Body of Lies

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)

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)

All the ingredients are here but this time it's no gourmet delicacy. It’s as though Ridley Scott was resting and not giving it his full concentration like he did recently with the American Gangster. In any case, the actors were excellent, the bearded DiCaprio gets cooler with every movie, Russell Crowe perfectly pulls off a dad/agent who teaches his son to go to the bathroom, the imaginary crown was stolen by Mark Strong whose Hani could easily carry a movie all of his own. The rest is an almost textbook hi-tech spy scenario. Smart enough to impress you, not good enough to drool over with bliss for two hours. 75% (06/02/2009)

Though it has a traditional concept and is a more than decently filmed spy thriller, Body of Lies does not have enough of the exotic atmosphere of Spy Game or the high-tech coolness of Enemy of the State to become a hit. It goes straight to the epicenter of the issue of contemporary Islamic terrorism and does so with perfect action scenes. But even though it keeps switching between different locations and the plot moves forward at a decent pace, I still feel like it’s actually stuck in one place. That is probably because everything apart from spy machinations seems both superfluous and half- baked (the attempt to depict the background of Crowe’s character, or DiCaprio’s relationship with the local girl). And it needs a different kind of ending. (09/01/2009)

Less straightforward and more “intel” and “hi-tech” than Kingdom. Some people might like it, others not, but the fact remains that you would hardly guess that this talky spy film was directed by the master of visual and compositional image, Ridley Scott. There are several quality action scenes and sequences where he plays with the contour of colors, but there is nothing extra in this regard. And it is not even reached by the stunning dark contact lenses of Leonardo DiCaprio, who this time did not get as much space as in Blood Diamond and is overshadowed by Russell Crowe and especially the demonic and elegant Mark Strong, probably the most interesting character of the film. Overall, too much talk and too little action for my taste – although very high-quality and impactful. Kingdom is a simpler film and deals with Eastern culture in a very straightforward and simple way, but I liked it more than Body of Lies, which tries to go into depth but does it in a very uninteresting and overly talkative manner. (21/02/2009)