Green Zone

The film consists of very disturbing moral implications of the war in Iraq on the basis of a rather interesting thriller, which takes advantage of all the qualities from Greengrass's tested abilities to set a hard pace. The wooden acting of Damon is just the tip of the iceberg of missed opportunities and issues that could and should have gone much deeper - to his detriment, Greengrass tried to find a gap between the non-participation and rawness of United 93 and Jason Bourne. Green Zone is not nearly as impressive as the former and not nearly as fun as the latter. It’s simply...green. (15/06/2010)

Technically speaking, it’s a flawless political-military thriller (not combat action), but to me it’s the weakest viewer experience that I’ve ever had with Greengrass. I get what Green Zone probably wants to say, but I believe they could have got more out of the premise. Given the level of the game the creators are playing, I can’t say the script is good enough – the deus ex machina character of Freddy is especially awful. But I’m not disappointed, because the genre (which I’m not a big fan of) didn’t lead me to expect much. (10/06/2010)

I can’t avoid the word routine. Gritty editing and rawness are Paul Greengrass's main assets and also the thing he focuses on most in his films, so praising these them seems quite redundant, it'd be like being surprised that a car takes me from one place to another, with nothing else expected from it. The disadvantage of Green Zone is that the topic it deals with cannot be as personal for the viewer as the quest for truth portrayed by the physical person of Jason Bourne, where the viewer can feel and relate to every blow and thought. Here, it’s too global and you are thus detached from the main characters and there is hardly any close connection. The action is good, the pace is good, Matt Damon still knows how to fight, and the music is effective. It simply works well again, but it's only about the story, and that's not enough for me. (17/07/2010)

A politically engaged Bourne in Iraq? I’d like to use a line from the movie “don’t be naive", but that wouldn’t be altogether true. As a comparison it rather fits. A lot. A shame about the last third of the movie, however, when it turns off the hitherto path of the story down over-simplified and naively presented political agitation, aimed in the right direction, but the delivery... (especially the last dialog between Miller and Poundstone is just beyond the pale; I would never have expected anything like that from Greengrass). P.S.: Although I understand that a book in newspaper article form which is a bureaucratic odyssey where the left hand doesn’t know what the right is doing, or: “How the Yanks failed to understand that an Arab land after years of tyranny, sanctions and war is not the same as any State of the Union following a natural disaster" is darn hard to turn into a non-documentary movie, but why on earth make a movie about weapons of mass destruction or botched attempts at finding them if there is no mention of either in the book? (27/05/2010)

Paul Greengrass tried out the style he applied in Green Zone in two parts of the Borneo series, thus creating a prototype of a modern action hero set in a realistic environment and using top combat techniques, but one that is far from the action superheroes of comic or game adaptations and routine thrillers. Moreover, he moved from pure entertainment to a deeper reflection on a specific political problem currently affecting America. His Green Zone is an excellent war action film that also perfectly functions as a mapping of the roots of war against Saddam and the subsequent civil war in Iraq. The film is a synthesis of all the motifs that played a role in creating today's complex situation, namely amateurism on the part of strategists, manipulated information from secret services and the American government, underestimation of the watchdog function of the press and media in general, unpreparedness for long-term occupation, and logistical failure. Of course, the film has its flaws and the five stars I'm giving it are not flawless, but in this case, I am happy to add them because the film stands very high above the genre average. The fictional hero of the story, Miller, has too much initiative and is too independent in his thinking for a lower-ranking army officer (possible members of the armed forces will forgive me), and above all, he does not hesitate to disobey orders and defy authority in a significant way. Also, the handheld camera, which plays a dominant role in Greengrass's films, is unnecessary in some cases, and the film contains some minor logical lapses. I doubt, for example, that a wanted war criminal, whose likeness is on every American soldier's playing card, would be driving around the streets of Baghdad in a car registered in his name several weeks after the occupation. But the action sequences, be it shootouts, wild chases, or fights, are filmed in the highest quality, and the entire story is set in a functional environment and corresponds to what actually happened in Iraq despite the fictionality of the main character. Matt Damon has already tried out a similar type of hero in the character of Jason Bourne, and his work with the director is top-notch. The entire film is incredibly dynamic and captivating. Overall impression: 90%. (03/12/2010)