Syriana (2005) User Reviews

See no evil

[jotix100 · 8/10 · 6 January 2006]

The interesting novel by Robert Baer seems to tell it all about "Syriana". It is a tale that is driven by the ambition of a few unscrupulous people who will stop at nothing to achieve their goal. In a way, Mr. Baer's novel as well as the film seems to be reaffirming Niccolo Machiavelli's "The ends justify the means"

Stephen Gaghan's first major directorial job presents the story in multiple settings running at the same time, which, for a great majority of the public will prove disorienting. Mr. Gaghan has adapted for the screen material like the one in "Syriana" before, so he wasn't a stranger working in that format.

What "Syriana" presents is a sort of rat race for the control of the oil in the Persian Golf, by whatever means necessary. Ultimately, the ones in control of that commodity will dominate the world. We are given about five different narratives in the film that interplay one another in the most unexpected ways. In fact, all these different subplots have a lot more in common than really meets the eye. One could almost recommend the viewing of the film a couple of times in order for all the different parts to come together in our minds and by doing so, the viewer will see the inner mechanisms of this intricate tale of corruption, greed and power.

The cast is enormous. There are a lot of different acting styles in the film. An almost unrecognizable George Clooney plays Bob Barnes, the CIA operative fallen from grace who is instrumental in set the story in motion and who reappears at the end at the climax of the action. Jeffrey Wright does a tremendous job as the lawyer who discovers the hidden mystery in a performance that is completely different from whatever he has done before in the screen. Matt Damon plays the ambitious young man who is at the top of his profession and can help Prince Nasir with his revolutionary views about changes in his country and the Arab world. Ultimately, Wasim, the poor Pakistani guest worker makes the case for the displaced youth of that world that is willing to go ahead and commit the ultimate sacrifice.

There are also good appearances by some seasoned actors that only appear shortly. Tim Blake Nelson, Chris Cooper, Jayne Atkinson, Akbar Kurtha, William Hurt, Christopher Plummer, Robert Foxworth and the rest are seen briefly.

Robert Elswit photographed the film in the different locations and makes it look better. The music score by Alexandre Desplat is heard in the background without interrupting the action. The editing by Tim Squires works well with the action. Stephen Gaghan shows he can do well working with Mr. Baer's material and made an interesting film that while it will irritate some viewers, on the whole he had the right idea in the way to tell this story.

An Exhausting Tour of the Many Faces of Corruption Around Oil

[noralee · 8/10 · 11 December 2005]

In "Syriana," writer/director Stephen Gaghan uses the busy style of "Crash" and "Amores Perros" to illustrate the complex geopolitics behind oil. Each sector--regulators, "intelligence", lobbyists, grease-the-wheel-ers and cogs-in-the-wheel-ers, in the network of greed, idealism, self-interest, sophistication and naiveté, is represented by a different character followed through the movie to bring them together, directly or indirectly, into the climax.

This technique to coordinate a huge ensemble of captivating character actors woven tightly together in a complex story is helped enormously by Robert Elswit's ever-moving camera shots as visually and sound edited by Tim Squyres, who had some experience with overlapping dialog and movement in a more literal upstairs/downstairs on Robert Altman's "Gosford Park." Alexandre Desplat's music adds to the tense mood.

The variegation that Gaghan presents is almost staggering, even more ethically complicated than a Graham Greene Cold War noir. This is the first film I've seen that illustrates the diversity of clashing Islamic cultures and interests, despite that I couldn't keep their interests or motives all quite straight. Though the English subtitles (which are commendably outlined in black for unusual legibility) wipe out some of the distinctions, we can infer that Iranians are speaking Farsi, Pakistanis' Urdu and others speaking Arabic, all with varying fluency and mutual cultural comprehension, let alone manipulators who can speak anything besides their native tongues. We've seen immigrants and guest workers in films critical of Western countries, but not the resentment-brewing conditions of badly treated non-citizens in the oil-rich Persian Gulf states, like the fictional one here which looks a lot like Dubai or Brunei, where clusters of modern skyscrapers contrast with Bedouin goat herders. It does help for background on the fascinating side plot of the radicalized young Arabs to see "Paradise Now" about Palestinian terrorists to explain particular details of their training.

While each character is specifically set within a believable home and family setting, some are painted with too easy and broad strokes. While Alexander Siddig seems to have the monopoly on naively idealistic Arabs, as his similar character in "Kingdom of Heaven" against another Crusades, history is littered with the interim, modernizing liberal tragically caught between powerful forces. (Though the proliferation of Western-educated Arab intellectuals in movies is beginning to sound like all those Japanese generals in World War II movies who went to USC or whatever; at least he went to Oxford and not Harvard.)

Matt Damon's un-Bourne-like energy analyst just sounds simplistic even when he's truth-telling, but we also see that he's already slid down the slippery slope of ethics in the crossing of his personal and professional lives. That so many of the oil and gas executives have Texas accents (superb Chris Cooper, Tim Blake Nelson, Robert Foxworth) does seem to say that the decades of business and political corruption there, as documented in Robert Caro's biography of LBJ, have simply been extended to a global scale.

The film is also unusual in focusing on the role of lawyers negotiating the deals between companies and governments. While Christopher Plummer's Ivy League senior partner type has been seen as a shadowy force in countless paranoid thrillers, Jeffrey Wright is completely unpredictable and tightly wound, though the point of his relationship with his cynical alcoholic father isn't exactly clear except maybe as his conscience. We see before our eyes he goes from, as his mentor says, "a sheep into a lion."

Most films have prosecutors like David Clennon's U.S. attorney as a hero against corruption, instead of being chillingly dismissed as "trust fund lawyers." But the script is so full of such epigrams, like "In this town, you're only innocent until you're investigated," that one character calls another on issuing them too brightly.

