Syriana

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.

In "Syriana," writer/director Stephen Gaghan uses the busy style of "Crash" and "Amores Perros" to illustrate the complex geopolitics behind oil. Each sector--regulators, "intelligence", lobbyists, grease-the-wheel-ers and cogs-in-the-wheel-ers, in the network of greed, idealism, self-interest, sophistication and naiveté, is represented by a different character followed through the movie to bring them together, directly or indirectly, into the climax.

This technique to coordinate a huge ensemble of captivating character actors woven tightly together in a complex story is helped enormously by Robert Elswit's ever-moving camera shots as visually and sound edited by Tim Squyres, who had some experience with overlapping dialog and movement in a more literal upstairs/downstairs on Robert Altman's "Gosford Park." Alexandre Desplat's music adds to the tense mood.

The variegation that Gaghan presents is almost staggering, even more ethically complicated than a Graham Greene Cold War noir. This is the first film I've seen that illustrates the diversity of clashing Islamic cultures and interests, despite that I couldn't keep their interests or motives all quite straight. Though the English subtitles (which are commendably outlined in black for unusual legibility) wipe out some of the distinctions, we can infer that Iranians are speaking Farsi, Pakistanis' Urdu and others speaking Arabic, all with varying fluency and mutual cultural comprehension, let alone manipulators who can speak anything besides their native tongues. We've seen immigrants and guest workers in films critical of Western countries, but not the resentment-brewing conditions of badly treated non-citizens in the oil-rich Persian Gulf states, like the fictional one here which looks a lot like Dubai or Brunei, where clusters of modern skyscrapers contrast with Bedouin goat herders. It does help for background on the fascinating side plot of the radicalized young Arabs to see "Paradise Now" about Palestinian terrorists to explain particular details of their training.

While each character is specifically set within a believable home and family setting, some are painted with too easy and broad strokes. While Alexander Siddig seems to have the monopoly on naively idealistic Arabs, as his similar character in "Kingdom of Heaven" against another Crusades, history is littered with the interim, modernizing liberal tragically caught between powerful forces. (Though the proliferation of Western-educated Arab intellectuals in movies is beginning to sound like all those Japanese generals in World War II movies who went to USC or whatever; at least he went to Oxford and not Harvard.)

Matt Damon's un-Bourne-like energy analyst just sounds simplistic even when he's truth-telling, but we also see that he's already slid down the slippery slope of ethics in the crossing of his personal and professional lives. That so many of the oil and gas executives have Texas accents (superb Chris Cooper, Tim Blake Nelson, Robert Foxworth) does seem to say that the decades of business and political corruption there, as documented in Robert Caro's biography of LBJ, have simply been extended to a global scale.

The film is also unusual in focusing on the role of lawyers negotiating the deals between companies and governments. While Christopher Plummer's Ivy League senior partner type has been seen as a shadowy force in countless paranoid thrillers, Jeffrey Wright is completely unpredictable and tightly wound, though the point of his relationship with his cynical alcoholic father isn't exactly clear except maybe as his conscience. We see before our eyes he goes from, as his mentor says, "a sheep into a lion."

Most films have prosecutors like David Clennon's U.S. attorney as a hero against corruption, instead of being chillingly dismissed as "trust fund lawyers." But the script is so full of such epigrams, like "In this town, you're only innocent until you're investigated," that one character calls another on issuing them too brightly.

While from the beginning I couldn't quite follow all the machinations around George Clooney's character, he is wonderful at transforming from his usual Cary Grant suave to harried, dedicated, mid-level bureaucrat who literally won't toe the Company line in a dangerous hierarchy that's shown to be a bit more competent than in real life, that reminded me both in the gut and guts of Russell Crowe's Wigand in the tobacco wars in "The Insider." It recalls how benign corrupt spooks looked in their personal lives, as there's much conversation here about houses, cars and college tuition. Indirectly, the film implicitly shows the dangers to Valerie Plame from her outing as a CIA operative, as families and personal connections are constantly used as threats and bargaining chips.

Significantly, there is not a single mention amidst all these Mideast chicaneries, plots and plans of the Zionist entity, proving that pro or anti-Israel policies are smoke screens around the main draw -- oil.

Movie-wise, these characters seem a lot like the gangsters and their conseglieres in "The Godfather" carving up Cuba and drug rights, let alone Gordon Gekko extolling "Greed is good" as the ultimate ideology, and fits right in with this year's other geo-political thrillers "The Constant Gardener" and "Lord of War," and those weren't even about natural resources. It works better than the re-make of "The Manchurian Candidate" because even though the focal point is a fictional country the issues are real, not science fiction.

So does this make you ready to get out of your car and onto the train? Because until then, we'll still need lots of that oil from the Middle East.

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.

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")

"Syriana" is a Drama - Thriller movie in which we watch the intricate and often corrupt relationship between the oil industry, government, and global power structures.

I found this movie very interesting mainly because of its plot and the connection between some events. The movie presented a realistic view of the machinations behind oil, power, and geopolitics, giving the audience a sobering look at how corruption and exploitation shape the modern world. The interpretation of George Clooney who played as CIA operative Bob Barnes was one of the strongest of the movie. The movie's tone is tense and gritty, reflecting the dangerous world in which it takes place. However, it can be difficult to follow at times, with its fragmented narrative and multiple story-lines. The movie requires careful attention to detail since the thematic depth is impressive and the storytelling a bit complicated. Lastly, I have to say that "Syriana" is a compelling political thriller movie that offers a sharp critique of global power dynamics and the oil industry so, its plot and intricate storytelling may not be for everyone.