War, Inc. (2008) User Reviews

A funny, silly ride

[sioenroux · 7/10 · 7 May 2008]

Don't mistake "War Inc." for a sharply chiseled satire or a brainy comedy full of inside jokes for news buffs. It isn't.

This is an old-fashioned screwball comedy, with ridiculously coincidental plot twists, stock characters (given some depth in fun performances by John Cusack, Joan Cusack, Marisa Tomei and Hillary Duff) and a straightforward approach to the political content.

You see, the filmmakers' political points are things nearly all of the country already knows are true. Yeah, we understand that the corporations profiting off the war are corrupt, inept pigs, the political leaders in charge of it are even more inept buffoons, and American imperialism has never looked crasser and more out of touch than it does right now -- but none of that is the point.

Here, all of that noise is the setting that they lampoon -- sometimes in genius ways -- as the backdrop for a silly romp, as John Cusack's character (the hit-man with a heart) tries to change his life with the help of the do-gooder journalist who doesn't trust him (Tomei) and the young Middle Eastern starlet who wants to call off her marriage (Duff). Cusack's sister, Joan, plays his assistant with an almost cartoonishly enthusiastic quality. Ben Kingsley seemed to me wasted in his smaller part as a ruthless CIA boss.

That's all, and it works. It's simple fun, but if somehow you can't see reality and you think the war is going well and everyone involved with it is doing a good job and there's no corruption and people in the Middle East wish our Western culture would supplant theirs, then you might not find it as funny.

For all the rest of us, it was a light comedy with a political edge.

"...sh-t happens"

[Tyler_Seymour_Wallach · 7/10 · 12 May 2008]

Joshua Seftel's first film - a satire of memorable proportions - is about just as the title suggests: The corporations effect on War.

The film is about a mercenary (John Cusack) traveling to Turaqistan (not a real country, fyi) to help the American government 'get their message across' to Turaqistan's leaders. He meets a reporter (Marisa Tomei) and we all know what will ensue with a lonely man + a hot reporter. Somewhere in the mix, a pop star named Yonica Babyyeah gets thrown in. As Yonica is marrying one of Turaquistan's most important people (a son of the president), a subplot is created where the mercenary must watch over this star, well, somewhat. The film starts off with a lonely Cusack in a bar; no more than fifteen seconds later, the film hooks you. With it's amusing and intriguing insight on terrorism and politics, the film's running time blows by you. The film has a lot more action than I expected, with the occasional scene of war, well choreographed fights and just sporadic scenes of murder. Though the story isn't much deep, the simplicity of it all makes the film perfect for both the common man and movie critics alike.

In the final act of the film, the simplicity of it all turns very hostile and jumbled. I thought it was executed very well, but other may disagree, and I could understand why. Twist after twist is what the ending is all about, and like most films, it is a true hit/miss situation. Regardless, the three writers on the film (Mark Leyner, Jeremy Pikser & John Cusack) did a fantastic job creating a realistic and entertaining satire on today's situation overseas.

Joshua Seftel does an excellent job insuring the film's integrity; not reducing the material to the most redundant of films (which I was afraid would happen). Seftel crafted the film as perfectly as one could: he created a vibrant atmosphere, one that is both examines harsh reality and cartoonish falsities; - contrasting them perfectly - as well as making the film feel as if you were watching it all. Seftel really gets you involved in all of the action and it pays off completely. No missteps here. Hopefully, he takes on more directorial jobs, for he is one director to look out for.

A Libertarian's take on a war satire

[Shattered_Wake · 7/10 · 5 June 2008]

In this satire of the commercialization and 'lightheartedness' of war, John Cusack plays Brand Hauser, an assassin sent to to 'Turaqistan' to take out Omar Sharif, who is doing some oil business that will spell trouble for the former Vice President of the US's own company. In addition to this, Hauser must juggle his fake position as a trade show producer, a wedding for pop princess Yonica (Hillary Duff), and a nosy Liberal journalist, Natalie (Marisa Tomei).

Assessing the technical aspects:

• The acting (by the main characters,at least) was good, as was to be expected. Some of John Cusack's dialogue was quite obviously not written for him as he often seemed uncomfortable saying it. . . maybe unrealistic is more accurate. Joan put forth a great, and often hilarious, performance. Marisa Tomei, while I've never been a big fan of hers, was more than suitable for the role and worked well. Hillary Duff, however, was pretty terrible. They needed an attractive Middle Eastern (or Russian, or whatever that accent was supposed to be) pop-star. Unfortunately, they went 0 for 3 with her.

