DVD Talk
Green Zone (Greengrass, 2010): Matt Damon and Jason Isaacs [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : Green Zone (Greengrass, 2010): Matt Damon and Jason Isaacs


NoirFan
07-05-09, 09:58 PM
Synopsis: A thriller about a pair of CIA agents on the trail of certain Weapons of Mass Destruction and a foreign correspondent following their mission. Inspired by Imperial Life in the Emerald City.

CBS on-set footage (http://atlantis2.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=3919708n)
AICN test screening review (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/40495)
Now 2010, apparently. (http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/2008-12-11-awards-campaign-2009/posts/2009-6-24-contender-countdown-the-oscar-field-expands-to-26-dreamers)
IMDb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0947810/)

Jam Master Jay
07-05-09, 10:42 PM
I really dug the book that this was based off, but from reading about the movie it sounds NOTHING like it at all.

Solid Snake
07-05-09, 11:06 PM
Interesting....I'll keep an eye out for it.

Mr. Cinema
07-29-09, 06:22 AM
Was supposed to be a Fall '09 release. Now it's March 12, 2010.

NoirFan
07-29-09, 05:24 PM
I'm really surprised this was pushed back, it seemed to be an Oscar contender.

ChineseCheckers
10-27-09, 09:43 PM
the trailer is up on yahoo...I'll see the movie

Artman
10-27-09, 10:07 PM
Heh, I bet a lot of people will think it's Bourne when the preview starts... looks good, but a little more...I guess generic than I was expecting. I'm getting a little tired of the middle east thrillers, but I'll make an exception for this one.

james2025a
10-28-09, 08:23 AM
The trailer to me looked like a cross between Bourne and Hurt Locker. I will see this....but not sure if its gonna be any good. Something about all these Iraq War movies that just never gels. They always feel empty and all seem to look exactly the same. Hurt Locker was the best i have seen so far from this genre.

BJacks
10-28-09, 02:16 PM
For a film that's been namedropped in Oscar talk, this trailer doesn't do anything at all to push in that direction. It comes off as Bourne in Baghdad, right down to the "you don't know what he's capable of" line. Looks like a generic political/military action flick like Body of Lies.

I really hope this flick is good, but whoever did the trailer should hang their head in shame.

The Bus
10-28-09, 02:29 PM
Looks good, but I agree with BJacks in that it could go very generic very quickly.

jfoobar
02-15-10, 02:48 PM
The trailer for this is giving me a real Matt-Damon-has-jumped-the-shark vibe (although Invictus is partially to blame for that).

F20ovcLI29s

It also looks like the kind of movie script carefully crafted to score political points as well.

Daytripper
02-15-10, 03:38 PM
The trailer for this is giving me a real Matt-Damon-has-jumped-the-shark vibe (although Invictus is partially to blame for that).

F20ovcLI29s

It also looks like the kind of movie script carefully crafted to score political points as well.

I don't get it, how has Damon jumped the shark by doing this movie? Or even "Invictus". He hasn't done a rom-com yet, has he? Anyway, I think this film looks great. And THANK GOD Greengrass has ditched the shakey cinematography!

Mr. Cinema
02-16-10, 10:34 AM
I was excited for this months ago just based on the Damon/Greengrass factor. However, after seeing the trailer for it last weekend, I'm not so enthusiastic. It definitely looks like a low-budget version of Bourne in Iraq. Even with a free ticket, I may pass on it. Just looks kinda blah.

Zen Peckinpah
02-16-10, 11:05 AM
The Oscar buzz and potential big wins for The Hurt Locker might kill its street cred.

sauce07
02-16-10, 11:09 AM
Are you guys forgetting that Paul Greengrass directed this? He's 4 for 4 in my book.

Mr. Cinema
02-16-10, 11:28 AM
It's usually not a good thing when a movie gets bumped to a March release, so that has me a little concerned this may be underwhelming. I hope that's not the case, but the trailer just did nothing for me. So as of now, my excitement is very low.

There are a few exceptions to delays, such as Zodiac.

jfoobar
02-16-10, 09:27 PM
I don't get it, how has Damon jumped the shark by doing this movie? Or even "Invictus". He hasn't done a rom-com yet, has he? Anyway, I think this film looks great. And THANK GOD Greengrass has ditched the shakey cinematography!

