Regie:
Paul GreengrassDrehbuch:
Brian HelgelandKamera:
Barry AckroydMusik:
John PowellBesetzung:
Matt Damon, Greg Kinnear, Brendan Gleeson, Amy Ryan, Khalid Abdalla, Jason Isaacs, Igal Naor, Raad Rawi, Said Faraj, Michael O'Neill, Faycal Attougui (mehr)Streaming (4)
Inhalte(1)
US-Armee-Offizier Roy Miller (Matt Damon) und sein Team sind kurz nach der Eroberung Bagdads 2003 in den besetzten Gebieten im Einsatz. Um einer gefährlichen Spur zu folgen, müssen sie die Sicherheit der so genannten Green Zone" weit hinter sich lassen. Doch der Einsatz läuft nicht wie geplant und bald kommen Zweifel auf, die das eigentliche Ziel in Frage stellen. Gemeinsam mit der Washington Post-Korrespondentin Lawrie Dayne (Amy Ryan) deckt Miller eine gefährliche und raffinierte Verschwörung in den eigenen Reihen auf. Er wird zum Gejagten und es beginnt ein packender Kampf um die Wahrheit und ums Überleben. (Universal Pictures Germany)
(mehr)Kritiken (11)
Ein Vergleich mit Bourne-Filmen wäre nicht würdevoll. Wir werden also ignorieren, dass Green Zone nicht ihren unterhaltsamen Drive hat, dass keine spannende Musik da ist und dass der Film vom Anfang bis zum Ende auf einer dunklen Baustelle spielt und dem Publikum nichts über seine Figuren sagt. Es ist besser, das Werk mit Scotts thematisch ähnlichem Der Mann, der niemals lebte zu vergleichen, dem ich drei Sterne gegeben habe und der mir mehr Spaß gemacht hat. Green Zone ist nur eine schwarzweiße militärische Übung vom Regie-Stil, den es schon woanders in einer erfolgreicheren und bunteren Version gab.
()
Die sehr beunruhigenden moralischen Implikationen des Krieges im Irak beruhten auf einem ziemlich interessanten Thriller-Grundriss, der sämtliche Qualitäten den bereits getesteten Greengrass-Fähigkeiten entnimmt, ein Höllentempo einzuschlagen. Der matte Tölpel Damon ist nur die Spitze des Eisbergs ungenutzter Chancen und der höflichkeitsumgangenen Fragen, die hätten und sollten viel tiefer gehen sollen - Greengrass versuchte zu seinem Nachteil, eine Lücke zwischen der Nichtteilnahme sowie der Rohheit von Flug 93 und Jason Bournes Wumms zu finden. Die Green Zone ist bei weitem nicht so beeindruckend wie das Erstgenannte und bei weitem nicht so unterhaltsam wie das Zweitgenannte. Sie ist ... Eben nur grün.
()
Wenn ich Green Zone mit dem Fünf-Sterne-Film Der Mann, der niemals lebte vergleichen würde (dieser Vergleich bietet sich geradezu an), könnte ich schreiben, dass Damon ein bisschen schlechter als DiCaprio ist, Gleeson ein bisschen schlechter als Crowe, Greengrass – was die Action betrifft – Scott gleichkommt, aber in den Momenten, in denen im Film gerade nicht geschossen wird, nicht mehr so gut ist. Green Zone hat aber Glück gehabt, dass ich gerade keine Lust zum Vergleichen habe. Ich muss zugeben, dass dieser Film zum Besten gehört, was sein Genre zu bieten hat. Das angenehm verschwörerische und ziemlich intelligente Drehbuch (tja, es ist von Helgeland), die realistischen Actionszenen, die das Publikum gefangen nehmen, und das monströs gesteigerte Ende mit einer tollen Verfolgungsjagd haben mich überrascht. Matt Damon habe ich seinen Miller mit allem Drum und Dran geglaubt (zum Glück war er kein eingebildeter Superman im Stil von Tödliches Kommando - The Hurt Locker). Kinnears Ratte und die tolle Figur von Jason Isaacs haben mir auch gefallen. Fünf ein bisschen schwächere Sterne.
()
Technically speaking, it’s a flawless political-military thriller (not combat action), but to me it’s the weakest viewer experience that I’ve ever had with Greengrass. I get what Green Zone probably wants to say, but I believe they could have got more out of the premise. Given the level of the game the creators are playing, I can’t say the script is good enough – the deus ex machina character of Freddy is especially awful. But I’m not disappointed, because the genre (which I’m not a big fan of) didn’t lead me to expect much.
()
A word that is often used in connection with cinema is "disappointment." I think I know why, but I’m not going to share it. Fears that Greengrass and Damon would merely swap running around the world's capitals for the dusty roads of Iraq have not come to fruition. Leaning on one spectacular screw-up by the Bush administration and Helgeland's script, they’ve created a compelling, rather conversational thriller that is given momentum by the restless cinematography and Powell's pulsating score. Expecting an action geyser is not worth it because Green Zone is, despite all the impressive set design, a rather modest film with no ambition to entertain, and yet is not at all afraid to point fingers at specific people. It’s based on the lesson that was the motto of a certain spirits advertisement: "There’s always a reason."