• Like I said above, the writing seemed a little stiff and mismatched at points, especially John Cusack's dialogue. Not much of it, mind, but some. The story also got a bit ludicrous at points, which is fine for a satire to a point, but it took it to a whole new level here. Luckily, the Cusacks and Tomei keep a relatively cool, calm demeanor throughout, and that makes a nice even mix of the craziness of the film and the levelheadedness of the actors.

• Joshua Seftel, who previously had a drought of real credits to his name, did a fine job with a rather wide-spectrum film. He handled the small ($10 million) budget very well, stretching it to make it appear to be much more. Seftel also managed to nicely blend the humour of the story. . . with the painful and hard-to-watch parts of the real war (including slaughter of civilians, etc.).

• As far as the general satire goes, its exaggerated look on the commercializing of war is very well done, especially the 'Golden Palace Poker' ads on the U.S. tanks. At points, it becomes a little too much, but, in the end, it still accurate portrays what it's going for an a young 'Mel Brooks'-type of style.

Overall, the film is very well made for the meager budget and it's definitely worthy of a look. It won't go down as one of the great satires of cinema, but it's certainly not the worst.

7/10.

Mistakes Kubrick never would have made.

[doug-697 · 5/10 · 27 April 2008]

If you agree with the political premise of this movie or you like John Cusack, Marisa Tomei or Ben Kinsley you may enjoy this movie. But as the satire it was obviously meant to be it is a huge misfire.

Despite a few funny moments, it breaks a basic rule of satire: believability. Watch Dr. Strangelove, M*A*S*H, or The Great Dictator and you'll notice that the main characters, while caricatures of varying degrees of preposterousness, the world in which they exist was made to be very real.

In War Inc. this is reversed. The primary characters are played seriously and we do care about them, but, with only a few exceptions, the environment in which they exist is played for laughs.

For example, the scene of the rehearsal of a Broadway musical dance number where the dancers are women with prosthetic legs who've been victims of the war but who've been "helped" by American medical technology. It's an idea of near-genius, but it's impact is almost entirely lost because the world in which it takes place isn't credible. There are the "Arab rappers" who are played as ridiculous idiots, but it comes off as a commentary on rappers and not American cultural influence. There are so many potentially great moments ruined because they aren't played seriously. The director just didn't understand comedy.

There are other mistakes. Much of this movie takes place in the protected compound "Emerald City". The movie brings us into what is intended to depict an orgy of American capitalist/corporate superficiality, but the movie fails to first sufficiently establish that it exists within a non-Western (Arabic) country. So instead of succeeding as a critique on American imperialism, we simply feel like we're in a weird theme park with no context.

Also, and this is potentially more serious for U.S. showings, there is the apparent portrayal of average soldiers. I don't know if this was intentional or not, but regular soldiers are shown as moronic, thugs and murderers. In one scene, which is one of those that's filmed realistically, soldiers machine gun innocent civilians. The soldiers have the corporate logos on their uniforms, perhaps meant to differentiate them as a "corporate" army. However, I think that is likely to be lost on many viewers and in a movie meant as criticism on the abuse of corporate power, denigrating the average American soldier, intentionally or not, seems a huge mistake.

And, perhaps this is minor, but Joan Cusak looks quite old in her first appearance in the movie. This was obviously not intended since she looks younger for the rest of the movie.

This is not a terrible movie but as a satire it's a mess.

A really fun ride

[Gimme_Fiction · 7/10 · 23 April 2008]

I don't want to spend to long here rambling about the plot- you've seen the trailer, and if you haven't its online. I don't recommend seeing it though- it was poorly crafted and didn't pack any of the laughs or magic from the film. So those avoiding this film due to its lousy trailer should give this one a chance. It's really funny. I was blown away by the cleverness and originality in this film. The first 40 minutes had me on the floor in hysterics- my only problem was that it unnecessarily evolved into a bad Austin Powers film in the final 20. This however, is one of the few films where the campy ending didn't make me dislike the rest of the film (which is normally the case). Everyone gives a great performance (especially Joan Cusack) and there are some really great moments throughout. I personally plan on seeing it again when it comes out- only to catch all the details which I was laughing over during the first viewing!

Disjointed storyline. No thrill, nor suspense. What a mess.

[imseeg · 4/10 · 10 July 2022]

Doesnt matter if you dont understand the story, because it is incomprehensible.

More bad: there is no suspense or thrill. Neither is it funny. What's left?

This anohter John Cusack flop who is winging it and who is going down.

Amateur night. Every actor seems lost. Let's forget this was ever made...

A Funny and Topical satire.