Based on the trailer (which admittedly is shaky logical grounds), this looks like yet another film in which Damon is playing pretty much the same basic character. He's very good at that character, but we are getting pretty close to overexposure territory here. This is especially true in that this does indeed look like a poor man's Bourne in Iraq as mentioned above.

Remember how sick everyone got of Kevin Costner for a while there? Damon may be heading in the same direction.

Dr Mabuse
02-17-10, 08:21 AM
That trailer looks awful.

Maybe the marketing approach was to make it out to be so political, and 'telling the truth THEY don't want you to know about Iraq' or something and it doesn't represent the film, but that trailer has me in no hurry at all to see this.

Artman
02-17-10, 09:05 AM
Remember how sick everyone got of Kevin Costner for a while there? Damon may be heading in the same direction.

I don't see how they're comparable...Costner made a couple of big critical and commercial duds in a row and never recovered...mostly because he continued to make bad films.

Damon just played two very different characters in The Informant and Invictus...they weren't box office hits but they weren't expected to be and they go solid reviews. I think it's fine if he wants to do an action flick (even if it's not called Bourne) every three yrs or so.

candyrocket786
02-17-10, 12:40 PM
Look of a Bourne film + Damon + Greengrass = Me at the theater! :up: :D

TheBigDave
03-10-10, 12:37 AM
New Damon flick slanders America

After all of Hollywood's Iraq movies have flopped (even the Oscar-garlanded "The Hurt Locker" earned only $15 million at the box office), one studio thinks it has the following secret to success: The previous films didn't insult the United States enough.

"Green Zone," opening Friday, is a $100 million slime job that conjures up a fantastically distorted leftist version of the war and wraps it around a frantic but preposterous action picture. (Spoilers about the plot follow.)

Matt Damon plays Miller, an Army "chief" (chief warrant officer) assigned to searching for weapons of mass destruction in Baghdad in the opening days of the war in 2003.

The preposterous part comes in almost immediately: After Chief Miller comes up dry a couple of times, he decides to launch a one-man internal-affairs investigation into US intelligence-gathering.

He bypasses his chain of command, endangers good men (when one of his soldiers asks why he's following a random Iraqi into what could well be an ambush, Miller snaps, "Put your game face on") and forges a secret alliance against his fellow soldiers with a Baghdad CIA officer (Brendan Gleeson).

Despite being guilty of gross insubordination, lying to his superiors and concealing important evidence from them (a notebook containing the addresses of Saddam's top officers), Miller is the hero of the film.

Others we're supposed to cheer for include Sunni officers who shoot down helicopters carrying American soldiers sent to assassinate them. Those death squads are acting at the behest of a duplicitous Pentagon intelligence mandarin (Greg Kinnear) who has single-handedly drummed up a fake casus belli.

Before the war, he interviewed a general of Saddam's who told him pointedly that there were no WMDs in Iraq after 1991 but that he'd be willing to work with the Americans after Saddam was deposed. The Kinnear figure then lied to a gullible reporter (Amy Ryan) that he had a rock-solid source, "Magellan," who had given him proof of WMDs in Iraq.

Such is this movie's eagerness to turn reality upside down that, although the Ryan character is obviously based on Judith Miller of The New York Times, the reporter is said to work for the Wall Street Journal. In full-on liberal daydream mode, Damon and his friends can pretend their favorite lefty paper is untainted by flawed reporting.

To cover his tracks from Chief Miller, the Pentagon official sends out a goon squad to assassinate the Sunni general -- who, according to the movie, is also the sole figure responsible for whether Iraq will erupt into an insurgency.

Even for Hollywood, "Green Zone" is dumbfoundingly brazen in its effort to rewrite the facts. As any reasonably informed person knows, many intelligence services (including the French, German, Chinese, Russian and British) believed Iraq had WMDs. And the CIA (which along with Chief Miller is a hero of "Green Zone") was among them. Plus, such intel reports predated the Bush administration -- and Saddam's refusal to allow the UN weapons inspectors to finish their work gave us every reason to think he was hiding something and sealed his fate.

