Green Zone (Greengrass, 2010)

[Morris Schæffer]

Trailer:

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1809976147/video/16313314

[Dukefrukem]

god Matt Damon is pumpin out movies lately

[Kurosawa Fan]

That trailer is terrible.

[Henry Gale]

This one (http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-GB&from=sp&vid=503152ef-8135-4724-b41a-e7a697035c6c) (which some sites are labelling as the international one) is much cooler. Also much more violent, but mainly it just gives a cooler idea as to what the film may be. Still makes it out to be more "badass" than it probably is, but at least it makes it look more like something worth anticipating.

Plus, that quick shot at 2:04 with the door is jawdropping.

[B-side]

That trailer is terrible.

Yup. Looks like a poor man's Bourne.

[number8]

It's ridiculous how different the visual style in those two trailers are. I'm willing to bet the American one is heavily altered and color-corrected just for the trailer.

[number8]

Also, hilarious that neither trailer show the plot of the film.

[eternity]

I always thought that Matt Damon was kind of a Streisand, but he's rockin' the shit in this one.

[Dukefrukem]

I always thought that Matt Damon was kind of a Streisand, but he's rockin' the shit in this one.

Huh? It's almost the exact same role as the Borne series... except he's not some freak of an agent....

[Acapelli]

http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/2988/greenzo2.jpg (http://img249.imageshack.us/i/greenzo2.jpg/)

[B-side]

Huh? It's almost the exact same role as the Borne series... except he's not some freak of an agent....

It's a 40 Year Old Virgin quote.

[Morris Schæffer]

Jason Isaacs is in this too! Where he in the trailer?

[Dukefrukem]

It's a 40 Year Old Virgin quote.

*woooooooshhhhhhhhh*

[Sxottlan]

Yeah, kind of looks like Bourne 4, but whatever I'm game.

[number8]

LOL, I think they made the trailer out of just the last 15 minutes of the movie.

[[ETM]]

Also, hilarious that neither trailer show the plot of the film.

I thought it spells out pretty much all of it, except for the "secret".

[number8]

;246777']I thought it spells out pretty much all of it, except for the "secret".

I just rewatched it. Yeah, I guess so. I think it's just the fact that they never say the word "WMD" in the trailer, whereas it's said like 4 times in every scene in the movie. It's also deliberately vague about the movie being a condemnation of the Bush administration's lies.

[megladon8]

So is it any good? Worth seeing?

[number8]

I think so. I'm just giddy to hear from the people going in expecting a Bourne movie. Or hell, even a Hurt Locker.

It's more like Bloody Sunday meets No End in Sight.

[megladon8]

I haven't seen either of those films.

But you'd say it's definitely not a situation where "if you loved Bourne, you'll love Green Zone!"

[number8]

I haven't seen either of those films.

THIS CONVERSATION IS OVER!

[megladon8]

THIS CONVERSATION IS OVER!


:cry:

[Skitch]

I think so. I'm just giddy to hear from the people going in expecting a Bourne movie. Or hell, even a Hurt Locker.

It's more like Bloody Sunday meets No End in Sight.

That's more what I was expecting. Bloody Sunday is brilliant.

Yeah, I don't like how they're selling it like a new Bourne. I also thought the entire movie was spelled out in the trailer...so much so that I may be skipping and wait for the dvd.

[baby doll]

I liked Bloody Sunday, but didn't bother with either of the Bourne sequels (the original was forgettable enough), or United 93.

One line that bugged me in J. Hoberman's review:

Had the movie been released during the 2008 election season, it might have been something more than entertainment.

Really, Jim? You think Matt Damon movies are what sway elections?

[Sxottlan]

Quite liked this film.

[hey it's ethan]

This was really good. Extended thoughts later.

[hey it's ethan]

Paul Greengrass' Green Zone is essentially an attempt to blend the director's two best films (United 93 and The Bourne Ultimatum) into one politically relevant, ass-kicking package. Though if you're buying a ticket this weekend, you should maybe just expect it to be a bit more of the latter than the former. That being said, this film is far more successful with its attempts at political commentary than many other films of its ilk (The Kingdom, Body of Lies...two films I sort of hated) because like the recently Best Picture-crowned The Hurt Locker, it uses interesting character dynamics as its main means of thematic operation.

Essentially, Green Zone is a story of a man doing what he thinks is the right thing but becoming increasingly disillusioned. Many have noted that this film makes no real points about the Iraq conflict that we don't already know, but the point is more in watching a character being lead down a suspenseful path than builds his arc rather than overt political commentary. The aforementioned blend is not 100% successful; characters like Greg Kinnear's sniveling government weasel and Amy Ryan's unethical journalist feel too heavy-handed and caricature-y while one like Jason Isaac's hard-assed military man work perfectly because Greengrass lets his actions define his character purely; such as done in United 93 with the ensemble cast.