While from the beginning I couldn't quite follow all the machinations around George Clooney's character, he is wonderful at transforming from his usual Cary Grant suave to harried, dedicated, mid-level bureaucrat who literally won't toe the Company line in a dangerous hierarchy that's shown to be a bit more competent than in real life, that reminded me both in the gut and guts of Russell Crowe's Wigand in the tobacco wars in "The Insider." It recalls how benign corrupt spooks looked in their personal lives, as there's much conversation here about houses, cars and college tuition. Indirectly, the film implicitly shows the dangers to Valerie Plame from her outing as a CIA operative, as families and personal connections are constantly used as threats and bargaining chips.

Significantly, there is not a single mention amidst all these Mideast chicaneries, plots and plans of the Zionist entity, proving that pro or anti-Israel policies are smoke screens around the main draw -- oil.

Movie-wise, these characters seem a lot like the gangsters and their conseglieres in "The Godfather" carving up Cuba and drug rights, let alone Gordon Gekko extolling "Greed is good" as the ultimate ideology, and fits right in with this year's other geo-political thrillers "The Constant Gardener" and "Lord of War," and those weren't even about natural resources. It works better than the re-make of "The Manchurian Candidate" because even though the focal point is a fictional country the issues are real, not science fiction.

So does this make you ready to get out of your car and onto the train? Because until then, we'll still need lots of that oil from the Middle East.

This Movie is Not Political Propaganda

[Rmdnjoe · 26 November 2005]

This is a great, complex movie. Its only faults are in the clarity of character motivations. This is not a liberal or conservative film. It is an exploration into the existing system that evolved over many years.

At no point in the movie does it take any pot-shots at Bush, Republicans, or Democracts. In fact, non of those words are ever spoken. It is not a left/right - red/blue debate. At no point in time does it ever mention the political parties of those in charge.

The fact is, be it a Republican or Democrat, this world depends on oil. Our country while split on how to obtain it, will do anything to make sure the flow is not cut off.

This movie finds faults with the global economy. Faults with the US system that has been tweaked by both sides over the span of decades. Faults with the Middle East for squandering its earnings. Faults with emerging China and its impact on consumption.

Anyone claiming this movie is politically motivated is a troll looking for attention and should be ignored.

Confused, Ambitious and Complex Collection of Clichés

[claudio_carvalho · 6/10 · 1 October 2006]

Syriana is a confused, ambitious and complex thriller of corruption and power related to the oil industry that tells four parallel stories: the CIA agent Bob Barnes (George Clooney) with great experience in Middle East that falls in disgrace after an unsuccessful mission dealing missiles in Lebanese Republic; the investigation of the attorney Bennett Holiday (Jeffrey Wright) related to the merge of two American oil companies, Connex and Killen; the traumatic association of the energy analyst Bryan Woodman (Matt Damon) with the son of a powerful emir of Iran; and the social drama of the Pakistani immigrant worker Wasim Khan (Mazhar Munir) that is fired by the oil company.

The greatest problem with this movie is that it is too complex for only 126 minutes running time, due to the number of plots, subplots and characters; therefore its edition is tremendously confused with the use of many ellipsis. It would be more appropriated a mini-series, or a longer film. Even the title of this movie is very ambiguous, with many non-official explanations. The movie's website states that "'Syriana' is a very real term used by Washington think-tanks to describe a hypothetical reshaping of the Middle East." (http://syrianamovie.warnerbros.com/about.html). In the end, I truly found this movie a pretentious and sophisticated collection of clichés sold in a beautiful "package". My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Syriana – A Indústria do Petróleo" ("Syriana – The Oil Industry")

The Price We Pay

[evanston_dad · 10/10 · 12 December 2005]

"Syriana" is a blistering, powerful film about the degree to which governments and corporate conglomerates place the ambition to control the world's oil supply above the well being of their citizens and employees. In this game, there are only bad guys, and what separates the villains from the protagonists is not a question of who's good and who's bad, but rather how bad each is willing to be.

So maybe "Syriana" doesn't tell us anything new. But that doesn't mean its points aren't worth making again and again. And though it is complicated, and I'm not going to pretend I followed every detail of its intricate plot, it's not *that* hard to follow. Stephen Gaghan is a good writer, and he provides a nice summary of the film's action in its final moments.

What emerges from this tangled puzzle is a web of corruption and self-interest, all fueled by the need for oil. In one plot thread, the men behind two soon-to-merge oil companies will stop at nothing to make the merger go through, since the new company will be one of the most powerful in the world. In another thread, the law firm representing the company proves that it's eager to cash in on the company's new economic success. Meanwhile, a power struggle between the two sons of an aging king in an unspecified Middle Eastern country (though Saudi Arabia is obviously suggested) has attracted the attention of the American government, operating through the CIA. America (read American business) has a vested interest in which of the king's sons succeeds him to the throne: It doesn't want the reform-minded eldest son, whose priorities will be building a country to benefit his own people; it wants instead the younger son, who will continue to relegate his country to a cosy spot in America's hip pocket and take its orders directly from the president of the USA. And in the film's most chilling plot strand, we see how the struggle for oil feeds the radical Islam movement in the Middle East, providing young men with a feeling of brotherhood and righteousness in the face of a region they feel has turned its back on them in favor of big business and Western corruption.

"Syriana" is tense, fast and furious. Following it can admittedly be somewhat exhausting, but if you pay very close attention to the first hour or so, as each story is introduced and the relationships between characters become clear, the second half of the movie is easier to digest.