It's one thing to make a fantasy film laced with snarky jibes at the United States and its military. It's of another order entirely for an American studio (Universal, a unit of GE) to perpetrate, during an ongoing war, such vicious anti-American lies disguised as cheap entertainment.

"Green Zone" tells US troops that all of their efforts have been based on a deliberate deception. Worse, it blames the insurgency that has killed so many of our fighting men and women on US treachery.

Movies like "In the Valley of Elah," "Rendition" and "Redacted" have shown US forces doing nasty things -- but none went anywhere near as far as this picture in suggesting original sin corrupted the entire Iraq war and that American officials are more blameworthy than the insurgents for the most violent years.

"Green Zone" isn't cinema. It's slander. It will go down in history as one of the most egregiously anti-American movies ever released by a major studio.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/new_damon_flick_slanders_america_FGv1evpniBqZyEfmFpP4yO

FinkPish
03-10-10, 01:15 AM
As far as I know, The Green Zone is intended to be fiction, so who the fuck cares what this asshole from the NYPost thinks? The fact that he automatically lumps it in with "Rendition" and "In the Valley of Elah," which were also unfairly attacked for their views on the war, makes me think this kid is just writing what his bosses told him to write, which would be bullshit propaganda.

Sondheim
03-10-10, 01:52 AM
"Green Zone" isn't cinema. It's slander.I don't have much interest in this film, but that's just a really stupid statement. "The Triumph of the Will" is cinema. "Jud S" is cinema. "The Birth of a Nation" is cinema. "The Green Zone" most certainly is cinema.

DonnachaOne
03-10-10, 03:41 AM
Green Zone is odd. It's definitely well-made, with breathtaking production design and wonderful cinematography. It's just that the story's a bit flat, really. While grittier and more palpable than something like Body Of Lies, it does the same thing again of not really doing anything new or interesting. None of the characters are particularly deep or compelling, and for all the detail in the way they're outfitted, they may as well be wearing black or white hats. Everything and everyone is much simpler than they look and sometimes downright stupid. Damon's Roy Miller is a soldier understandably miffed that the intelligence reports that tell him where to find WMDs aren't accurate. At this point, everyone in the audience knows that the information isn't just inaccurate, it's false. It takes one and a half hours for anyone in the film to figure this out. Miller also seems very trusting of strangers and seems willing to go along with the whims of others very easily.

The film hints at bigger themes and intricacies, at one point almost turning into a compelling spy story with factions within the same government playing against each other for different ends, but then it just devolves into the same bang-zoom-ratatat you've seen before. Throw in stock characters from other movies, from the political slimeball who really knows what's going on to the soldier who likes to follow orders 'cause it means he gets to shoot and hit people, and you have yourself Green Zone. Kinda like The Hurt Locker, but with a budget instead of suspense.

Geofferson
03-12-10, 08:39 AM
Ebert sure liked it -- 4 stars (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100310/REVIEWS/100319990).

Ash Ketchum
03-12-10, 10:23 AM
As far as I know, The Green Zone is intended to be fiction, so who the fuck cares what this asshole from the NYPost thinks? The fact that he automatically lumps it in with "Rendition" and "In the Valley of Elah," which were also unfairly attacked for their views on the war, makes me think this kid is just writing what his bosses told him to write, which would be bullshit propaganda.

To be fair, the regular film reviewer for the New York Post, Lou Lumenick, gave GREEN ZONE a favorable 3-star review in today's paper. He even addresses his colleague's critique, which was done as an opinion piece, not a review. Here's the link:
http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/movies/green_from_page_HWPOKCqTP15olvZliS8jHL

To be even fairer, Kyle Smith, the one who attacked GREEN ZONE, can be very funny and witty when he does one-star movie reviews.
Here's the link to today's review of the Rob Pattinson vehicle, REMEMBER ME:

http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/movies/fuhgeddaboutit_fGdciAVC63Mpp94Y6paetJ

Dr Mabuse
03-12-10, 03:08 PM
Now that I realize this film is exactly what the trailer made it out to be, I'll be skipping it.