()
A politically engaged Bourne in Iraq? I’d like to use a line from the movie “don’t be naive", but that wouldn’t be altogether true. As a comparison it rather fits. A lot. A shame about the last third of the movie, however, when it turns off the hitherto path of the story down over-simplified and naively presented political agitation, aimed in the right direction, but the delivery... (especially the last dialog between Miller and Poundstone is just beyond the pale; I would never have expected anything like that from Greengrass). P.S.: Although I understand that a book in newspaper article form which is a bureaucratic odyssey where the left hand doesn’t know what the right is doing, or: “How the Yanks failed to understand that an Arab land after years of tyranny, sanctions and war is not the same as any State of the Union following a natural disaster" is darn hard to turn into a non-documentary movie, but why on earth make a movie about weapons of mass destruction or botched attempts at finding them if there is no mention of either in the book?
()
When I compare it to American Sniper and Lone Survivor, Green Zone comes out pretty bland. I like Matt Damon, but he couldn't save the film in my eyes. The action is rather sparse and uninteresting, the finale in the dark rather annoyed me, and overall it tends to deal with political and other uninteresting stuff for me. Unfortunately I didn't have much fun, but the technical side was decent. 60%
()
Paul Greengrass tried out the style he applied in Green Zone in two parts of the Borneo series, thus creating a prototype of a modern action hero set in a realistic environment and using top combat techniques, but one that is far from the action superheroes of comic or game adaptations and routine thrillers. Moreover, he moved from pure entertainment to a deeper reflection on a specific political problem currently affecting America. His Green Zone is an excellent war action film that also perfectly functions as a mapping of the roots of war against Saddam and the subsequent civil war in Iraq. The film is a synthesis of all the motifs that played a role in creating today's complex situation, namely amateurism on the part of strategists, manipulated information from secret services and the American government, underestimation of the watchdog function of the press and media in general, unpreparedness for long-term occupation, and logistical failure. Of course, the film has its flaws and the five stars I'm giving it are not flawless, but in this case, I am happy to add them because the film stands very high above the genre average. The fictional hero of the story, Miller, has too much initiative and is too independent in his thinking for a lower-ranking army officer (possible members of the armed forces will forgive me), and above all, he does not hesitate to disobey orders and defy authority in a significant way. Also, the handheld camera, which plays a dominant role in Greengrass's films, is unnecessary in some cases, and the film contains some minor logical lapses. I doubt, for example, that a wanted war criminal, whose likeness is on every American soldier's playing card, would be driving around the streets of Baghdad in a car registered in his name several weeks after the occupation. But the action sequences, be it shootouts, wild chases, or fights, are filmed in the highest quality, and the entire story is set in a functional environment and corresponds to what actually happened in Iraq despite the fictionality of the main character. Matt Damon has already tried out a similar type of hero in the character of Jason Bourne, and his work with the director is top-notch. The entire film is incredibly dynamic and captivating. Overall impression: 90%.
()
This action-packed probe into the war in Iraq turned out to be as good as both of Bourne’s little brothers. Greengrass, Damon and Powell step on the gas absolutely everywhere, but the final action sequence (perfect camera) is unequalled. The tempo, suspense, and the perfect directing workmanship... just superb. Helgeland’s screenplay, based on a lie that was (as always) intended to serve a good cause despite all the dynamics remains in the forefront and points out mistakes that should never be forgotten and swept under the table. If anyone knows how to mix ingenuity and entertainment in one movie, it’s Greengrass. Everything fits nicely together and makes Green Zone a seriously good watch.
()
I can’t avoid the word routine. Gritty editing and rawness are Paul Greengrass's main assets and also the thing he focuses on most in his films, so praising these them seems quite redundant, it'd be like being surprised that a car takes me from one place to another, with nothing else expected from it. The disadvantage of Green Zone is that the topic it deals with cannot be as personal for the viewer as the quest for truth portrayed by the physical person of Jason Bourne, where the viewer can feel and relate to every blow and thought. Here, it’s too global and you are thus detached from the main characters and there is hardly any close connection. The action is good, the pace is good, Matt Damon still knows how to fight, and the music is effective. It simply works well again, but it's only about the story, and that's not enough for me.
()
I have found that modern war movies probably won't be my thing, even though I have wanted to give the film "Marine" a chance for a long time. "Green Zone" didn't really impress me, even though it becomes a very good movie when it comes to action. Greengrass has already practiced with Matt Damon, but what worked twice for "Bourne" may not be a recipe for a third film. It probably needs a stronger story, a bit deeper critique of the United States and their political intentions. Like this, it's just a movie that takes place on the hot grounds of Iraq, occasionally showing scenes that reveal how those who actually control the world have their fingers everywhere, but there is no significant added value. So, it's mainly a film for action enthusiasts who will enjoy all the shootouts, action in the city, and the gear that soldiers have. It is truly good in how it captures the military environment. Greengrass could probably make a living as a war reporter. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/05/kocour-v-botach-jedna-hodne-blba-svatba.html
()
Werbung