I disagree with other comments here that the characters aren't developed or that the acting is unimpressive. On the contrary, I think all of the actors create extremely nuanced, compelling characters, a challenging task given the fact that none of them are allowed more than a minute or so at a time to feed us information about themselves. A movie like this could easily fall prey to filling itself with a bunch of stock villains, all cocked eyebrows and facial mannerisms rather than full-bodied characterizations, and the fact that it avoids this is a tribute to both Gaghan and the cast. And hats off to the editor on this movie, who had perhaps the most daunting task of the year.

2005 has been full of terse, important films, fresh in their immediacy. There have been a small number of sensational, tough, thought-provoking films instead of a larger batch of more mediocre ones, as has been the case recently. "Syriana" is one of the best movies of the year: it's angry, yet it's not hopeless. I hope Americans see this movie. At this time of year, when people are trampling each other in malls in order to be first in line for Christmas sales, I hope they remember that the vast wealth of America frequently comes at the sake of people all over the world who will never have a fraction of the comfort those in our country take for granted.

Grade: A

Puzzling

[jannagal · 7/10 · 17 December 2005]

Do you like puzzles? I do. I work crosswords, encryptions and sudoku. I think that's one reason I liked Syriana. But this movie left me puzzled.

Do you like movies with convincing acting, and character development. I do. I think that's another reason I liked Syriana. But who all of the characters were, and what characters were not revealed in the movie left me puzzled.

Do you like movies with mysteries, and with a credible backdrop of events relevant to today's world? I do. That's another good reason to like Syriana.

I think you get the idea. Syriana is a very good movie, but with so many characters and inter-related plots that it is difficult to assemble all of the pieces. You definitely get the main idea though: oil is all-important, and whomever controls oil gets very rich and powerful.

George Clooney, Matt Damon, Christopher Carter, et al., are a terrific ensemble cast that portray their characters very convincingly. Their stories are told separately and coalesce at the end of the movie, much like in "Traffic" and many other contemporary movies. Who are the "good guys" in this movie one may ask. That's difficult to discern. Maybe there aren't any (and maybe there aren't any bad guys either; or, maybe they're all bad guys.) If you decide to attend this movie, pay attention right from the beginning of the movie. And, if you like mysteries and puzzles, try to solve the question of who has the ultimate power among the characters in this movie. As for me, I think I'll have to see the movie again.

ambitiously confusing

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 5 December 2015]

Connex loses its access in Kazahkstan by its Emir which is then given to the Chinese. Connex is merging with the smaller Killen to get back into the region. Bryan Woodman (Matt Damon) is an energy analyst in Geneva. He attends the Emir's party where his son is accidentally killed. Reformer Prince Nasir (Alexander Siddig) offers him reparation and eventually takes him on as his adviser. Meanwhile, there is a secret missile sale in Iran that ends explosively. Bob Barnes (George Clooney) is a hard-nosed CIA operative trying to stop the arms smuggling. He clashes with his superiors and then assigned to assassinate Nasir.

It's an ambitious movie that would confuse the most fanatical of conspiracy theorists. It's a complicated interconnected series of stories. It's tough to keep it all straight. In this case, the confusion adds to the appeal of the movie. It highlights the murky nature of dealings within that region.

Interesting flick about petroleum power , terrorism , spies and geopolitical issues

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 30 November 2022]

Moving espionage thriller from Stephen Gaghan with suspense , thrills , intriguing events and great performance . Nail-biting and exciting movie dealing with a spy Bob Barnes (George Clooney) who falls in distress when some weapons are missing , he's on the verge of retirement from the Central Intelligence Agency but is eventually assigned by Division Chief (Jayne Atkinson) to a dangerous mission , then things go wrong when he's taken prisoner by Hezbollah . While the heir to an Emirate Prince Nasir Al-Subaai (Alexander Siddig) gives an oil contract to China, cutting out a US company that promptly fires its immigrant workers and merges with a small firm that has landed a Kazakhstani oil contract . But then the oil company's law firm finds a scapegoat resulting in fateful consquences . Meanwhile, executive Bryan Woodman (Matt Damon) , an energy analyst, after a family tragic becomes associated with the Emir , largely due to his essential business skills . Meantime , the super-powerful CIA uses relentlessly technological-gizmo-surveillance satellites and modern surveillance systems for people spying and hound terrorists , and getting nasty purports . It's not how you play the game ... It's how the Game Plays you. It's not how you play the game. It's how the game plays you.

Story's core is thought-provoking and script is dense with information and drama in which everything is connected . A politically charged epic about the state of the oil industry in the hands of those personally involved in and affected by it and in which unfortunate people become simple pawns in the goings-on among international powers that play a complex chess game . The ultra-brisk editing , various twisted stories hard to follow and rapid scenes movement leave little time to consider some inadequacies . Regarding peculiar relationships between top-of-the-range spies and other international forces that control the world energy . This is an espionage thriller from writer/director Stephan Gaghan and George Clooney as producer , and both of them giving awesome efforts in the important results . Including a known , notorious cast with eight Oscar winners : Chris Cooper, George Clooney, William Hurt', Viola Davis, Will McCormack, Christopher Plummer, Matt Damon and Tom McCarthy . Engaging and thoughtful thriller concerning the spy-world on Middle East and other countries , unemployment youngsters who join islamic fundamentalist cells and anything else . Interesting and brooding story by director Stephan Gaghan himself based on the book "See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on Terrorism" by Robert Baer. Main and support cast are frankly good. George Clooney and Matt Damon sustain interest enough in this tale of world power , corruption , betrayal , sacrifice and terrorism . Adding the use of geopolitical messages to add weight to a subplot . George Clooney is good as tough , out of favor operative and displaying an enjoyable performance as the elderly and regretted CIA agent, his role is based on the real life exploits of career CIA operative Bob Baer. Along with a large support cast , such as : Jeffrey Wright, Christopher Plummer, Chris Cooper, Jayne Atkinson, Tom McCarthy, William Hurt , Jamey Sheridan , Amanda Peet , Tim Blake Lelson , David Clennon , Viola Davis , Max Minghella , among others .