Maybe I'll 'legally purchase' it once to check it out some time in the future on a slow day.

cdollaz
03-12-10, 04:52 PM
Does it have a lot of shaky-cam in it?

PopcornTreeCt
03-12-10, 06:10 PM
Now that I realize this film is exactly what the trailer made it out to be, I'll be skipping it.


The Bourne Identity 4?

I'm not really interested in seeing Matt Damon get chased by guys in suits on cell phones.

Indy Jones Fan
03-12-10, 08:11 PM
Does it have a lot of shaky-cam in it?
Unfortunately, yes...ad nauseam...even when characters are just sitting at a table talking.

Patman
03-12-10, 09:16 PM
Didn't much care for this film, as it was just hard to bypass the 2-dimensional characterizations and didactic feel to the script. Yes, Greengrass = tons of shaky-cam, and it's kinda of pervasive in most of the action scenes.

Even with the Damon-Greengrass pedigree, I recommend a matinee showing at best.

I give it 2 stars, or a grade of C.

Dr Mabuse
03-13-10, 03:51 AM
The Bourne Identity 4?

No... a political 'lesson' movie from people who think they are going to tell the 'unwashed' the REAL story of something. Filled with cartoonish, one-dimensional characters that beat the audience over the head with the often mindlessly simplistic ideology angle. All so the dummies can glean the message from it.

That trailer screamed that at me. At first I thought it may be bad marketing which is wont to happen, but now I'm positive it was an accurate representation of the film.

DGibFen
03-14-10, 04:28 PM
Wanted to like this, but couldn't. Everything Dr. Mabuse mentioned in his post above mine nailed my criticism of the story/characters. I actually heard a couple of people say afterward "that Miller guy needs to get an award; how come no one knows this story?" (Gee, maybe because it's fiction! :rolleyes:)

One positive note: Greengrass can pace action sequences extremely well. That last sequence lasted twenty minutes and it had a great "pins-and-needles" type feel to it.

The Bus
03-14-10, 09:49 PM
I fell asleep during the action sequence. This is the first Greengrass dud for me. Worth a view on DVD, maybe.

cdollaz
03-14-10, 10:34 PM
The skaky cam made this unbearable. I had to look at my lap a few times because it was so bad. Until this guy changes his camera technique, I think I'm out of the Paul Greengrass game.

Also, the story was lame and the characters unmemorable.

SuperJim88
03-15-10, 01:03 PM
I understand the need for shaky cam during action sequence, but for the love of god, put the camera on a stand when it's just people talking in a room. I'm pretty sure I got motion sickness from the movie.

sauce07
03-31-10, 01:40 PM
I guess i'm one of the few who doesn't get bothered by the use of shaky cam and am glad that they don't use tripods for dialogue scenes. Can you imagine how jarring it would be to have the style change between nearly every single scene? He's Paul Greengrass, not Oliver Stone or Tony Scott. You know what you are in for when you go see one of his movies, it's not like he only does this in every other movie.

I thought the movie was good, not great. I liked the suspense throughout the movie, how you just had to go along with Miller on this wild goose chase.

Pendi
04-07-10, 05:59 PM
Auch... so many "bad" reviews... To be honest I had good expectations on this movie...
I'll give it a try tho

Rival11
07-25-10, 06:17 PM
Now that I realize this film is exactly what the trailer made it out to be, I'll be skipping it.

I should have made this call.....this was one of the most boring films I've seen in a while. This film should have been no longer than an hour in length.

gmanca
08-09-10, 12:57 AM
It wasn't as mediocre as I thought it would be; a pretty good political thriller, akin to the Jack Ryan films, particularly "Clear and Present Danger." I do think that because the film localized the "bad guy" to just those in the Green Zone it would lead to erroneous conclusions about what really happened in Iraq, when the actions of L. Paul Bremer were more nuanced and externally-based than Greg Kinnear's character.

Being that I haven't seen Greengrass' other films and am really against shaky-cam, I was surprisingly not against it in this film. I think the biggest issue with shaky-cam is how the action is framed and how quick the cuts are; unlike shots from The Dark Knight, it was pretty clear who was where and who the different "actors" were in the firefights.