I elected to watch Syriana next because it was an Oscar winner that came up in my Netflix recommendations, and that I had otherwise missed at the time of its release and ensuing buzz/accolades. Also, I have been watching several quirky comedies of late (and one mediocre romantic comedy) and decided that I needed a change of pace. So, I reordered some of the next movies in my queue a bit, putting off "Music and Lyrics" for another time, and popped this one in. I have decided, upon finishing this certainly intelligent but complicated film, that Sunday night, when one is looking to relax before Monday morning and the work week dawns, is no time to watch a movie like this.
Syriana portrays a highly complex interweaving of interests, both tangible and non-tangible, tied to the production of oil in the Middle East and the United States' almost addict-like dependence upon it. There are almost too many to list. It is hard to summarize this plot with any decent efficiency except to say that all of the storylines revolve around the succession of one of two brother princes to emir of some unnamed Arab country. Alexander Siddig (Dr. Bashir!) plays the reforming older brother; the younger brother (actor unknown) is power-hungry and America-friendly. George Clooney plays Bob, a CIA-agent turned scapegoat. Matt Damon plays a corporate energy consultant who, through personal tragedy, connects to the older prince and his ambitions. Amanda Peet plays his estranged wife. Christopher Plummer plays a partner in a prestigious law firm caught up in the web of corporate maneuvering and behind-closed doors government endorsement surrounding the younger brother. Jeffrey Wright plays one of his attorneys who likes to play all sides for the security of his own future in spite of his troubled past and present. Chris Cooper plays the CEO of an oil company that merges with another big oil company, both of which have a stake in the cat-and-mouse game. In the meantime, the viewer is treated to humanistic portrayals of conditions in the Middle East, Islamic teachings, and is offered a sympathetic eye to the possible motives of suicide bombers.
This movie, inspired by non-fiction events as the footnote at the conclusion of the film notes, is ambitious, intricate, multilayered, intelligent, deftly neutral when considering the topic and the possible parties involved, well-written, and well-acted. George deserved his Oscar, playing a weary, field agent facing the death of his career and possible future with nothing to lose and completely against type. It is a role I have never seen him play. He only smirked coyly once, and that alone impressed me. Jeffrey Wright was also amazing and was possibly the more compelling of the two performances, as he played this attorney who never fully reveals his agenda to anyone, even the viewer, until the end of the film.
The trouble is, though it is so intricately woven, with all of these parties deftly spun into the web, the story is very convoluted. Watching this movie, I had a sense that the filmmakers wanted to be didactic and wanted to present an argument. The sheer volume of characters and situations the film introduces, however, makes it impossible for the viewer to really be interested in any message or outcome unless the topic itself is one of interest to the viewer going in. I must confess that I was only interested in this film because of the Oscar attached to it when I started watching, and my interest in following all of the different storylines ebbed and flowed throughout the film. If there was an argument to be made, I can only guess at it less than twelve hours after finishing the film.
That's not to say that I had trouble following it. None of the scenes or situations, as they were, felt out of place because of the strength of the performances and the script. There was simply too much to keep straight, too many lines to connect, to make the film effective. That is, of course, part of the film's message: oil and the inevitable profit margins and war and terrorism and corporate/political collateral affect and are affected by more human beings than the average moviegoer realizes. Another part of the message: this oil crisis may be the downfall of civilization (that's overdramatizing but, inevitably, the subtext is there). Unfortunately, the average moviegoer is probably going to be completely turned off by this film, if such a person managed to muster the courage to watch it, and any message or appreciation of that message will be lost.
I am not an average moviegoer, and I am still kind of turned off. It was a smart film but not one I will ever watch again because of the subject matter and my inability, caused by the film, to connect to any part of it. Thusly, it does not pass my test. It will not be purchased or owned in any way in the future.
Ironically, filmmakers are often criticized for oversimplifying stories, either taken from pre-published print materials or real-life accounts, for the sake of art and appealing to the viewers. Sometimes, I am one of those critics, especially when the edit is blatantly manipulative. This time, however, I really feel that Syriana could have benefitted from a slimmer set of stories; or, if the large and tangled web appeals, a few more minutes of straightforward exposition, even a written blurb at the beginning of the film, to orient the viewer to what is happening and to whom the viewer will be introduced would have helped. Also, while nothing felt out of place, per se, there were times when I felt something was missing, some piece of the dialogue, perhaps, that was left on the cutting room floor. I can't think of a specific example right now, but, to me, those moments undercut even the overarching point of the entire piece.
I applaud the filmmakers for their ambition, but, in the end, this was not a movie that interested me. I think, personally, I have to give this movie a 7.5, a step above shaky, but there were too many flaws in my eyes to warrant an 8. I appreciated the intellectual challenge and the courageous subject matter but, be forewarned, this movie is not for everyone.