The film packs adequate , evocative cinematography by Robert Elswit and rousing musical score by Alexandre Desplat . The motion picture was well realized by Stephen Gaghan. He has written two screenplays where Harrison Ford was offered a role : Robert Wakefield in Traffic (2000) (which went to Michael Douglas) and Bob Barnes in Syriana (2005) (which George Clooney won the Oscar). He's a prestigious writer , such as : Chaos, The Alamo , Rules of Engagement , Dolittle , Traffic , who has directed a few films , such as : Abandon , Gold , White city , Dolittle and Syriana. Rating : 7/10 . Better than average.

Incredibly convoluted

[briancham1994 · 6/10 · 19 October 2020]

I only gave this film a 6/10 after reading a dense diagram summarising every character in the film and how they are related to the main plot. Ideally, I should not have to consult something like this. The film was very fast and involved a lot of characters working for different organisations, all with their own secrets, and it was very hard to follow. Eventually as viewers we get the overall gist by the end. The oil corporations make losers of us all - whether in America or overseas, and the whole world's cheap fossil fuel supply relies on a network of corruption, assassination, alienation and misery. It's a deep insight into how this whole system works but perhaps presented in a convoluted and overwhelming way.

A political slap in the face reality check

[nolarobert · 10/10 · 14 December 2005]

I walked out of this movie feeling pretty depressed. As a historian, I always knew there have been forces at work in our society that act against the best interest of the average citizen. This film does an excellent job of illustrating just how politics and big business conspire to preserve the status quo which also protects their power and profits. The global interaction depicted in this film shows how all actions have consequences. The thirst our nation has for oil drives the kind of political and business policies that cause anger and hatred towards our nation. This oil addiction has led to an unjust war that was started on lies and disinformation. The result has been the deaths of over 2000 US servicemen and women, thousands more injured and tens of thousands Iraqi dead and wounded. This act has been the best tool Islamic terrorist groups have ever had in attracting followers and money to their cause. Those that attack this film obviously buy into the fantasy that America is involved in Iraq and the Middle East due to our sincere desire to spread "democracy." Anyone who is willing to have an open mind will find this film to be chilling for the implications of the storyline. This film is a must see for those who care about how the behavior of our government and big business impacts us in our everyday lives and how it will contribute to further terrorist attacks for decades to come. A well researched story with excellent actors for the numerous roles. I will buy this as soon as it comes out on DVD.

Trafficking Oil and Preaching to the Converted

[WriterDave · 7/10 · 12 December 2005]

2005 has been a great year for politically charged films, ranging from old-fashioned highly fictionalized throw-back thrillers like "The Interpreter", to searing, romantic and artistically astute literary adaptations like "The Constant Gardner" to quiet and classy period pieces with timely morals like "Good Night, and Good Luck." "Syriana" arrives late on the scene like gangbusters purporting to be the gritty no-holds-bar thriller that will shine light on the shady underside of our current energy crisis.

Though ultimately a bit of a disappointment, "Syriana" is still far better than the Stephen Gaghan penned "Traffic"-the overrated, over-long multi-layered intertwining episode about the "War on Drugs." Here Gaghan serves as both writer and director, and given the current state of geopolitics, the subject matter here of terrorism, corruption, and oil trafficking is far more compelling and timely than his previous Oscar-winning effort.

Though extremely well acted and marginally well made, "Syriana" suffers because it presents scenarios liberal-minded Americans already know too well thanks to movies like "Farhenheit 9/11" and the continued follies of the current Bush administration. Here we have greedy American oil companies and corrupt politicians putting in place a puppet regime in the Middle East to protect their interests and prevent the Chinese from gaining access to the energy source their burgeoning economy so badly needs. We also have the tale of a grizzled CIA operative (the excellent George Clooney) getting outed, a slick energy analyst (an equally good Matt Damon) looking to cash in on "the winning horse" in a fraternal power struggle for the Saudi crown, and a legal investigator (the underwhelming Jeffrey Wright) pegged to bring down some devious insiders as a PR sideshow designed to give the illusion of due diligence and deter people from seeing the true corruption behind all these overt mergers and acquisitions and covert assassinations.

There are some white-knuckle moments, but the film relies on cheap manipulations (failed father-son relationships, a strained marriage, and the accidental death of child) to play on the audience's emotions. Ultimately none of these characters are very sympathetic because of these lame ploys, although there is an interesting side story about some suicide bombers that could've been more developed and should've provided the emotional core the film so badly wanted to create. Ultimately, the film depicts things we all know too well and offers no solutions to the problems. For all its supposed revelations it left me with a feeling of "so what?" because it never tried to make a statement about what we should do to curtail all this evil-doing.

Side Note: Amanda Peet, the most underrated and misused actress of her generation, is excellent as Matt Damon's wife. Her brief screen time displays her natural charms and her ability to carry heavy drama. Here's hoping her agent convinces her to do more stuff like this instead of the inane comedies she normally finds herself headlining.

Beware, Genius At Work

[leonardofilmgroup · 8/10 · 12 December 2005]

Maddening and infuriating but also fascinating like most things we don't understand when we're told we should. I kept hearing people around me whispering - Who's that? - What are they talking about? - William Hurt!? I haven't shoosh people in a movie theater in years but I did throughout "Syriana". The most compelling aspect is that I felt let into something and hear things I shouldn't. They're all baddies one way or another but then, what else is new. Stephen Gaghan, the writer director, devices a devilish web for us to get lost into. I was mesmerized by his self assuredness and although I didn't have any kind of emotional connection with "Syriana" whoever she or it is, I couldn't dismiss the experience so, well done, cinema comes in all shapes and flavors.

