Commentaires des utilisateurs

First off, the criticism is too harsh. From a directorial aspect, this is not a perfect movie. Yet the movie clearly goes over the head of some people. There are numerous laughs big and small scattered through the movie where you laugh at the absurdity of the characters and the unfolding of events. At times it also gets informative and at times drama-serious. When the movie ends you feel like to have gone through a journey with General Glenn McMahon, an inside look into the relationship and mechanism of America's war in Afghanistan.

War Machine delivers its message and will prompt you into thinking. The pacing is slower at times but then catches the speed. Great chemistry between the cast with solid performances. Brad Pitt is excellent, giving a unique and strong performance that radiates as the film goes on.

An absurd story at an absurd time, this is a unique movie worth watching for its theme and characters.

War Machine - A satirical but honest look at the treadmill of war.

First off, Brad Pitt is essentially a caricature in this movie. I kept going back and forth on whether he was brilliant or miserable in his performance. I found myself feeling the same way I did when seeing him in Allied late last year. There are scenes when he is absolutely dialed in to the role and what's going on around him. And there are a handful of scenes where you'd think someone is just reading him his lines off-screen. He's been frustratingly inconsistent these last two outings.

I had no trouble deciphering the performance level of the surrounding cast, as they all came to play. From the big names of Ben Kingsley and Tilda Swinton, to still familiar names of Anthony Michael Hall and Topher Grace, I was impressed. My favorite performance would have to go to one of the smaller roles played by Lakeith Stanfield. I'd seen him earlier this year in Get Out, but he had a better opportunity to shine here as an absolutely emotionally broken marine.

The first half of the film is very quirky and actually has some pretty funny lines. The second half all but abandons the comedic tone and shifts into a full fledged war drama. The end result is satisfying, but that contrast is pretty jarring. It would have been more successful to mix the paint a bit more or just choose one color.

Netflix pulled out the big guns putting up $60 million for the distribution rights to the film. Later this year they are also backing a loose follow up to 2009's Moon (please see this underrated film if you haven't already) and breaking the bank with a $100 Martin Scorsese film with Robert De Niro and Al Pacino in 2018. Netflix is quickly changing the game in the world of cinema. Don't be surprised to see the awards shows tweak their rules to allow for streaming content down the road.

So pop some popcorn and reserve your couch to see this film of grandiosity and failure. Not exactly your typical recipe to Netlix and Chill, but I'm not one to judge.

Gen. Glen McMahon (Brad Pitt) is no non-sense soldier. He lives a Spartan life often away from his family. He and his team such as the always shouting Greg Pulver (Anthony Michael Hall) are called in to cleanup the Afganistan quagmire. He is told to push the needle and not request for more troops. Instead, he is driven to win and sees his way where everyone else has failed. He uses any means to get his way while not getting his meeting with Obama. He finds President Karzai (Ben Kingsley), an isolated corrupt leader. Media consultant Matt Little (Topher Grace) suggests getting him an article in Rolling Stones.

This dark comedy is too real to be funny. If Strangelove actually happened, the absurd movie would be less fun. One is always reminded that real people died here and there because the character of McMahon is based on a real person. While there are interesting bits, the general sense of this movie is one of tired resignation.

I don't know if it's the Rolling Stones reporter but I'm reminded of Almost Famous. In that movie, the reporter is the protagonist and he's the eyes with which the audience sees the story. The rock star is a subject who is slowly revealed. In this movie, we are given only the narration of reporter Sean Cullen for the most part. He shows up for a limited role later in the movie. McMahon is the protagonist and we're stuck with him for good and for ill.

Of all the characters, the most compelling is the 'confused' Marine Cpl. Billy Cole. His first scene with McMahon is devastating. His face is haunting. What he says resonates more than any other character. In the end, he is a minor character. His other scene is another compelling sequence as his squad goes into a hostile town. Again he is more compelling than anyone else and it is emotionally draining. This movie could have been great but McMahon can't be the protagonist. He is an absurd side character like Karzai in this movie.

