oiltrader Look people, we watch movies for a bit of escapism.That's the general public, such as c'est moi!A few things I want when I sit down to catch a cinematic production are"1. Good, if not sharp and witty dialogue.2. Good action, should it be classified as an action movie.3. Something to think about, albeit maybe not as deep as the English Patient, Wuthering Heights, etc., but some pieces of the movie that one can reflect on.I have a lot more points, but let's just keep this simple.The movie achieved it's ultimate goal to entertain and it very well did.Kudos to the Cusacks, Dan Akroyd, Ben Kingsley, Hilary Duff and the whole lot of yokels that made this a fun and absorbing movie.Loved the tobacco sauce rituals.Later gators
tieman64 "I don't want to sell anything, buy anything, or process anything as a career. I don't want to sell anything bought or processed, or buy anything sold or processed, or process anything sold, bought, or processed, or repair anything sold, bought, or processed." - Lloyd Dobler "War, Inc", a weak comedy by director Joshua Seftel, stars John Cusack as an assassin who occasionally works for the US military. The film is a loose sequel to Cusack's "Grosse Pointe Blank", a 1997 cult favourite. Cusack himself spearheaded "War, Inc", co-financing the film and co-writing its screenplay.A satire of the United States' 21st century Middle Eastern crusades, "War, Inc" spends most of its time making valid points in the most blunt ways possible. And so we watch as the US military throws money and bombs at social problems, as Middle Eastern monarchs and oil barons strike unholy alliances with Western muscle-men, as private defence firms run amok (Blackwater, Academi etc), as various spokesmen spew Orwellian double-speak, as vulgar capitalism comes to the Middle East, as "vertically integrated" corporations profit off both bombs and prosthetics, and as various journalists are deftly manipulated by a war machine that specialises in selling wars.Comedy – especially satire – tends to work best on screen when it adopts a minimalist stance. The more money on screen, the more cluttered, and less searing, your message becomes. "War, Inc" thinks its the next "Dr Strangelove", or perhaps "Duck Soup", but those films were sparse and knew when to reign things back. "War, Inc", in contrast, is mostly obvious and excessive.A number of John Cusack's films from the 1980s saw him playing a teenager who flirts with ing the military. His "Grosse Pointe" then revolved around a kid who returns from the military to become a corporate assassin. That film saw Cusack wrestling over whether or not to dump this deadly career in favour for something more wholesome. "War, Inc" repeats this narrative arc, Cusack playing a little devil who grows to despise everything he represents. "I like killing people as much as the next guy," his character spells out, "but I signed up to kill the bad ones! Health clinics, trade unionists, journalists, agricultural co-ops, catholic liberation theologians, impoverished Colombian coffee farmers, these are the barbarians that are brave opponents of civilisation? We turned Central America into a graveyard! Whoever momentarily interrupts the accumulation of our wealth, we pulverise! I'm just not feeling good about that anymore, sir!" "War, Inc" co-stars Ben Kingsley in another wholly ridiculous, racially dubious role. This was also director Joshua Seftel's first feature length fictional film, and it shows. He's bitten off more than he can chew, and the script he's been saddled with is messy, less clever than it thinks it is, and largely preaches to the converted.6/10 – Disappointing. See "Grosse Pointe Blank", Alex Cox's "Walker" and Pontecorvo's "Burn".
James Myers (jomyers-876-475480) Not Grosse Point Blank by a long shot, but still an alright film; think critics are being a bit overly critical here but maybe that's just me, the film sort of blows but Cusack's performance in this film is great –it like Martin Blank 10 years on (see Grosse Point Blank). I'd say that Cusack needs to find a new agent, and fast, as his talent seems to be being wasted on rubbish as of late. Even in films that suck he himself always puts on a good performance. There is some great dialogue from Cusack akin to the aforementioned Grosse Point Blank; but sadly not even close to the same calibre. This film was recommended to me by a friend saying it was' the spiritual sequel to Grosse Point Blank' and in that I can see the comparison.Like most sequel it blows when compared to the 'original'. This film just seems to be trying to relive the best bits of Grosse Point Blank (GPB) but fails. I think due to the very slapstick, and immature style of the satire in the film. In GPB there was no political commentary behind it; it was just a beautifully executed 'dark romantic comedy'.The fact that this film touched on a very real issues with obvious links to recent international events should have made this a dark, edgy film, and hilarious but as I said above, due to the immature style that it seem to approach it with just ruins that poetical, and just lowers the tone of the film; this is only highlighted more by the sometimes though provoking dialogue between Cusack's and Tomie's characters; making it feel like you're watching two different films at the same time and nether gel together right. If you've never seen GPB then watch War Inc. first and follow up with GPB as War Inc. will only enhance the comic genius behind GPB.