Disappointing

[klingic-1 · 6/10 · 20 December 2005]

'Syriana' takes on one of the most important issues of our time: the conflict between American oil interests and the powers of the Middle East. The task proves too much and we are left with a film that buckles under the weight of its own intricacies.

I enjoy films that offer complicated plots. The problem with 'Syriana' is that its level of complexity exceeds its capacity for coherence. There are long stretches of unintelligibility, where it is nigh impossible to determine exactly what is going on or how it relates to the movie as a whole.

Another of 'Syriana's' shortcomings lies in its ensemble cast. The difficulty is not the ensemble cast itself, however; this is a story that demands the use of multiple characters. Rather, the problem is the size of the ensemble. We are presented with numerous parallel stories whose relations between one another do not become clear until the very end. With this bevy of narratives comes the sacrifice of character depth. The film attempts to add dimension to its characters by providing unnecessary conflicts. The fact that Bennett Holiday's father is an alcoholic is utterly irrelevant to the plot; it is included for the sole purpose of adding depth to an otherwise boring character. Bob Barnes' son exists for no reason other than to illustrate the tension in Barnes' family. The death of Bryan Woodman's son serves a similar purpose: to provide conflict between Woodman, his wife, and the royal family.

'Syriana' is not without its positives, however. The acting is first- rate across the board, and the parts that do make sense are quite captivating. It is also unsettling when one realizes that the basic premise is not at all far-fetched. But on the whole, 'Syriana' is a disappointment.

Way too confusing

[david-754-449735 · 4/10 · 20 June 2019]

Fine, others will sniff and sneer and say I'm thick but this was hard work from the off I'm afraid and I challenge anyone to know what the h*ll was going on for at least the first 45 minutes. Way too clever for its own good, this film could have been great but I spent too much time trying to figure out what was happening, who was doing what, why any of them were doing it and so on, that any enjoyment of watching the thing was severely diluted. Same thing happened with Inception - completely clueless after 30 minutes! It must be me....

Go See It

[magdillane · 8/10 · 17 December 2005]

Initially I wanted to compare it with Traffic, same style and interwoven story lines, but the film itself stopped me from doing so. Thank you. Comparing films can so difficult, you know, the old apples v. oranges thing. This film stands on its own without the comparison or the similarities to Traffic.

Just before I went to the movie theatre, I saw an interview with Steve Gaghan the director on the Charlie Rose Show, and probably this helped me to fit most of the pieces together. The scene where Bob (Clooney) is taken to visit Hezbollah leaders, is based on the exact experience the director had when researching the story. He said that most of the film was based on his or Bob's actual experiences.

So what do we have....Oil, big oil, oil executives, oil analysts, oil geography, oil politics, big time oil power brokers, CIA, Islamic terrorists, Middle East culture....It's all there. And Steve Gaghan does a very good job in bringing it all together. His directorial debut. Very good acting all round, maybe the oldest boy and his mother Amanda Peet stand out.

I walked out of the theatre in an emotional daze, if that's possible. I will see this film again.

My coda.... What a rotten, ugly barrel of oil.

"We only want to give the illusion of due diligence"

[blanche-2 · 7/10 · 1 May 2007]

I gave "Syriana" a 7 only because I thought it could have been a little easier to follow. And I love complicated plots. Other than that, this is an excellent movie about how absolute power corrupts absolutely, and what people will do to control the oil situation and profit by it. In the film, which is based on a book by an ex-CIA agent (the Clooney character), we are shown many different stories that eventually come together - a CIA agent who infiltrates the other side, an executive and his family, two brothers struggling for a country's power, a young man who is seduced into a fundamentalist cell, and fat cats who want two huge oil companies want to merger and will do just about anything to get the merger approved. Probably the most sobering thing in the film for me was the fact that the emir had two sons ready to take over the country, and the U.S. wanted to make sure that the son in power was the one more in tune with them than the other son, who wanted to do things for his country and his people.

The point made by George Clooney on one of the DVD features is that there are no good guys and no bad guys - the oil people, despite despicable actions, feel completely justified doing what they do because we need oil. As a result, other countries hate us, we're at war now, and with so many Iraquis killed, terrorists have been able to raise money for their cause. I told you the most sobering part. The saddest was a young man, before a suicide mission, approaching his father and asking for money for the bus. The father is playing baseball and stops and gives him the money. The boy impulsively hugs him and holds him tight. It was heartbreaking and frustrating - they believe in their cause and are willing to die for it, and I can't understand how that can be. But it is.

The performances are all excellent with many stars, such as William Hurt, in cameos. Chris Cooper, Christopher Plummer, Jeffrey Wright, Robert Foxworth, Matt Damon, and Amanda Peet are all wonderful as part of this intricate story. Clooney is great - his eyes are haunted, he's scruffy, flabby, and conveys terror and his sense of isolation beautifully.

You see "Syriana," and you think, wow, that was pretty complicated, I'm not even sure I knew half of what was going on - and then you can't forget about it. "Syriana" and its thought-provoking messages will haunt you and make you wonder what on earth is going to happen to all of us.

Boring, full of stereotypes and meaningless

[RobiCher · 1/10 · 28 March 2006]

Living in the Middle East (in Israel), I was excited when I bought my ticket for Syriana. Having seen the trailer, and being a thriller-lover, I expected to see first of all a fast moving, breath catching movie, which wisely dips in global policy-making and the relation between oil, power and corruption, from a fresh angle. Well, I almost left the movie in the middle. The pace was painfully slow, almost all characters were stereotyped, the intertwined editing made understanding the logic very difficult, but, as Steve Rhodes wrote in his review, in the end you don't care. Save your money, save your time, choose another movie.