Everything I saw about the movie before I saw the movie pointed to a bold critique of US foreign policy and war politics, so I didn't expect an action filled nail-biter. It did deliver what I expected, and did so phenomenally. The issues the movie brings up and the things the characters said really, truly couldn't have been said more openly and directly. As the narrator would have you know, it's going to fall on deaf ears where it matters the most, granted, but it's one heck of a catharsis session all the same.

Where the progression of events gets too slow, the brilliant acting comes to the rescue. Pitt's performance didn't look to me as smooth and believable as it used to be, but Tilda Swinton and Ben Kingsley blew my mind. With their impeccable accents and spot on mannerisms, it was near impossible to tell they were just actors (save for their very familiar faces). There were a few pretty funny lines, too.

To anyone who doesn't mind listening to dialogue and watching out for subtle goings-on, this movie is a must, MUST see.

War Machine is a movie about the absurdity of the war of Afghanistan and the absurdity of American foreign policy in general. Therefore the tone of the film is absurdist to reflect this. Brad Pitt's portrayal of General McMahon is absurdly over the top and quite deliberately so in order to reflect the general's absurd actions and attitude, his interactions with the other characters including the politicians are baffling and confusing which again reflects the baffling and incoherent nature of America's policy towards Afghanistan and the Middle East. How do you wage bloody war and build a nation up at the same time? The two do not go hand in hand.

War Machine's exposes just how much of a wild goose chase the battle against the Taliban is, how do you defeat an enemy that are often nothing more than disgruntled locals who have had quite enough of American soldiers bombing civilians homes and killing their children, without committing genocide? The film makers have reflected this by showing the Gen. and his men embarking on a wild goose chase of Europe in a futile attempt to secure more troops to the cause and get some face to face communication with the President of the U.S. The theme is quite clearly wild goose chases galore.

Overall I feel War Machine is an interesting anti-war movie that is much more a dark comedy drama than a clear satire which is what it was wrongly billed as. It isn't the funniest movie in the world but it has its' laugh out loud moments. Ultimately the mixture of satirical comedy, thought provoking drama, and taut action scenes blend together to tell a story which at it's essence aims to provoke everyone who watches this movie to ask, what were/are the Americans doing in Afghanistan? 7 out of 10 and some good performances and score.

Finished the movie War Machine on Netflix. It is a comedy satire of American international politics and the war in Afghanistan. The film was overall an entertaining social commentary on dysfunctional involvement with Afghanistan.

Brad Pitt's dead pan deliver style worked well in this particular role. Personaly I would have trimmed off twenty or so minutes of the movie to make a tighter presentation. Giving it a 7 out of 10.

I agree with what many other reviewers say, about it being confusing but still pertinent and that it might go over many viewers' heads because in general many Americans just have no idea that the US is still actively conducting warfare in Afghanistan. I feel like it was a pointed, clear message about our presence there, but that many of us were perhaps expecting another Fury or Inglorious Basterds. Others have spoken about all the characters in the movie, so I won't add anything, but I'm amazed to see that no one has once mentioned Meg Tilly as Gen. Glenn McMahon's wife. I haven't seen Meg act in anything in ages, but this was a terrific and nuanced performance. Male soldiers with fewer lines and less screen time have merited call outs, but really, Meg Tilley was amazing, just as amazing as the wonderful Tilda Swinton or Ben Kingsley. Her eyes never left Brad Pitt, and you could just imagine what their thirty years of marriage must have been like. Her subtle gestures and half-spoken words created a picture of 30 years of unwavering loyalty and devotion to a man she adores and respects, but her face shows how much those often lonely years cost. When she said her final line of, "I'm proud of me too.", I found it thrilling. I hope we see more of her in the future, because she was definitely one of astonishing bright points in this movie.

Not exactly good, not exactly bad. If you don't have anything else to watch, go for it. It's trying to be funny, but it cant be because of the seriousness of it all. Its like someone wrote a serious war movie, then the script was given to a satirist who just simply couldn't pull it together. The movies narration was meant to be the guiding voice of reason among madness. Unfortunately it was like having a high school student interested in politics give his two cents about the meaning of it all. This movie would have been better released around April fools than Memorial Day weekend.

