Comments on: Body of Lies Review

By: the rants and rails of a MELman or vikings should be man enough to handle pillaging

Sat, 31 Jul 2010 18:31:13 +0000

[...] handled by William Monahan, which would have reunited him with DiCaprio after The Departed and Body of Lies. However, as a result of the latest Gibson scandal it appears as though DiCaprio has left the [...]

By: Mel Gibson To Direct Leonardo DiCaprio In Viking Movie - Screen Rant

Mel Gibson To Direct Leonardo DiCaprio In Viking Movie - Screen Rant — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:18:18 +0000

[...] Gibson and Monaghan on Edge of Darkness; and he worked with DiCaprio on the Ridley Scott-directed Body of Lies last year. We’ve still to see a couple of those films in theaters, but I’m going to [...]

By: Arijit

Arijit — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 10:09:04 +0000

A thoroughly enjoyable film. Like in “Syriana” it portrays quite a credible view of GWOT and Middle-East.
The contest between Techint and Humint is engrossing. Those giant plasma screens filling in real-time full-motion video via Predator UAVs are very real.
Leonardo DiCaprio puts a human face to this remote war, a warrior uncorrupted by power.
A sequel on the fate of Ferris would be most engrossing.

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:45:38 +0000

@Steven

I realize that. My point is that the last two films he’s appeared in conveniently involved him having facial hair.

Vic

By: Daniel

Daniel — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:01:16 +0000

“Beards in most middle east countries are a sign of maturity”

So umm the beard isn’t to make him look older? I thought looking more mature was sort of related to looking older.

By: Steven

Steven — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 07:27:32 +0000

The beard on DiCapreo is not too make him look older. Beards in most middle east countries are a sign of maturity. Men who don’t have them are seen as foreign. Thus since Leonardo is playing a CIA operative in the area, it is his job to become like those around him to not attract attention. For the same reason, U.S. special forces operators around the world are encouraged to grow a beard before deployment.

By: Jess

Jess — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 00:08:10 +0000

Thanks vic, based on this review im going to see it now i wasnt planning on it but it sounds like an intresting movie.

By: Daniel F

Daniel F — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 21:00:13 +0000

I am adding the F to my name now. There are two of us running around.

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 18:06:08 +0000

Regardless of what you say, people are going to interpret it as I’ve described, and when setting out to make a movie like this everyone involved should realize that.

Vic

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 17:20:11 +0000

I was pleasantly surprised that Leonardo did a good job with this movie. I enjoyed his performance in Blood Diamond, but his acting in Titanic was awful. I had been hoping his acting in Blood Diamond wasn’t just a fluke, and I was pleasantly surprised with this movie. I find it funny that the writer chose Al Saleem as the name of the terrorist target, the most known Al Saleem is an airstrip in Kuwait that civilians oftentimes pass through on their way into Iraq. If you know much about Iraq geography or policy, you’ll find such examples throughout the movie, making it an interesting viewing for those who have first hand knowledge of the areas depicted.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 17:13:05 +0000

“Daniel,
I disagree.Of course the writer of the book upon which the screenplay is based had the intent of this reflecting upon his interpretation of the way things work. And it follows that the film does the same.
I really don’t see how it could be interpreted otherwise.
Vic”

Actually, that’s my very point. It’s a civilian writer reflecting upon HIS interpretation, meaning his opinion. For the record though, the film is VERY different from the book. But both the film AND the book reflect upon not only an interpretation of one individual unrelated to real events pertaining to anything he writes about, the premise of the book is based not on real events or interpretations, but pure fiction, using a real event as nothing more than a backdrop. No offense, but you sort of show exactly what I referring to as the problem. It IS a purely dictional movie with fictional elements relying on an INTERPRETATION of a real event as nothing more than a backdrop to induce familiarity and thus emotion to suck in the viewer. And there is no logical way to interpret it differently, if you take this movie or the book and associate real life to it, you are simply incorrect. And yes, this comes from personal experience.

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 01:40:16 +0000

Daniel,

I disagree.Of course the writer of the book upon which the screenplay is based had the intent of this reflecting upon his interpretation of the way things work. And it follows that the film does the same.

I really don’t see how it could be interpreted otherwise.

Vic

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 00:53:59 +0000

The movie wasn’t bad at all. But one problem that I see is how people take a purely fictional movie, and because it uses names of real events such as the Iraq War, they for some odd reason associate it with real life.
This quote, “So yet again another movie that takes a quasi-realistic look at the war on terror does not do well at the box office,” pretty much sums up one of the problems with these movies nowadays. Go in expecting a purely alternate world that borrows from real names and events but takes no real approach at accuracy, and the movie is highly enjoyable. But there is very little similarity between events or depictions in this movie and anything close to real life. It was a thoroughly enjoyable movie depicting characters that exist only in conspiracy theories, and should be enjoyed for the entirely fictional but trying to appear realistic so you can feel emotion towards it movie that it is.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 06:33:44 +0000

Lol na I’ll go see it in theaters still looks like a good movie.

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 03:33:40 +0000

Yeah, I did mention that above, but maybe I’m more sensitive to it. It was more of a “get results now, damn the consequences” sort of thing, but yeah, it was there.

You should rent it when it comes out.

Vic

By: Daniel

Daniel — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 03:27:40 +0000

Yea it looks to be better than those films, but seems to send a very similar message.

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 03:20:19 +0000

@Daniel

I agree completely, although I put this film on a different level from the sorts of films you’re talking about (Redacted, In the Valley of Elah, etc.).

Vic

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 03:14:50 +0000

@Shawnna

I realize that, but my point is that they did place him in a role that required facial hair and I think it’s partially to make him look older.

Vic

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 23:50:18 +0000

The problem with these films in my opinion isn’t the realistic approach its the idealism behind them. No matter what idea it’s putting out there it’s gonna have a large group of people who will disagree. I think the film looks good I love Russel and ever since The Departed I like Leo. I’ll watch it, but I can tell from trailers and reviews I’m gonna be turned off by it’s thoughts and messages. All these politically driven films take the same path. None of them ever try to show things from the other point of view. I get it America and or it’s government are evil. I disagree, and sort of tired of it being pounded in my head.

By: Shawnna

Shawnna — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 23:29:37 +0000

Hey their Vic. Good job on the review, but I think you missed a bit about Ferris character. The beard was not placed on dicaprio to make him appear older, its becasue he is a secret agent in the Middle East trying to fit in with Islamic men. Who if you had noticed, all had beards? Just wanted to point out that observation for you.