Robi Chernitsky

Detect Shun

[tedg · 29 December 2005]

Film-goer friends, we are watching a new cinematic storytelling form emerge. This is why you should see this, to participate in history. It is not a very good film by the measure of the genres it brushes against. Those looking for a political message (an amazingly large number) will find the message trite. Oil? Corruption? Smarmy men all around? Sure. But if you think this is about oil, you are daft.

Yes, the acting is superb and the score as well. But the reason to see it is simply because of the storytelling devices that are employed.

For background, you must know that film is always fighting its older siblings. Books and the theater evolved narrative techniques that were uneasily overlain on film, limiting it. It is a lazy thing to expect a story to just unroll before you in an easily mappable way. No matter, people love their genre films because they know precisely what to expect.

In recent years, we've seen a rash of films that add cinematic texture to a basic frame by weaving several characters that combine to make one, or several narratives that do the same. Here we have something more sophisticated, though it doesn't play with time like some of the experiments.

The dreadful "Traffic" was a simple weaving of multiple stories. There was no mystery in the story or challenge in watching. It was blunt. Now we have a real mystery, in the old school tradition. We as the viewers are tasked with sussing it out, knowing the writer/director plans to stay a half step ahead of us.

The thing is populated by a noir-defined guy, Clooney, who is our surrogate sufferer, as all noir heroes are. He remains barely clueless till the end, the man who suffers because we aren't trying hard enough as viewers. He knows far less than we.

Next is our surrogate detective. Every mystery needs one, our representative in the story — someone who knows less than everyone he encounters. He and we together doggedly make sense out of the thing. We both will miss some details but see enough to damn. All the rest of the men are opportunists, some evil, some less so. The master manipulator is played by Chris Cooper.

The whole adventure in novel storytelling depends on the unusual richness given this detective character. He is the only character who truly is developed, the only one with some past and present haunts that are not clarified for us. Usually film detectives are underdeveloped, defined with a few familiar strokes so we could fill the vessel with ourselves. Not here, we fill this vessel because he IS familiar.

What we have is a talented writer who finally has the confidence to be clever. But he is not a masterful director. So he plays a trick that is effective and cheap. He lets his actors define their own characters and lets his terrific cinematographer get in close. When you — the viewer — are in, constantly in, the personal space of all the characters, you get swept up in the complexity of the conflicting urges.

When you look at this, see that every single shot that is not an ultracloseup, usually hand-held, is there in the barest of minimums, just enough to have every scene make sense, and no more.

Yes, I would have liked more adroit manipulation of the eye. But someone was brilliant to come up with this solution.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

Syriana: an Achievement in Post-Modern Film-making

[weezer987654321 · 7/10 · 28 December 2005]

Syriana's ambition is its most remarkable facet. It took guts to make this movie, not just because of its political nature (notice I said "nature" and not "stance" or "content"), but because it dares to challenge its audience, not merely in their way of thinking, but in their ability to invest in the film—invest their full attention and comprehension skills. The next thing that must be praised is that Syriana challenges its audience without abusing them: the film's characters are human and complex; its story topical and intriguing. (This coming from someone who left the theater scratching their head.) Syriana is as confusing a movie as I've ever seen, with a dizzying array of plots (none of them can be designated "sub"); it's a movie you want to talk about with your smart friend, a movie you want to see again, so you can "get it."

Syriana is loosely based on Robert Baer's See No Evil; according to Baer, the CIA is a bureaucracy that has lost its way and is now guided by the politics of the careerist that man it. In that respect, See No Evil is intended as an expose of sorts--a wake up call to the country and powers that be. George Clooney is doing something with his "ER," F-you money; the film was co-produced by him. Clooney (who stars as CIA agent "Bob Barnes") is showing himself to be gutsy, talented, and out-spoken; he is fast becoming a name brand for exciting projects. Stephen Gaghan wrote the adaptation for Syriana and also directed it. Gaghan won an academy award for the screenplay to Traffic (which he also directed). Syriana looks and feels just like Traffic, it is quite obvious his ambitions for the two films were the same: to humanize and reveal the complex, intertwined nature of a hot-button issue. While Syriana is in another league than Traffic as a movie, it is also not nearly as entertaining or "watchable"—that is to say that in comparison, Traffic is an easy view. You just may leave Syriana un-entertained, or with a headache, or with a new concern for the state of things, or furious (perhaps at the film-makers), but you will be talking about it in the parking lot, and depending on how well the movie's magic worked on you, you'll pepper conversations with its name for some time to come after the drive home.

Red-State opinions of Syriana are that it is "yet another work of Hollywood propaganda." As foolish as that assertion is in general, it is doubly foolish when applied to the film in question. Syriana's subject is no doubt very political, but I feel there is an argument that the movie itself is journalistic in that it's merely an attempt at an honest portrayal of things as the way they are based on the facts available. It is not trying to persuade us into a way of thinking; it's trying to tell it like it is and leave us to think for ourselves. Baer's book is ultimately a catharsis for himself, a way to work out his personal demons and come to terms with the contemporary CIA, but it is also political in that Baer wants to advance his agenda, his plan, his way of thinking—he wants his warnings headed. While Syriana is informed by Robert Baer's work, it isn't trying to change the way we think to suit an agenda, it's merely trying to inform our opinion with the experiences of a man who was "on the ground" in the Middle East and risking his life to secure his country. This is the genius of Gaghan. He has used Baer for his own purpose and shed Baer's rhetoric thus transcending his source.

