a sprawling twenty minute stretch of " infamous what the h*ll is going on, I can't see sh*t visual style." I've certainly had my fill of alleged directors of MOTION pictures who can't competently translate MOTION.
-
Mar 13, 2010 2:27:59 AM CST
Hey, guys! Let's relive the '06 / '08 elections in the talkbacks
by thebearovingian
Okay, dude!! Yeah!!So what's the time frame for this movie? One night in Baghdad? "Shit, we didn't find anything. But we looked all night!"
-
Massa's reviews always causes me the reaction that he doesn't want to. And really, somebody should tell Massa that he's not yet the smart guy he think he is. He will be one day. One day. But not yet.
-
Face it Asslives that's all you're good at.
-
It is based on real events (obviously dramatized to keep the people with low attention spans entertained) but Damons character is based on a real person who did do go 'off mission' etc.
So take your pro Bush stance and shove it.
-
But that the chase sequence was poorly shot, you couldn't tell what the fuck was going on (which, to me, is a definite must for a chace scene). Shaky cam must die. I love the last 2 Bournes, I love Cloverfield, but this movie didn't need the shaky cam. It really annoyed me.
Besides that, I had no interest in the story whatsoever, everyone was spouting out their cliched dialogue and acting the stereotypical character that they were given (matt damon playing matt damon, greg kinnear playing the higher up corrupt douchebag, amy ryan playing the reporter who just wants more to the story).
oh, and the message was too obvious and heavy handed. I didn't have a problem with the message itself, just how they batted you over the head with it, and didn't let you figure it out for yourself. We're big boys and girls, we don't need the characters speaking in the political points that the screenwriter/director wanted to get across. (Freddy: "This is not your country to mess with" or something of that nature, "Your government wanted to hear this lie", and various other times that I forgot). We can think for ourselves, we're not all stupid.
Otherwise, you pointed out exactly what I disliked about this movie. Love your reviews man, just had to put in my 2 cents -
Good points (although do howitser shells count as WMD?). Odd debate going on now with both sides accusing the other of convenient revisionism - anti-war people accused of giving arguments they could not have possibly known at the time, pro-war of suggesting that there was a consensus which did not exist, or that certain points were not controversial at the timeBut more that that: there now even seems to be some debate about the reasons which were given for going to war (not just debate about a disconnect between reasons given and possible ulterior motives), which you would think were a matter of recordLots of politicians distancing themselves enormously from the warBest avoid arguments about bad things Saddam did which justfied it, given the number of other people guilty of the same things or worse who we do not invade (or indeed whom we are allied to). And UN resolutions in particular are like smoke on the wind - Israelis just shrug them off and their allies blame all sorts of UN shenanigans to devalue them.
-
http://tinyurl.com/yh5nvsa
I know it is the loathsome Fox News, but the guy says he was the main military adviser for the film and he some interesting points to make about how the plot uses the "government" lied plot-point. It was meant to be fiction, not an accurate representation of what really happened.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 439 total posts 159 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 144 total posts 142 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 155 total posts 140 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 55 total posts 45 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 196 total posts 45 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 35 total posts 35 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 34 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 127 total posts 32 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 513 total posts 29 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 118 total posts 27 posts