Red de Mentiras

A taut and engaging Middle Eastern thriller from Ridley Scott, who handles the political motivations just as well as the frenetic action scenes. BODY OF LIES is a modern-day counterpart to Scott's Crusader epic KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, revealing how the war between the East and West is nowadays fought through terror attacks and sinister subversion rather than all-out battles.

DiCaprio continues to develop as one of the most interesting actors of our age while Russell Crowe is cast against type as a shifty CIA controller. Although the on-the-ground operations, bombings and betrayals are as exciting as you'd expect, the film's real strength lies in the back story: namely, America's interference in cultures it doesn't fully understand or get to grips with. Add in another dignified performance from Mark Strong and you have a winning combination for a movie.

The craftsmanship behind director Ridley Scott's 2008 convulsive political thriller is impressive, but having acts of terrorism drive an intentionally labyrinth plot reveals how they impede the story structurally, an insurmountable barrier that screenwriter William Monahan ("The Departed") can't seem to overcome. The movie's first half is all the more bewildering for all the double-crosses and cover-ups that serve to set up the central situation. Based on Washington Post columnist David Ignatius' 2007 novel, the movie focuses on embedded CIA operative Roger Ferris who is on an undercover assignment to hunt an Al-Qaeda terrorist leader named Al-Saleem. Ferris is not entirely alone as he is connected via cell phone with his stateside boss Ed Hoffman, who is the head of the CIA's Near East division and directs Ferris toward life-threatening tasks in a most nonchalant manner from his upscale suburban home.

The plot's impetus is driven by the elusive Al-Saleem's unblinking series of suicide bombings in Europe in response to the invasion by US and UK troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. The movie gets more interesting when Ferris decides to work with Jordanian intelligence director Hani Salaam, an erudite, enigmatic figure who is well entrenched in the Middle East militia and appears to take a page from Mario Puzo's "The Godfather" when it comes to loyalty and betrayal. Of course, it's a matter of course that Ferris' loyalty is tested when an elaborate plan is hatched to create a bogus competing terrorist group and use an unwitting Dubai architect as the head. The other complicating factor is that Ferris has fallen for pretty Iranian nurse Aisha when he gets treated for possible rabies at a clinic. It becomes inevitable that she also becomes a pawn in the political intrigue. Scott paints his canvas with a lot of graphic violence from large-scale bombings to more intimate acts of torture.

All of the external elements are fitting, but they can't seem to masquerade the convoluted and often cliché-ridden plot at the film's core. A solid cast goes a long way to compensate for the plot holes. As Ferris, Leonardo DiCaprio applies his trademark wiry energy to an intensely compelling performance that could have shown a bit more variety. Adding fifty belly-stretching pounds to his frame, Russell Crowe, Scott's favorite leading man ("Gladiator", "American Gangster", "A Good Year"), plays the Arkansan Hoffman as a scene-stealing character part. The irony is that the Australian actor's Southern accent is more convincing than DiCaprio's. Their antagonistic interplay, played out mostly on the phone, is rather predictably developed. Fetching Iranian actress Golshifteh Farahani provides gratefully calm relief to the ongoing mayhem as Aisha, although her character comes across as a mere plot device. There is a nicely fractious dinner table scene with Ferris and her judgmental older sister, although the movie plays down the more human-size hostilities in favor of the pyrotechnics.

As Hani, Mark Strong ("Sunshine", "Stardust") leaves the most vivid impression of the cast but for the most old-fashioned of cinematic reasons - he plays what could be a villainous figure as a suave, mysterious man of honor who is completely on top of his job, an intentional counterpoint, at least physically, to Crowe's slovenly Hoffman. The film's resolution defies credibility, but it finally becomes clear that Monahan is not interested in exposing the factors that have driven the Middle East political maelstrom into acts of escalating terrorism. Rather, his screenplay shows that testosterone-driven Hollywood-style entertainment can take place anywhere.

I watched "Body of Lies" the other night for the first time since having seen it in the theater. This is a well made film that just barely misses the mark of being outstanding.

Russell Crowe is good in this movie, and it's arguably one of the few Crowe movies in which he transforms into his character rather than simply playing himself. DiCaprio is good enough, though he definitely suffers from his ongoing inability to play a character rather than being stuck in his same old mannerisms.

The plot of this movie is quite intriguing. It's a film that revolves around post-9/11 terrorism in the mid-east, with most of the movie taking place in the very places that make the news the most some eight years later: Iraq, Syria, and Jordan. Sadly, the movie predicts the spread of terrorism to Europe (it was filmed after the 7/7 bus bombings in London, and references them, but shows an attack in Amsterdam that brings to mind recent attacks in Paris and Brussels). Its fictional drama mixed with real world terrorism makes for a compelling story.

Unfortunately there's just something about the movie that makes it obvious that it misses the mark just a tad. It might be argued that the studio was trying a bit too hard to make an Oscar worthy picture, but didn't quite pull things together enough. The romantic element of the film feels a bit forced, and despite its strengths it comes across as being a bit more like a made-for-TV drama series than an award worthy feature film.

All in all I'm going with 6/10 stars. It's certainly worth the time to see, but ultimately a good popcorn flick rather than a more substantive film.

I'm starting to get what and especially why people praised Leonardo Di Caprio so much. He really holds the movie together here. It's a great script story, but with his charismatic performance he really gives it the extra edge it needs.

Ridley Scott has chosen a very peculiar story for (t)his movie. But he really treats it with much respect. His visual sense and his story-telling mastery combined with a great cast and the aforementioned script make up for a very interesting, entertaining, but still very complex and sophisticated! It's not something you can watch in-between doing other things. You do have to pay attention to what is happening to follow the story/plot. And I liked that very much :o)

I have really liked Leonardo DiCaprio's films since he came back from his hiatus (esp Blood Diamond). However, this one was quite forgettable. I enjoyed the movie when I was in the theater and left thinking "Huh. That was pretty good". But the week after someone asked what movie I saw and I couldn't remember. It reminded me a lot of "The Kingdom" actually (the feel, not the details). It was a very well made film, dialog and script were good, just nothing really stood out and grabbed me. Leo was the shine, he is such a talented actor and I was happy to see him in a great role. I just wish the plot had something fantastic in it to make it into a great film.