War, Inc.

Don't mistake "War Inc." for a sharply chiseled satire or a brainy comedy full of inside jokes for news buffs. It isn't.

This is an old-fashioned screwball comedy, with ridiculously coincidental plot twists, stock characters (given some depth in fun performances by John Cusack, Joan Cusack, Marisa Tomei and Hillary Duff) and a straightforward approach to the political content.

You see, the filmmakers' political points are things nearly all of the country already knows are true. Yeah, we understand that the corporations profiting off the war are corrupt, inept pigs, the political leaders in charge of it are even more inept buffoons, and American imperialism has never looked crasser and more out of touch than it does right now -- but none of that is the point.

Here, all of that noise is the setting that they lampoon -- sometimes in genius ways -- as the backdrop for a silly romp, as John Cusack's character (the hit-man with a heart) tries to change his life with the help of the do-gooder journalist who doesn't trust him (Tomei) and the young Middle Eastern starlet who wants to call off her marriage (Duff). Cusack's sister, Joan, plays his assistant with an almost cartoonishly enthusiastic quality. Ben Kingsley seemed to me wasted in his smaller part as a ruthless CIA boss.

That's all, and it works. It's simple fun, but if somehow you can't see reality and you think the war is going well and everyone involved with it is doing a good job and there's no corruption and people in the Middle East wish our Western culture would supplant theirs, then you might not find it as funny.

For all the rest of us, it was a light comedy with a political edge.

In this satire of the commercialization and 'lightheartedness' of war, John Cusack plays Brand Hauser, an assassin sent to to 'Turaqistan' to take out Omar Sharif, who is doing some oil business that will spell trouble for the former Vice President of the US's own company. In addition to this, Hauser must juggle his fake position as a trade show producer, a wedding for pop princess Yonica (Hillary Duff), and a nosy Liberal journalist, Natalie (Marisa Tomei).

Assessing the technical aspects:

• The acting (by the main characters,at least) was good, as was to be expected. Some of John Cusack's dialogue was quite obviously not written for him as he often seemed uncomfortable saying it. . . maybe unrealistic is more accurate. Joan put forth a great, and often hilarious, performance. Marisa Tomei, while I've never been a big fan of hers, was more than suitable for the role and worked well. Hillary Duff, however, was pretty terrible. They needed an attractive Middle Eastern (or Russian, or whatever that accent was supposed to be) pop-star. Unfortunately, they went 0 for 3 with her.

• Like I said above, the writing seemed a little stiff and mismatched at points, especially John Cusack's dialogue. Not much of it, mind, but some. The story also got a bit ludicrous at points, which is fine for a satire to a point, but it took it to a whole new level here. Luckily, the Cusacks and Tomei keep a relatively cool, calm demeanor throughout, and that makes a nice even mix of the craziness of the film and the levelheadedness of the actors.

• Joshua Seftel, who previously had a drought of real credits to his name, did a fine job with a rather wide-spectrum film. He handled the small ($10 million) budget very well, stretching it to make it appear to be much more. Seftel also managed to nicely blend the humour of the story. . . with the painful and hard-to-watch parts of the real war (including slaughter of civilians, etc.).

• As far as the general satire goes, its exaggerated look on the commercializing of war is very well done, especially the 'Golden Palace Poker' ads on the U.S. tanks. At points, it becomes a little too much, but, in the end, it still accurate portrays what it's going for an a young 'Mel Brooks'-type of style.

Overall, the film is very well made for the meager budget and it's definitely worthy of a look. It won't go down as one of the great satires of cinema, but it's certainly not the worst.

7/10.

It was hilarious from start to finish. Very poignant and very dark. I especially loved those deliciously violent and overtly sexual lyrics to all of Duff's songs. I'm actually hoping I can find that song, 'I Want to Blow You Up.' The frightening thing, in history, is that something similar did take place. The East India Company, a properly registered English company in the 1600's to 1857, did actually raise armies, fight wars and collect taxes in the sub-continent. They were as ruthless, if not more so, than Tamerlane. Ever since John Cusack first started acting in teenage movies, I've always thought him to have an impeccable sense of humour and timing. And I'm so glad to see that he is using these talents in dark comedies rather than the run of the mill, mainstream rom-coms.

I not really sure whether or not the reason I was disappointed in this film was because it wasn't what I wanted it to be or whether it seemed to lose it's comedic value because of what seemed to be a pretentious message wrapped up in a most confusing plot. This film offered three of the stars of one of my favorite movies, "Grosse Point Blank", (John Cusack, Joan Cusack and Dan Aykroyd). Cusack once again appears as a "troubled hit-man" as he did in "Grosse Point Blank" but this time the gimmick that worked so well ... just doesn't work. When I rented this film the lady behind the counter at Blockbuster warned me "It's no "Grosse Pointe Blank". Boy was she right! What this film doesn't have is Minnie Driver and a contained plot that flows with humor that still makes some sort of outrageous sense. My take on this film was that the film makers couldn't make up their mind as to whether they wanted to make a comedy or get across their anti-war message. Nothing wrong with an anti-war message type of film ... just don't let the message interfere with the entertainment that it promises to deliver. In other words, everything seemed forced, and that is what caused this film not to work for me. I would have much rather watched a "Grosse Point Blank 2" but sometimes sequels that should have been made are not such as a "Dirty Dancing 2" that could have starred Patrick Swayze and Jennifer Grey.

I don't want to spend to long here rambling about the plot- you've seen the trailer, and if you haven't its online. I don't recommend seeing it though- it was poorly crafted and didn't pack any of the laughs or magic from the film. So those avoiding this film due to its lousy trailer should give this one a chance. It's really funny. I was blown away by the cleverness and originality in this film. The first 40 minutes had me on the floor in hysterics- my only problem was that it unnecessarily evolved into a bad Austin Powers film in the final 20. This however, is one of the few films where the campy ending didn't make me dislike the rest of the film (which is normally the case). Everyone gives a great performance (especially Joan Cusack) and there are some really great moments throughout. I personally plan on seeing it again when it comes out- only to catch all the details which I was laughing over during the first viewing!