Syriana

Bomb Rating: 

If you actually believe that some Hollywood filmmaker has even the slightest inkling about what goes on in the world's most powerful circles, you should really have your head examined.

I mean, for God's sake, how much attention am I supposed to be expected to pay to a film? With all the crying babies, ringing cell phones, blinding text message screens, whispering octogenarians - I'd look up from time to time at another of director Stephen ("Traffic") Gaghan's multi-faceted, multi-storied, political ramblings and wonder if I'd be any more clued in had I just downed a hit of acid and a couple shots of rubbing alcohol.

And yes, that's my way of saying this film is confusing. Gaghan can whine on and on about the dangerous influence of big oil around the world, but until people stop driving and, frankly, heating their homes, oil is going to continue being important and its executives, crooked or not, are going to have influence both inside and outside government.

We're treated to the bad effects of American oil policy primarily through the eyes and actions of a schlubby CIA operative, Bob Barnes (George Clooney), who's been stationed in the Middle East for God knows how long, but whose numerous memos go unanswered by the higher-ups who think his so-called expertise is just a lot of complaining. Essentially, Bob likes to tell his betters that things are complicated in the Middle East while his betters want catchy little phrases and short little answer papers on why single sentence policy will make everything better.

Bob is sent to off one Prince Nasir Al-Subaai (Alexander Siddig), who's suddenly next in line to run Deep Space Nine. Prince Nasir wants to reform his country in a lot of great ways, one of which involves getting rid of their dependence on America. The U.S. government hates that idea and would rather kill him, support his idiot brother, and keep his country in complete and total barbaric chaos than support progress. Here's Gaghan's genius conclusion: money talks and it talks loud. Forgive me if I yawn and claim to have known that one already.

There's a whole slew of supporting actors, but need I go on? Bryan Woodman (Matt Damon) advises the Prince. Bennett Holiday (Jeffrey Wright) works the legal angle for the U.S. government as they slap the hands of the oil barons in a perverted effort to show the power of the law but allow the oil guys to still do their thing. Danny Dalton (Tim Blake Nelson) is a scummy lobbyist who spouts rhetoric like he's the incarnation of every bad dream Al Franken ever had.

Oh yes, this is liberal ranting at its worst - the kind of thing every left-winger goes to see to confirm every paranoid fantasy they've had about the rich and powerful. It's rich, it's powerful, and if you actually believe that some Hollywood filmmaker has even the slightest inkling about what goes on in the world's most powerful circles, you should really have your head examined.

To spread the word about this Syriana review on Twitter.

To get instant updates of Mr. Cranky reviews, subscribe to our RSS feed.
6 Comments

Like This Syriana Review? Vote it Up.

0

Rate This Movie:

Average: 5 (1 vote)

Other Cranky Content You Might Enjoy

  • George Clooney is such a bleeding heart liberal that it seeps from his film like water from a broken New Orleans levy.

  • Something very unsettling happens toward the end of "Ocean's Twelve," the follow-up to director Steven Soderbergh's remake of the Rat Pack film "Ocean's Eleven." It's likely that if I reveal exactly w

  • There oughta be a law. It's time for the federal government to step in and declare it a felony to produce children's movies that are more than ninetyminutes long.

Norm Coleman's support from pro-Israel lobby exposed

Dan_in_Cincinnati's picture

Not that there's anything wrong with Norm Coleman supporting Israel.  He is a Jew after all. 

Newspapers in the USA are dying like Dinosaurs after a meteor shower.  So what will replace them?  How about Internet sites that actually dig up information and even corruption?  One such site is Wikileaks.  This site encourages whistle-blowers to submit inside info anonymously.

Here is a quote from that site:

Campaigns are required to track the source of records like these -- since they buy, lease, and otherwise borrow lists from various organizations, it's important (and legally required) to note where you got a given name from. Most campaign databases will include a column called "Source" or something similar to denote this piece of information.

And Coleman's database includes just such a column. One of the codes in that column is "gopjew_091307" -- and there are over 20,000 of them.

Coleman is Jewish, as is his Democratic opponent Al Franken. But of 50,000 names in the database, over 20,000 from a single list, brought to the campaign September 13th, 2007?

There are a couple of possible connections here -- On September 20th of that year, Coleman sponsored a Sense of the Senate resolution that said "that the U.S. should 'combat, contain, and roll back' Iran's 'violent activities and destabilizing influence inside Iraq."

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Coleman%27s_database:_lots_and_lots_of_Jewish_...

 

{;-) Dan in Miami

 

 

Not really fair to Coleman...

Scumby's picture

I believe that Jews contribute at least 50% of the money of all US political campaigns, so this isn't unique to Coleman or the GOP.  What do you think Chuck Schumer's donor list looks like?

Jews have just as much a right to buy off government as anyone else, but unlike everyone else they actually part with the cash.  Consider that the next time your representative comes around with the hat.

Al Franken probably got many checks from Jews

Dan_in_Cincinnati's picture

I don't object to Jews sending money to their favorite candidates.

It just seems odd that so many of them gave money all at the same time to Coleman.  Some people call it bundling.  Other people call it a violation of campaign finance laws.

Personally I would get rid of all the campaign finance laws because they are a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution. 

Candidates should be required to post the names of contributors and the companies they work for on the Internet.  This would not violate freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment.  Instead it would increase speech by letting the voters know where a candidate is getting his money from.

{;-) Dan in Miami

PS:  Coleman ended up getting a job from the Jewish organization that sent him all that money.

 

 

No disagreement

Scumby's picture

I would suggest that the ultimate solution is to expand the House by about 10x and to go back to state legislature selection of senators.  That would greatly reduce the role of advertising and party machines and therefore money, while making gerrymandering harder.

That's the only way I see to break the grip of special interests.  Public campaign financing sure didn't, all it did was inflate advertising budgets.

Al Qaeda website gives handy bomb making tips

Dan_in_Cincinnati's picture

In an effort to spread the jihad a little wider, al Qaeda has now started an English language version of its internet magazine.  The first issue provides instructions on how to build a bomb with materials found in your kitchen.  Plus of course the expected diatribes from the leaders of the movement.

No word yet on whether there will be a lifestyles section for the trendy terrorist who wants to keep track of the latest in martyr fashion wear.

From Fauxnews.com:

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/07/01/make-bomb-kitchen-mom-featured-al-qaedas-st-english-magazine/

{;-) Dan in Miami

 

Why would anyone wait

RidingFool's picture

for the latest issue to arrive in the mail when they can saddlel up the camel and walk on down to the nearest library and get the bomb-making scoop online?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.