Body of Lies

Syriana in a more commercial guise. In comparison, Body of Lies is easier to understand, more accessible to the general public, but at the same time no less relevant, it’s pertinent not dumb at all and the acting is no worse. Ridley again proves anew that he’s getting a third wind in his retirement and hasn’t lost any of his talent. (14/12/2008)

Body of Lies is exactly halfway between a crowd-pleasing popcorn flick and a thriller that aims to analyze, provoke, and has slightly higher ambitions. According to the majority of users on FilmBooster, Ridley Scott did not please them with this balancing act, as popcorn enthusiasts feel it lacks more action, excitement, and grandiose scenes, while fans of art critique it for its shallowness, unfinished elements, and clichés. I must say that Scott pleasantly surprised me, and I rank this piece above American Gangster, which I found somewhat distant. I rank Body of Lies in his filmography in third place, behind Alien and Blade Runner, which I still hold dear due to my love for the sci-fi genre. This film relies on a quality screenplay, top-notch direction, and excellent actors, and as a whole, it runs smoothly without any major stumbles. I could, of course, point out a few minor flaws, but if I were to do the same with many of its genre counterparts, I would have to discard a lot of famous films. A thriller like Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy certainly surpasses Body of Lies in terms of attention to detail and atmosphere but that is a slightly different sub-genre and a film that is heading in a completely different direction. Overall impression: 90%. After the brutal disappointment with Prometheus, Ridley has redeemed himself in my eyes once again... (18/11/2012)

I came away from this two-hour conversation film, which cynically glosses over the current tense situation in the Arab world, and occasionally, as if unwittingly, jumps to some good action sequences, knowing I was going to give it four pure stars. But a day has passed now and I’m more and more puzzled by the fact that Scott and Monahan thought it through even deeper, that the black humor is damn chilling and that the current state of the region cannot actually be changed, although it also cannot be prolonged indefinitely. Immediately afterward, my mind flashed to the perfect acting trio of a certain Crowe, the uncompromising DiCaprio, and especially the chillingly charismatic Strong. In addition, the honestly sharp visuals and the fact that this blockbuster autumn probably won't get any more stimulating ensure that I’m giving it the full five stars. Ridley’s rolling Hollywood in his old age like nobody’s business! Edit: It's not as good the second time around, but still a strong 4 stars. (29/11/2008)

Three or four stars? I can’t decide. Body of Lies is unable to make up its mind whether it wants to be an entertaining film or one with a message. Unfortunately, it fails at both. The entertainment factor shows up only in a few shootout scenes between constant telephone calls and changes in location, while the “edifying” aspect appears here and there delivered by Russel Crowe (as satirical black humour) and Mark Strong. Plotwise it’s nothing remarkable, either, and I can’t avoid the feeling that the film could have easily continued for another half hour after the unforgettable scene of Leonard’s torture (instead of ending quite abruptly), while the first hour could be left out almost completely. Regardless of that, Body of Lies is not bad at all – it’s directed and acted with panache – it simply fails to impress. (06/12/2008)

When I start writing reviews of Ridley Scott's movies, I usually start by saying that I generally don't like his movies. Why should I change my habits? I don't like his movies, but since I'm generally interested in movies, I watch them. I tell myself that maybe he can surprise me, like he did with "Alien" or "Blade Runner". Usually, he doesn't succeed. In the case of the movie "Body of Lies", I thought it would be different. Interesting setting, quite a fast pace, actors that I can - yes, I have already accepted that prejudices about Russell Crowe are senseless, because that guy is simply a great actor. He doesn't have much space in this movie because the main character is Leonardo DiCaprio, who we almost can't get rid of throughout the film. He is in the Middle East, carrying out actions for the American government. Russell Crowe is his coordinator, the brain behind it, a person who can do several things at once. At one moment, he plans what Ferris (DiCaprio) should do, and at the same time, he takes a child to school. Quite an interesting contrast that gets overplayed after a while and it's not quite the same. However, the actions in the Middle East are worth it and I think Scott learned a lot while filming "Black Hawk Down". The actions look good, they are shot from interesting angles, and there are no lack of fast cuts. Well, I think he also learned a lot from his brother, at least in terms of action. The movie "Body of Lies" is initially loaded with some action, but in the end, you realize that nothing really significant happened. What were those actions for? For people to live in fear? They will still? For someone to die? People die all the time. What did the movie actually want to say? Ideologically, it seems quite empty to me, it tries to tell us that America is behind very dangerous actions, planning grand actions that can significantly shake up the world. But don't we already know all this? The world is full of lies and we actually don't know who is pulling the strings. We won't find out even after this. Well made, but I stand by the fact that the movie is quite empty in its message. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/12/wtc-yes-man-mary-max-zambezia-cerna.html (02/03/2013)