Syriana

Alright, just watched it and need some questions answered. Was the government that fired the missle trying to kill the arab brother? George Clooney?

 

I haven't seen it since it was in theaters, but I think so. They were trying to oust him from power to install their own person in power.

 

I think it was his brother

 

The US wanted to put Military bases in that county. The older brother was against it so they took him out with the missle and helped to make the younger, more naive brother, the king. The younger brother was a lot more receptive to the USA wishes.

I found it to be a complex but very good movie. My only question was why was Clooney's characters life sparred when he was being torchered?

 

Hooked on Phonics?

 

bumping this thread instead of my 2005 thread on the movie.

Finally saw the damn thing. Fantastic movie that only loses points where it left too much unsaid. I appreciate being treated like an adult (not spoon fed), but it does get confusing, as Fan1 pointed out.

Spoiler:

It seemed like Clooney was sent by the CIA to hire Mussawi & his terrorist cell to kill Nassir (spelling on both?) aka older brother with American ideals for his country. I think I blinked and missed why that pissed Mussawi off. Clooney was spared because he was under the protection of the Hamas leader who was also harboring Mussawi.

I was absolutely pissed when Nassir got whacked, even though you could see it coming really early on. The speech he gave about putting his oil on the open market and forgoing the exclusive contracts that gave complete control to the U.S. was very pro-capitalistic. He wanted to use theextra money from the free market to build real infrastructure for his country, but the U.S. couldnt have that because prices would balloon, and China would get access to the oil it needs to drive its booming economy. So the U.S. elected to compromise its idealism in favor of short term needs, oil co profits, and "security" against China, by putting a hit on Nassir (younger bro would maintain status quo).

I also really enjoyed the portayal of the recruitment of unemployed and disaffected youth guest workers from the oil fields for jihad terrorism.

The examples they used were all fiction, but the premise wasn't - from the standpoint of these kind of issues occurring daily over there. It's an extremely complex issue with a lot of moving parts, and I hate how it's portrayed as black and white, good v evil, in order to appease the American sheeple.

Also, it's not a fun movie to watch. Gripping & riveting, yes, but not enjoyable or even comfortable. I needed a break afterwards. Too depressing.

 

You could tell without even watching the credits that it was by the same people that did "Traffic". I love the way both of them were shot. The colors and camera angles. I will agree that movies of this nature are not necessarily fun to watch, but they make you think. What kind of corruption and such is going on at this level of government.

 

Good movie. It was hard to follow at times, but at the end everything became clearer.

I know it was a fiction movie but wasn't it based on a non fiction book 'See No Evil'?