I don't really know if it fits the moniker of docu-drama and I realise that that might put people off. But if you are conversant with the Afgan conflict then there is little new here. However it is well done as a filmic explanation if one is wondering still why that conflict is so intractable. I think Brad Pitt done a good job portraying the general which would be even a difficult role for the general himself. the general and his staff excellently illustrate the adage "you don't have to be mad to work here but it helps" or "you don't have to be mad to work here but you will be by the time you leave". overall a good effort from netflix and a brave one as one can be easily demonized for apparent anti-military stance in the current USA (thank u for your service). It is a bit misleading in the film where it is remarked that insurgencies are rarely successfully put down by force when in fact history teaches the opposite.All empires have beaten insurgencies by force and thru complete anilation of the insurgents. the Afgan situation is not even explained by the fact that the forces to put down the insurgency are "alien". in fact e.g in India home of continual insurgencies since independence the govt. manufactures "alien" forces to put down insurgencies by recruiting troops from other regions and ethnic groups to those of the insurgents and wiping them out thru foul or fair means. This matters not as some other insurgency erupts else where by some other abused ethnic group. The British empire thru Draconian methods was in the continuous process of putting down insurgencies and the US and Canada also have considerable experience subduing the 1st Nations and quite successfully if held against current situations. hence their unstinted instinctual belief in a military solution thru violent attrition as has succeeded countless times afore. methinks the world has turned.

I really appreciate the story War Machine tells, which sheds light on the hypocrisy and surrealism around the role of the US in the Afghani war. But the attempt of making a humorous sidelong glance on war, just didn't really work out. At the same time, the movie gradually moves into a more emotional territory, which honestly makes it more confusing than appealing in contrast to the satire-elements.

War Machine is a movie I almost like. There are some really good scenes, the premise of the movie itself is good in theory, but the result just isn't that appealing. The mixture of drama and satire just makes the movie insignificant and messy.

The trailers indicated that this would be a good dark comedy. But it's hard to call it that. It certainly gets dark at times, and it's genuinely funny at other times, but it never hits both at the same time.

Brad Pitts performance is very good, I would say one of the better in his career. I did find his character a bit exaggerated and caricatured though, but him and the cast around him is generally quite good.

This film will generate anger because it throws a "deadpan" brick directly towards cultural dysfunction and mass delusion. "War Machine," and Brad Pitt, even exceeded the deadpan message of "Being There" a film from a less cynical time in history but still relevant to this day.

"War Machine" does a great job illustrating how disconnected the every-man has become in relation to reality. We live in a time where facts are now selectively chosen to support forgone perspectives rather than being absolute, universal, and irrefutable.

We live in a time where personage, perceptions, and public relations matter more than overview, objectives, conclusions, and endpoints. Reality has been set adrift.

It was a brave thing to produce this film because it speaks to a very narrow audience. Most people won't be entertained by the communication mechanism (deadpan) nor will the understand the message. Few people will be open to perspectives other than those which are preconceived. Some people are not aware and thus cannot acknowledge the wounds and damage that political lies have done to the American process and psyche.

To conclude our failed state of affairs, the affairs of a failed nation state (our nation state) I am not with him because he is certainly not with me no matter how much he tells me otherwise. The cohesion of leadership, truth, and the American way has left the building.

It is more of a shame that people won't understand this film, or won't want to. And that is how far we have fallen. Perhaps Rome fell the same way on the sword and misadventure of its own lies and delusion.

The film is approximately 2 hours long.

2 hours of a deadly dull attempt to satirize war and those who lead it. Brad Pitts' attempt to convey a rigidly martial soldier, a man of inflexible values and honour is both laughable (and not in a funny way) and cringe-worthy.

Pitts' performance is so over-the-top it actually lands on its feet.

The 'plot' - and I use the word loosely - is as puddle deep as the acting. I don't need constant narration to tell me what going on.

The movie felt like I was watching out-takes, I kept wondering when I'd see something actually happening... right to the end credits.

Poor show all round. Avoid. Pull your own teeth as an alternative.

This film tells the story of an ambitious army general, who is posted to Afghanistan to run the mission to fight insurgents. It becomes apparent very soon that various parties have not aligned their goals and missions.