If Gaghan has an agenda, it is not of the same species as Baer's. I'd assert that there are no villains in Syriana. When everyone is knee deep in the dirty game of controlling the resource that will cause World War III (hyperbole?!), how do you single out a character as "the bad guy"? Syriana tells the story of the oil race from many, if not every, vantage point and does so without drawing caricatures or playing cowboys and Indians.

Ironically, for all its complexity, Syriana's flaw may be the sometimes trite, oversimplified, overconfident, and underdeveloped nature of the story's arcs. With so much on the table, no one course has enough room (main characters and entire plots were left on the cutting room floor, and you can see that time wasn't on Gaghan and company's side in what remains). A chief example would be the plot involving a young, laid-off, Pakistani oil field worker, who turns to fundamentalist Islam for answers to worldly as much as other-worldly issues. This part of the story is seemingly stripped and minimized, leaving you desiring a closer, more detailed look into perhaps the films most poignant portrait. It could also be said that the disorienting fog you remain in for the film's 126 minutes is caused by the overall under-done nature of Syriana (what exposition there is feels too little too late, and a little clunky for that matter—William Hurt's entire character, the mysterious "Stan," apparently exists entirely for the purpose of clueing us in to what "Bob" is thinking/doing). The disorientation can be regarded as a substantial flaw unless you prescribe to Roger Ebert's persuasive argument that the fog is the thing. In any event, brilliance inspires forgiveness; the movie's dark charisma, it's astute, intriguing observations wash over its flaws and push them into obscurity.

Most people will leave Syriana with only the broad strokes; it is good enough to demand that you patch together those broad strokes to find meaning. Syriana's "message" can be interpreted in many different ways, but it stimulates its audience and has the potential to provoke an enlightening global discourse. Truly a magnificent accomplishment, perhaps the most beautiful achievement a work of art can aspire to.

A complex movie serving multiple heavy stories

[Seraphion · 6/10 · 2 July 2014]

The base story is a good mix of a derivation from the all too-well-known CIA spy premise, a story about Islamic fundamentalism, a story about oil business and the corruption in the politics around it, and a story about family loss.

The story is developed nicely well. It's complex, sharply piercing and exposing the potential sleaze and corruption within and around the oil- rich region of the Middle East. The mood of the movie, having it as a drama-thriller movie, is nicely kept stable with a fluctuating pace of being fast at times and being slow at other times. One thing I found quite funny is that seeing George Clooney and Matt Damon on the cast list, I was expecting that they're going to be having intense in-frame interacting and duration together, but instead they are only in-frame together on the last scenes of the movie. They also don't share a dialog together.

The acting is nice, the level that we expected from the two big names of George Clooney and Matt Damon. Having Christopher Plummer, Jeffrey Wright, and Chris Cooper is also a great touch that emphasize the seriousness of the political aspect in the movie.

Syriana: the smart scripts that speaks

[froglegcutlet · 10/10 · 16 December 2005]

Syriana, starring Matt Damon and George Clooney, reveals a possible honesty in foreign political corruption. The movie starts out a bit discombobulating, but the ending unleashes a truism in our society. Directed and written by Stephen Gaghan (Screenplay for Traffic 2000), the script for Syriana shows not only a smart liberal-approached storyline, but also how much the American and Arabian lives becomes juxtaposed by oil politics. Based on the non-fiction book "See No Evil" by Robert Baer, Syriana takes its viewer step by step through the birth and processes of terrorism; and tears at the roots from where all violence and corruption derives.

The movie starts with the introduction of a character, Bob (George Clooney), an American CIA agent who works in the Middle East for years witnessing the destruction of social injustice. The movie then turns light to the American governmental affairs and its due process to make oil business proposals and governmental decisions to promote oil driven businesses in the Middle East. Bryan (Matt Damon) struggling to survive in America's capitalistic society thrives to introduce business opportunities in the Middle East; but before completing any deals with reformer and leader, Prince Nasir, all the characters, including a young Arabic man suffering from American politics and social injustices, end up experiencing sacrifices beyond comprehensible.

The movie leaves its audience stunned with a raw realism that the world we live is not a pretty picture, and all the beliefs you trust can be questionable. Although the movie definitely wouldn't exactly be a "feel good movie", its thought provoking and enlightening, and I don't think it was ever meant to be a "feel good movie." The movie shows a perspective worth learning, considering and understanding. And although the movie takes the viewer through a roller-coaster of different lives and people objectives at the beginning of the film, the movie ties in brilliantly to connect not only the characters lives, but the lives of the audience and everyone's lives who have capitalistic motives.

Politics of the Middle East 101 - artfully presented

[mstomaso · 8/10 · 13 May 2007]

I torture-tested Syriana - watched it twice over the course of two days. Why? Because I had read that it was a complex film and that it might require two viewings to really get it. After my second viewing, all that I can say is that this film does not live up to its reputation in terms of complexity, and does not treat its subject matter with the reputed depth people seem so willing to ascribe to it. Seems to me that the film introduces the complexity of Middle East/U.S. relations, but doesn't really indicate how deep the rabbit hole goes. I did not learn much from it, but unlike most Hollywood political films, I did not disagree with it either. Despite these comments - which were not meant to be critical - Syriana is a very serious and very good film. In my opinion it is less a thriller and more of a political drama.

Clooney plays Bob Barnes, a CIA field operative who is beginning to develop a conscience. Damon plays a financial analyst who, after the death of his eldest son, becomes adviser and friend to a smart reformist prince (Siddig). Jeffrey Wright gives an outstanding performance as a smart, aggressive attorney preparing for a merger between two oil companies by investigating their dealings in the region very critically. A young man (Amr Waked) and his father are deported from Iran because of a change in ownership at the refinery they worked in, and the young man begins to be drawn toward Islamic fundamentalism. These, and other stories, intertwine and eventually merge explosively.

