tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610074516299275060.post2942228290103055478..comments2024-01-21T11:18:54.087-05:00Comments on Lost in the Movies: Now Playing: Green ZoneJoel Bockohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610074516299275060.post-68081718064906262182010-03-14T22:18:21.763-04:002010-03-14T22:18:21.763-04:00MovieMan - This is an excellent, touching treatmen...MovieMan - This is an excellent, touching treatment of a rather difficult film to respond to. I found it entertaining - and I enjoy how Greengrass has turned Damon into a very believable, very capable hero. But at the same time it's taking on a whole bunch of issues and churning them up in a 112-minute action movie.<br><br>I think the first half of the film is more successful than the latter half - which pretty much slides into thriller mode. In the first half, when the soldiers risk their lives looking for WMDs while a sniper threatens, I found that old anger at the Bush administration coming back. That's one of the big crimes here - that by ignoring the truth, young Americans were put at risk and are still at risk, and that message comes through here quite effectively.Hokaheyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12397053921647421425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610074516299275060.post-77351915169387627692010-03-15T07:37:13.672-04:002010-03-15T07:37:13.672-04:00I felt similarly - that the early segments of the ...I felt similarly - that the early segments of the film were stronger in stoking those old feelings, not just of anger, but also the confusion and excitement that accompanied the whole venture - it put me back into the overwhelmed mindset of 2003. By the end, the thriller mechanics do take over and politically, I think Greengrass just made things to extreme. (spoilers) Turning the Kinnear character into a bald-faced liar and a murderer isn't necessary; the truth is bad enough, and this just opens the film up to conservative attacks that it's propaganda. Also, the extremity of the conclusion - that Damon exposes all the corruption right away, CC'ing every media outlet (and the fact that's there's not just corruption but a conspiracy neatly-tied with a little bow) just seemed to veer too far into Inglourious Basterds territory. Still, I welcome the picture with all its flaws and complexities. Among other reasons, I'm always fascinated when filmmakers try to fashion a myth - something I have to defend the cinema against from both left and right, on occasion.MovieMan0283http://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610074516299275060.post-58176309363684255152010-03-15T07:38:32.032-04:002010-03-15T07:38:32.032-04:00By "myth" I don't necessarily mean a...By "myth" I don't necessarily mean a falsehood (so sometimes such films contain them - the more and more they do, the more troublesome; not saying I wouldn't criticize them at all here) but rather a package which tries to include everything and streamline it into an easily digestible narrative.MovieMan0283http://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610074516299275060.post-9487558195105146112010-03-15T11:34:49.661-04:002010-03-15T11:34:49.661-04:00I quite enjoyed your personal take on this film. I...I quite enjoyed your personal take on this film. It's another one I'm on the fence about but because I like the Damon/Greengrass combo so much I am more inclined to give this one a go. In some respects, it almost seems a little like a simplified version of SYRIANA, which I felt dealt with similar subject matter in a much more complex way.J.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08164105442273577128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610074516299275060.post-75956789974733549042010-03-15T14:25:26.302-04:002010-03-15T14:25:26.302-04:00Tony, you make some great points. Since I brought ...Tony, you make some great points. Since I brought up JFK myself, I should probably be the one to note a crucial point about that movie - it never explicitly shows us with the world of the film who killed JFK. Stone obviously sympathizes with Garrison's crusade, and probably believes a number of his points, but even as a "counter-myth" that film is cautious. What we "see" is shown over voiceover, and it's never clear whether they are flashbacks, fantasies, fabrications...they remain dangling "what-ifs".<br><br>Grengrass on the other hand explicitly reshapes reality. When he does this for streamlining purposes, as long as hews to the broader truth, I don't mind. I don't care if this one particular individual really did this or that if this or that really happened. But by the end we are in la-la land which is a pity since much of the film, by following what happened, makes an effective case against the Bush administration.<br><br>The Kinnear character confused me - I initially thought he was supposed to be Bremer, but then they mention Bremer's name at the end. Yet he seems to be calling all the shots. If they were going to create a villain out of whole-cloth who was culpable for WMD lies, he should've been lower-ranking and not confusable with any real figures. That was another weird thing about the movie, how journalists, Iraqi civilians, soldiers, CIA agents, and officers all rubbed shoulders with no concern for rank or separate duties.<br><br>Here's a weird analogy but I think it works: it was like one of the medeival paintings where they flatten the landscape, simplify features and dress all the ancient figures in then-contemporary clothing. Greengrass compressed this sprawling story into a streamlined narrative and while I find this aesthetically satisfying it's bound to wreak havoc on the truth, the storytelling, or both. Even with that consideration, however, he didn't need to go as far as he did in revisionism.<br><br>I'm heading over right now to check out your post.MovieMan0283http://thesunsnotyellow.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610074516299275060.post-71773826655790308102010-03-15T14:27:52.978-04:002010-03-15T14:27:52.978-04:00J.D., an interesting comparsion. Syriana is a grea...J.D., an interesting comparsion. Syriana is a great example of a film which utilizes current events but crafts its own fictional story so that nobody could really be confused about its factual qualities. One could criticize it for the way it characterizes certain events or issues, but as art, not reportage.<br><br>Greengrass just includes way too many details that have exact correspondences in Iraq. He duplicates things that happened and then inserts fictions inside them. The effect is surreal, fascinating, and very bad historiography.MovieMan0283http://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610074516299275060.post-71207437820246669512010-06-03T14:36:07.910-04:002010-06-03T14:36:07.910-04:00(Updated 6/2: Here are comments which were left on...(Updated 6/2: Here are comments which were left on the Sun's Not Yellow link-post, which has now been deleted:)<br><br>Sam Juliano said...<br><br> Nice to read this summation of your theatrical experience Joel, and of some vital historical relevence here, so to speak, as I am leaving my home is about 15 minutes to see the film at our local Edgewater multiplex. The critics are divided, though I see Ebert, the NY Times Scott, Zahareck and the Village Voice's Hoberman are among the yay sayers. I am trying to cull a summary judgement from this review, but I am assuming it's mostly favorable in view of this:<br><br> "There we were, surrounded by palm trees and the heat, half a world away from the action. It was an unforgettable sensation. Why do I mention all of this, particularly when I try to avoid these autobiographical, anecdotal asides in my pieces? Because Green Zone re-awakened the feelings of that moment: the odd mixture of pride, frustration, confusion, and helplessness that accompanied the most ambitious and dramatic start of an American war since World War II."<br> March 15, 2010 8:51 PM <br>MovieMan0283 said...<br><br> Mixed - you'll see. I'll be interested to hear your reaction.<br> March 16, 2010 12:54 AM <br>Sam Juliano said...<br><br> To be honest I disliked it intensely.<br> March 16, 2010 9:49 AM <br>MovieMan0283 said...<br><br> You're not the only one - check out Tony Dayoub's great put-down, which is linked at the bottom of my review.<br> March 16, 2010 10:24 AM <br>Hokahey said...<br><br> This is a touching approach to your review here. Yes, the images of the bombing of Iraq brought back a visceral time. I liked the first half of this film better than the latter half - which became standard thriller and not up to standard Greengrass quality. The first half really pointed out the crime of sending young American soldiers into harm's way on false pretenses. I also like how Greengrass has turned Matt Damon into a believable action-movie hero.<br> March 17, 2010 11:12 AM <br>MovieMan0283 said...<br><br> Thanks, Hokahey. Particularly since many more recent Iraq films have focused on the gruelling occupation of the country, it's a surprise to be taken back into the earlier, more disorienting days of the war...<br> March 17, 2010 11:22 AMMovieMan0283http://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.com