"War Machine" tells a story of an enthusiastic man who is stuck in a web of bureaucracies. The story unfolds slowly, and at times it looks like a satirical look at a system that is supposed to serve and protect the public. The cameos are plentiful, making me pleasantly surprised. Though I find the film a little uneventful, I can see that it parallels what exactly is happening in the story to the characters.

It's obviously a satire, but against a horrific background. And it's a slow movie, which seems to be not what most people expected. Also Brad Pitt's performance is questionable, as he plays the general a little too cartoonish for a movie that already starts off with a lot of bizarre and cynical situations.

The whole movie is a nice allegory on how the "yes we can" turned into "what's taking so long", when it comes to the recent U.S. wars. How American idealism collides with the fact that their presence is less glorious WW2 heroism but depressing management of an asymmetric enemy. They are not here to win the war, but to administrate it. And bureaucracy doesn't sell on CNN.

Nothing in this movie ever happened anywhere close to how it's presented, but the over-stylized satire and drama seems to capture the abstruseness of the situation better than a real drama could. I personally enjoyed it.

It starts off like any other grand American propaganda style US military movie. Enter the tall, good looking white male protagonist against the crappy third world foreign nation who deserve a war they never asked for.

The underlying political narrative that the movie plays on really hits home towards the middle. I felt it was a bit slow to start with, but it does grip you enough to get through it.

The end felt a bit lacking, the whole movie was building up to a grand finale which never really came. It kind of fizzled out.

Nonetheless it has a few jokes, intermingled with the bleakness of fighting an insurgency. It does provide a sort of "anti- propaganda"message that the far right will probably look down on in disdain, so i can see some emotionally charged reviews coming.

Overall a good watch and a good conversation topic.

Not knowing anything about the movie I was surprised that I was watching Brad Pitt with gravely George C Scott (Patton) voice and awkward stiff movements fool me, not knowing who he was! He looks so young. The movie did a great job of revealing the confusion of power that is the military and government in taking on a task of war against an enemy that likely would never have become an enemy if we had never moved against other powers in the region and caused the bitterness and anger we now face. Yet, it happened and the USA is now the great Satan and evil that is being fought against by terrorists and fighting in the middle-east. The movie finds the humor in military and government attempts to move politically and strategically with the great acting and directing. Many name stars and stars of the past make appearances, some stars that you might not immediately recognize, and carry the humor in the movie plot-line. And while it is not a strong plot-line it serves the purpose, reveals some of the ridiculous reasoning that surely happens in war, and creates an often believable mostly fast paced action that keeps your attention throughout the course of the movie. While the military is NOT the inept fighting force portrayed, the action of government intervention and politics truly must be seen as the master hindrance of warfare, and rightly so perhaps. The movie does make you think about things! As it was a little silly, and a little weak in plot, I knocked off some stars. But it was certainly funny and worth watching.

Admittedly I think Brad Pitt's character roles can border on brilliant (Burn After Reading, Inglourious Basterds) or self important. So what happens when he plays a self important general?

War Machine takes a look at the war in Afghanistan with a twisted perspective we can only hope is a farce. But as you watch and consider what we hear and think of other General-In-Charge films (Patton) it becomes all too real. Brilliant writing might go unnoticed by many and the deadpan play of characters hell bent to serve a purpose in the absurdity of the world of politicians running wars. Pitt's general sums it up, "we must avoid killing at all cost. We can't help them and kill them at the same time."

Like the war which has meandered over the years, the movie gets lost along the way. The film does well showing desperation of people caught in situations they can't control, the war and political opinion, and situations we think we can control, but can't. Illustrated by the awkwardness of the general's marriage. Meg Tilley, as the general's wife, brilliantly underplays the absurdity and desperation of a marriage where the betrothed see each other 30 days a year.

Bear through it, as they must, to get to the last act of the film. It is worth it. The narrator sums up how we all feel at the end. But I won't tell you here, put on you're snarky attitude and watch.

This is not a war movie. This is not a comedy. It's barely a drama. This is a two hour movie filled with virtually no plot and absolutely no interesting characters. The movie gives no attempt to develop the characters, with all but Bitt's character being entirely one dimensional, and even though Bitt does have a character, it's a poor and uninteresting one. He gives a laughably over-the-top and often cringe-worthy performance, showing that he was absolutely not right for this role.