The most controversial aspect of Greengrass' direction has always been his "shaky-cam" technique. Many complain about how it disorients them, but that is what he is trying to achieve with that style. Should action sequences just be oogling of slow-mow images or ones that actually put the viewer in the state of the setting? I feel that Greengrass has with his films achieved a sense of immersiveness that trumps most of what is being attempted with "3D".

If the purpose of United 93 was to distill the myths of 9/11 and remind us that they weren't heroes but average people; the purpose of Green Zone is to remind us that there are good people in Iraq who are trying to do the right thing.

[Barty]

This was really good.

[Sxottlan]

Too bad this is bombing. I thought it interesting that the CIA was portrayed as the good guys cut out of the loop.

I wonder if this is a case where in another ten years all of these films about the Iraq War will suddenly be revisited with kinder appreciation. Well, maybe not Rendition or Lions for Lambs.

[Ezee E]

Rendition is mildly good.

And I doubt it. I think the reason a good amount of these Iraq War movies have done bad is because they simply suck.

Haven't seen Green Zone.

[Mal]

Meh. Greengrass was the right person for this movie as far as production values go, but the script is poor and half-assed- it's like watching the Titanic sink from a lifeboat as it goes along. I liked Damon as Miller though... he has that everyman quality needed for the role. More Gleeson would've been cool too.

[Mal]

Rendition is mildly good.
But mostly bad.

[Skitch]

I liked Lions For Lambs. I may be jaded though, as I've hated nearly every film about the conflict.

[BrianCan't]

The blend of real life politics and action movie traits doesn't mesh all that well (typical with modern political thrillers). In the final 15 minutes or so, the messages go from not very subtle to to super heavy handed. "Freddy's" final line in particular made me cringe, as it spells the movie's message out, almost making the stuff that came before feel like a waste of time. It's an engaging film with good intentions and good performances, but it's lack of subtlety when it comes to politics, ultimately ends up compromising it as a whole, taking us out of the theater and forcing us to read a Huffington Post article.

Note: I'm fairly left leaning, I found the Iraq War to be unneeded, and I believe Bush deliberately destabilized Iraq when the "WMD" fabrication didn't work, but I also believe that subtlety works better in the context of a film made by people who have shit for brains when it comes to politics.

6.5/10

[Ezee E]

Heavy-handed, sure, but never boring to me. Gleeson has a dominating presence in his scenes, and Greengrass continues to be a very effective action director.

Good casting all around actually.

[Henry Gale]

Heavy-handed, sure, but never boring to me. Gleeson has a dominating presence in his scenes, and Greengrass continues to be a very effective action director.

Good casting all around actually.

Yeah, I watched this a couple of weeks back and these were basically my thoughts (although Gleeson's accent threw me at times). There's just something about Greengrass' coverage and pacing in his action that never fails to engage me.

I was confused going in about the talk about the film's lack of timeliness, and now I'd say that even more so after having seen it. A movie isn't like an article, a story on the news, a special or even a fictional series -- it's always going to be a long process to get made, released and then digested by its audience. Sure, it's now made and looked at from the perspective of that time being a failure (and the film isn't even very subtle with how it expresses its ideas about that), but as a piece of "historical fiction" or even a simple action film with tightly conceived political elements (obviously real in setting, imagined in its details), I think it's a great time capsule and summation of the frustration and confusion endured in the early, key days of the war.

It's too bad it was likely greenlit and then marketed in the hopes of it just being a breezy Matt Damon-actioner. It is that in a way, but the other side to it isn't so scary either.

***½

[Dukefrukem]

Anyone know where this was shot?

edit: Spain and moved on to Morocco according to wiki

[Irish]

Well made but contains such relentless plotting and political commentary that it would have worked better as a Frontline documentary than as a feature film.

The lame, half hearted attempt at the end to give the audience a feelgood happy ending was the most cynical thing of all, especially because it directly contradicts the main point the movie was trying to make during its runtime.

Finally, just who was the intended audience for this? People who like their Bourne with a bit of politics thrown in?

Americans don't watch this kind of stuff when it's streaming live on CNN. Why would any producer think they'd pay ten bucks to see it in the theater?

[number8]

Well, the Bourne sequels already had plenty of real-world politics in them. I think this more like a political movie with a little Bourne thrown in.

[lovejuice]

Well-made action film, but its message doesn't sit well with me either. The movie "simplifies" the whole WMD she-bang into some conspiracy games between politicians. From what I remember, the whole affair is more sophisticated than that.

Judged from where I lived back then, I don't think American were that naive going to war. There was a sense looming that the WMD might not have existed to begin with.