Syriana

"Syriana" is a blistering, powerful film about the degree to which governments and corporate conglomerates place the ambition to control the world's oil supply above the well being of their citizens and employees. In this game, there are only bad guys, and what separates the villains from the protagonists is not a question of who's good and who's bad, but rather how bad each is willing to be.

So maybe "Syriana" doesn't tell us anything new. But that doesn't mean its points aren't worth making again and again. And though it is complicated, and I'm not going to pretend I followed every detail of its intricate plot, it's not *that* hard to follow. Stephen Gaghan is a good writer, and he provides a nice summary of the film's action in its final moments.

What emerges from this tangled puzzle is a web of corruption and self-interest, all fueled by the need for oil. In one plot thread, the men behind two soon-to-merge oil companies will stop at nothing to make the merger go through, since the new company will be one of the most powerful in the world. In another thread, the law firm representing the company proves that it's eager to cash in on the company's new economic success. Meanwhile, a power struggle between the two sons of an aging king in an unspecified Middle Eastern country (though Saudi Arabia is obviously suggested) has attracted the attention of the American government, operating through the CIA. America (read American business) has a vested interest in which of the king's sons succeeds him to the throne: It doesn't want the reform-minded eldest son, whose priorities will be building a country to benefit his own people; it wants instead the younger son, who will continue to relegate his country to a cosy spot in America's hip pocket and take its orders directly from the president of the USA. And in the film's most chilling plot strand, we see how the struggle for oil feeds the radical Islam movement in the Middle East, providing young men with a feeling of brotherhood and righteousness in the face of a region they feel has turned its back on them in favor of big business and Western corruption.

"Syriana" is tense, fast and furious. Following it can admittedly be somewhat exhausting, but if you pay very close attention to the first hour or so, as each story is introduced and the relationships between characters become clear, the second half of the movie is easier to digest.

I disagree with other comments here that the characters aren't developed or that the acting is unimpressive. On the contrary, I think all of the actors create extremely nuanced, compelling characters, a challenging task given the fact that none of them are allowed more than a minute or so at a time to feed us information about themselves. A movie like this could easily fall prey to filling itself with a bunch of stock villains, all cocked eyebrows and facial mannerisms rather than full-bodied characterizations, and the fact that it avoids this is a tribute to both Gaghan and the cast. And hats off to the editor on this movie, who had perhaps the most daunting task of the year.

2005 has been full of terse, important films, fresh in their immediacy. There have been a small number of sensational, tough, thought-provoking films instead of a larger batch of more mediocre ones, as has been the case recently. "Syriana" is one of the best movies of the year: it's angry, yet it's not hopeless. I hope Americans see this movie. At this time of year, when people are trampling each other in malls in order to be first in line for Christmas sales, I hope they remember that the vast wealth of America frequently comes at the sake of people all over the world who will never have a fraction of the comfort those in our country take for granted.

Grade: A

Connex loses its access in Kazahkstan by its Emir which is then given to the Chinese. Connex is merging with the smaller Killen to get back into the region. Bryan Woodman (Matt Damon) is an energy analyst in Geneva. He attends the Emir's party where his son is accidentally killed. Reformer Prince Nasir (Alexander Siddig) offers him reparation and eventually takes him on as his adviser. Meanwhile, there is a secret missile sale in Iran that ends explosively. Bob Barnes (George Clooney) is a hard-nosed CIA operative trying to stop the arms smuggling. He clashes with his superiors and then assigned to assassinate Nasir.

It's an ambitious movie that would confuse the most fanatical of conspiracy theorists. It's a complicated interconnected series of stories. It's tough to keep it all straight. In this case, the confusion adds to the appeal of the movie. It highlights the murky nature of dealings within that region.

This is a great, complex movie. Its only faults are in the clarity of character motivations. This is not a liberal or conservative film. It is an exploration into the existing system that evolved over many years.

At no point in the movie does it take any pot-shots at Bush, Republicans, or Democracts. In fact, non of those words are ever spoken. It is not a left/right - red/blue debate. At no point in time does it ever mention the political parties of those in charge.

The fact is, be it a Republican or Democrat, this world depends on oil. Our country while split on how to obtain it, will do anything to make sure the flow is not cut off.

This movie finds faults with the global economy. Faults with the US system that has been tweaked by both sides over the span of decades. Faults with the Middle East for squandering its earnings. Faults with emerging China and its impact on consumption.

Anyone claiming this movie is politically motivated is a troll looking for attention and should be ignored.

Do you like puzzles? I do. I work crosswords, encryptions and sudoku. I think that's one reason I liked Syriana. But this movie left me puzzled.

Do you like movies with convincing acting, and character development. I do. I think that's another reason I liked Syriana. But who all of the characters were, and what characters were not revealed in the movie left me puzzled.

Do you like movies with mysteries, and with a credible backdrop of events relevant to today's world? I do. That's another good reason to like Syriana.

I think you get the idea. Syriana is a very good movie, but with so many characters and inter-related plots that it is difficult to assemble all of the pieces. You definitely get the main idea though: oil is all-important, and whomever controls oil gets very rich and powerful.

George Clooney, Matt Damon, Christopher Carter, et al., are a terrific ensemble cast that portray their characters very convincingly. Their stories are told separately and coalesce at the end of the movie, much like in "Traffic" and many other contemporary movies. Who are the "good guys" in this movie one may ask. That's difficult to discern. Maybe there aren't any (and maybe there aren't any bad guys either; or, maybe they're all bad guys.) If you decide to attend this movie, pay attention right from the beginning of the movie. And, if you like mysteries and puzzles, try to solve the question of who has the ultimate power among the characters in this movie. As for me, I think I'll have to see the movie again.

Syriana is a confused, ambitious and complex thriller of corruption and power related to the oil industry that tells four parallel stories: the CIA agent Bob Barnes (George Clooney) with great experience in Middle East that falls in disgrace after an unsuccessful mission dealing missiles in Lebanese Republic; the investigation of the attorney Bennett Holiday (Jeffrey Wright) related to the merge of two American oil companies, Connex and Killen; the traumatic association of the energy analyst Bryan Woodman (Matt Damon) with the son of a powerful emir of Iran; and the social drama of the Pakistani immigrant worker Wasim Khan (Mazhar Munir) that is fired by the oil company.

The greatest problem with this movie is that it is too complex for only 126 minutes running time, due to the number of plots, subplots and characters; therefore its edition is tremendously confused with the use of many ellipsis. It would be more appropriated a mini-series, or a longer film. Even the title of this movie is very ambiguous, with many non-official explanations. The movie's website states that "'Syriana' is a very real term used by Washington think-tanks to describe a hypothetical reshaping of the Middle East." (http://syrianamovie.warnerbros.com/about.html). In the end, I truly found this movie a pretentious and sophisticated collection of clichés sold in a beautiful "package". My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Syriana – A Indústria do Petróleo" ("Syriana – The Oil Industry")