As said, it completely falls short as either a war movie or a comedy, both of which it's listed as here on IMDb. There is only one action scene, and I use the term loosely - all it is is a two minute scene which only shows one side shooting a few bullets, and that's it. The comedy on the other hand is totally unfunny and virtually none of it lands. I honestly spent the entire film but knowing this was meant to be a comedy.

So we are left with a film that has no suspense, no tension, no action or effective comedy to take it off the ground. Ultimately this is a dull, lifeless effort at satirizing war that offers almost nothing in terms of entertainment or drama. Don't waste your time.

This is not a film for lovers of war movies. It is an acid critic to wars. Besides the curious mannerism of Pitt in his character lies a person whose capabilities are far below of what he thinks. Not the first, not the last.

This addition to Netflix seems much like a waste of money. The budget is 60 million and 70% of it very much looks like a TV film. The direction is as standard as the cinematography. At one point, it broke the 180 degree rule during a 60 minute interview, it just didn't work. Brad Pitt plays a general who is often serious, over the top, and funny? His performance is fine, aside from his crazy one eye mannerism. He's able to capture multiple emotions with several looks and it kinda works. The performances from the supporting cast are fine. They are just not given much screen time. Lakeith Stanfield is a stand out. His scenes were brief, but he was able to display an impressive range of emotion. The biggest problem with this film is it's just flat. There's no stake or ambition. It is a very safely crafted film. It is generic and uninteresting told with heavy narration and exposition. I guess the film is trying to display how some military folks have an obsession with war. The general here is quite irresponsible, egotistical, and seems deranged. The same with his crew as well, but just not as much. There's a large amount of tonal shifts from being serious to comedic and the film doesn't know which one to choose, so it ends up uneven altogether. There are times where the film switches hard rock to rap then to classical music creating uneven scenes with abrupt jump cuts that just makes no sense. I am guessing it was meant to be comedic, but it just didn't work. Overall, I think this film is quite a mess.

4/10.

It wasn't a movie I enjoyed very much, but it was a good movie. You can feel it in your guts. It's a description of the US operations in Afghanistan, and I had expected a liberal viewpoint that made fun of the mess there. But it wasn't so. It actually showed viewpoints from multiple perspectives.

Brad Pitt plays a general, newly appointed to the region in order to "fix things". And he is trying to. He fights bureaucracy, politicians, and insurgents alike in order to get things done. He has a faithful group of subordinates who worship him and help him do whatever he wants. Ironically, his technical approach makes him the enemy of the US administration, which only needs to show they are trying, without actually having to succeed. Ben Kingsley has a few scenes as president Karzai that are ridiculously funny, too. "But I am acting as a leader. I am unavailable", he says in one scene. Hilarious.

In the end, one cannot but sympathize with a guy who wants to end the war, militarily or course, by unequivocally winning it, regardless of what human issues are hindering the victory. He has a job to do, even if it's obvious no one wants him to do it. The movie shows how these kinds of "wars" were never meant to be won, even if you had someone actually trying to.

Bottom line: A movie is impressive when it manages to portray a US army general as a simple task oriented technician, hired like you would hire a plumber to do a job. It gets even more impressive when it shows how impossible that job really is. And the acting was great. The mood was a little too deadpan for me. It is something that amuses you internally while you wonder why everything is moving so slow. I believe this was deliberate, in order for the viewer to understand a little bit of how slow things are really moving in the real world.

An interesting take on what the US 'War Machine' has been accomplishing over in the Middle East the past 18 to 20 years. Brad Pitt with a great performance once again. This is of course, a satirical take on a pretty ridiculous situation over there.

7/10

The acting was bland, there was no action, the dialogue was uninspiring, and there was no message or deep conflict of philosophies. I suppose that some will praise Pitt's gravely voice, with which he says nothing. Some think of this movie as an anti-war statement. At best it was a mild statement about how poorly our leaders and military understand the situation in AFGH. That lack of understanding can be no shock, given Vietnam, Iraq, Somalia, and too many others. Luckily, if one has a Netflix subscription, one may watch if "for free". A waste of time, however.