Although Syriana is not a happy go-lucky walk in the park Disney show, I found it just as interesting and compelling the second time around. This speaks very highly for the films artistry and the performances of the entire cast. Clooney and Daman are always good, but both shine especially nicely in the less mainstream roles they brought to life in Syriana. This film (or the mediocre Kingdom of Heaven) should be a long overdue breakthrough for the great Alex Siddig (Siddig Al Fadil). The cast is a long list of some of Hollywood's brightest (if not most well paid) stars. Each member of the ensemble plays their part very well, and with obvious conviction.

The soundtrack is great! Gaghan's script is excellent, and the cinematography and directing are both good, though perhaps a little derivative of Traffic. Gahgan is establishing himself as one of more objective and well-informed script writers of films with political points, and I am glad to see that he is handling this difficult role with the passion, artistry and intellect it requires.

A Cynical, Compelling, But Flawed Movie

[tabuno · 6/10 · 23 January 2019]

10 December 2005. Unlike "Traffic" (2000) directed by Steven Soderbergh who took a direct helm over that movie, Stephen Gaghan, took over the reigns of "Syriana," formerly having writing credits for "Traffic." The results are that "Syriana" fails to deliver the same gritty, powerful intensity. Instead, the movie follows one too many strands that don't provide the personal touch, the continuity of action that "Traffic" was able to offer its audience. While the content and premise are commendable and sincere in their assumptions about the power of big oil, corruption, and the limits of government, "Syriana" drags and plods along, unlike even the more low-key "The Tailor of Panama" (2000). George Clooney, seems so over the hill that he's lost his intelligence, fumbling not so much in his performance as the script that lags severely behind such classics as "The Ipcress File" (1965) or even the more contemporary spy thriller, "Spy Game" (2001).

The cinematic approach to "Syriana" tried to weave a balance between the more stark, harsh, gritty approach of "Traffic" and the mainstream, polished, big studio photography of mainstream movies resulting in something that didn't seem quite believable or real. There was either too much realism in the script development that would have required a different cinematographic approach than used in this movie or a more tightly, woven plot that would have put more intelligence into some of the scenes that seemed more manipulative or exploitative than reasonable.

unwatchable

[undertaker72 · 1/10 · 27 April 2012]

This was a terrible movie, slow,boring and confused. There was no a story and not a understandable storyline, just a lot of characters and subplot put together without a logic.

Most of movie is just talking, talking, most in Arabic with no discernible story or plot.

A lot of people here pretend to have enjoyed the movie, stating that who didn't are too stupid or shallow to follow a "complex plot", habit to watch just Rambo-style action movie and that if you don't understand their sacred piece of art the first time you should re-watch it three or four times until you do. But the life is too short for such a things and the only thing that someone can appreciate in this turkey are its liberal bias about American role in middle east politics and wars.

Films knowledge not as deep as it would have you believe.

[sirlexman · 7/10 · 12 December 2005]

From a production quality viewpoint, this film was quite good for a relatively low budget independent. Acting, editing, camera work, etc. were first class. However, the film makers try to use some techniques to convince you they know more than they do about the international energy situation. During the film a lot of relevant details go by so fast and are so little explained that the informed viewer who catches a glimpse of them is inclined to give the film makers the benefit of the doubt.

I know a great deal about the world this movie purports to address, not as a player, but as an independent investigator with international sources. Whoever wrote the screenplay is only seeing a part of the picture. Many aspects relating to how central Asian oil reserves are being exploited and fought over are utterly missing in the film. The relationship between the US government and Iran is very badly misrepresented (the true story would make a much better movie). All that said, the impression the film leaves with the viewer about the extent to which the various players in the international energy market represent a set of ignorant armies clashing by night is quite accurate. So if you see this film, don't get lost in the details; take home the impression.

Added Later:

I did not know when I wrote the above that I would have enough space to address details, but it appears I might, so.....

One of the things that bothered me about this film was that the plot was over-simplified. (Please don't shout at me like that!) For instance, if the movie is really talking about the oil industry term "Syriana," then a large area of central Asia is involved, running all the way from the Persian Gulf states through Kazakhistan in the North. That being the case, where are the Russians in this movie? The Russians are major players in this business on all levels and they are not even represented.

Also, no Pakistani had to go to Saudi Arabia to learn about Islamic Fundamentalism from a Wahabi; there are plenty of madrasas in Pakistan preaching a similar ideology.

Where is the Pakistani factor in this film? Where is the reference to the development of terrorists by the Pakistan for service in the Kashmir? Since that story led DIRECTLY to the events of 9/11, it would have seemed of interest to have included it. Also, where is the story of the Unical Pipeline from Usbekistan through Afghanistan and the Baluchistan area of Pakistan to the Persian Gulf? That was a major factor of direct US meddling that led to the current situation which the movie was trying to portray.

Also, there is no indication that the film makers knew anything about the looooong-standing relationship between the current government of Iran and certain sections of the US Republican Party. Also, in the name of all that's holy, how can you make a movie that has an anti-Iranian group based in the US and leave out the Israelis? Let Iran get close to having nuclear weapons and you will see what I mean.

And finally, you don't need a shaped charge to bring down an LNG tanker. All you need is a charge sufficient to penetrate the double hull opposite a tank; the LNG that begins to leak (at -400 degrees plus) would do the rest. The explosion would be inevitable, enormous, and about 20 minutes later (given the ambient high temperature).

I am afraid it would take many movies to tell the story of "Syriana," perhaps more than the average film-goer would care to sit through. However, the continued ignorance of the world to what is really going on there will lead to more events that will get everyone's attention.