Green Zone

I have found that modern war movies probably won't be my thing, even though I have wanted to give the film "Marine" a chance for a long time. "Green Zone" didn't really impress me, even though it becomes a very good movie when it comes to action. Greengrass has already practiced with Matt Damon, but what worked twice for "Bourne" may not be a recipe for a third film. It probably needs a stronger story, a bit deeper critique of the United States and their political intentions. Like this, it's just a movie that takes place on the hot grounds of Iraq, occasionally showing scenes that reveal how those who actually control the world have their fingers everywhere, but there is no significant added value. So, it's mainly a film for action enthusiasts who will enjoy all the shootouts, action in the city, and the gear that soldiers have. It is truly good in how it captures the military environment. Greengrass could probably make a living as a war reporter. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/05/kocour-v-botach-jedna-hodne-blba-svatba.html (19/02/2013)

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)

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)

This action-packed probe into the war in Iraq turned out to be as good as both of Bourne’s little brothers. Greengrass, Damon and Powell step on the gas absolutely everywhere, but the final action sequence (perfect camera) is unequalled. The tempo, suspense, and the perfect directing workmanship... just superb. Helgeland’s screenplay, based on a lie that was (as always) intended to serve a good cause despite all the dynamics remains in the forefront and points out mistakes that should never be forgotten and swept under the table. If anyone knows how to mix ingenuity and entertainment in one movie, it’s Greengrass. Everything fits nicely together and makes Green Zone a seriously good watch. (11/06/2010)

A word that is often used in connection with cinema is "disappointment." I think I know why, but I’m not going to share it. Fears that Greengrass and Damon would merely swap running around the world's capitals for the dusty roads of Iraq have not come to fruition. Leaning on one spectacular screw-up by the Bush administration and Helgeland's script, they’ve created a compelling, rather conversational thriller that is given momentum by the restless cinematography and Powell's pulsating score. Expecting an action geyser is not worth it because Green Zone is, despite all the impressive set design, a rather modest film with no ambition to entertain, and yet is not at all afraid to point fingers at specific people. It’s based on the lesson that was the motto of a certain spirits advertisement: "There’s always a reason." (10/06/2010)