[rogue719 · 7/10 · 2 June 2008]

In War, Inc we find the logical extension of the current outsourcing of all war-related activities we are currently doing in Afghanistan and Iraq. If you are familiar with the antics of Halliburton, Kellogg, Brown & Root and Blackwater overseas you are already halfway home to fully appreciating the satire of Cusack's latest piece. Cusack plays a corporate hit-man named Brand Hauser who finds himself in Turiquistan organizing a trade show in the newly liberated country as his cover while waiting to get access to his latest target. While there he finds himself intrigued by the anti-establishment reporter played by Marisa Tomei and pursued by the over-sexualized pop star played by Hilary Duff. We are introduced to Hauser's past, which includes a tragedy that has haunted him ever since and the corporate assistant named Marsha Dillon who actually is running the entire operation for him (and played hilariously by Joan Cusack). While some moments are played suitably over the top, they aren't always the moments you expect and the little touches often catch you by surprise. All the principals turn in solid performances. Duff's accent comes and goes but otherwise she does a very nice job and goes a long way to dispel her Disney image. Tomei is funny but understated while the Cusack's own nearly every scene they are in. To be fair, they are given good material. The writers turn in a good script with enough twists and turns and visual gags to keep you giggling throughout all the way to the predictable conclusion. In fact, the predictability of the end is the only thing that keeps me from rating it higher as the story twists and turns it's way to the expected conclusion.

If you like your comedy broad and physical, there is probably not enough here to keep you interested the entire movie. On the other hand, if you like sly comedy and broad satire, this is for you.

Yikes! Pretty bad

[edwardclinch · 2/10 · 9 July 2022]

Not funny. Not well written. Not realistic. Too bad, with all the talent and money. This movie could have made some more sense if it had a better writer or 10.

Thoroughly Enjoyed the Movie

[syedaamirmsd · 4 June 2008]

It was hilarious from start to finish. Very poignant and very dark. I especially loved those deliciously violent and overtly sexual lyrics to all of Duff's songs. I'm actually hoping I can find that song, 'I Want to Blow You Up.' The frightening thing, in history, is that something similar did take place. The East India Company, a properly registered English company in the 1600's to 1857, did actually raise armies, fight wars and collect taxes in the sub-continent. They were as ruthless, if not more so, than Tamerlane. Ever since John Cusack first started acting in teenage movies, I've always thought him to have an impeccable sense of humour and timing. And I'm so glad to see that he is using these talents in dark comedies rather than the run of the mill, mainstream rom-coms.

Tabasco sauce

[jotix100 · 6/10 · 10 September 2009]

The CIA man, Brand Hauser, is a man of few words and a lot of action. He is seen as the story begins going into a saloon in a remote Alaskan post. We are not prepared for what he does after a shot of Tabasco sauce! Hauser, who pilots his own private jet, has deep conversations with someone through a device in the panel of the plane. He even gets to talk to the US vice-president, who talks from the privacy of his own bathroom while engaging in some bodily functions.

This political satire makes fun of the folly of the war on Turakistan by placing the action in the middle of the conflict, where Hauser goes to take part in a trade fair sponsor by the powerful Tamerlane corporation. On his arrival in the country, Hauser is assisted by the media expert, Marsha Dillon. The agent has been sent to take care of oil minister Omar Sharif who dares to think he can get an oil pipe line through the country, something that clashes with the Tamarlane group's interests in the country.

Directed by Joshua Seftel, who has worked on television, and based on the screenplay in which the star of the film, John Cusack helped produce, "War, Inc" deals with issues and scandals too many to go into detail. Suffice it to say that no one is spared at all. Parallels with the present conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan are clearly what the creators intended all along, something the last administration probably didn't appreciate, or even vice-president Cheney. Mr. Seftel has some success in presenting a chaotic situation in a satiric way.

John Cusack is all over the film. He makes a case for his Brand Hauser. Marisa Tomei plays a leftist oriented journalist that has come to cover the war and has too many questions that go unanswered. Joan Cusack is also on hand to give one of her usual funny performances. The surprise is Hillary Duff, who goes almost unrecognized. Ben Kingsley is also seen in a pivotal role.

Credit must go to John Cusack by daring to do the impossible with a subject that not many would have touch with a ten foot pole.

Dr Strangelove it ain't!

[imagineda · 4/10 · 13 March 2009]

I really wanted to like this, but in the end it's a poorly made film with too few laughs.

The politics are spot on, it's gonna offend the hell out of republicans but that's what it's designed to do. That alone gives me reason to chuckle.

The problem is, it looks like it was made in a REAL hurry (like about a week). And it contains a stupid subplot about some bimbo singer, which seems to be completely off topic.

Turiqistan is obviously Iraq, or Afghanistan, or any other number of countries the US has f**ked with since the 50s. The humour is a little dark (amputees dancing with prosthetic legs made by Tamerlane corporation) but it IS on the mark, especially with the corporations cashing in on the reconstruction ("democracy lite"!)

However like a lot of satire criticising the US, it seems terribly heavy handed and laboured. I guess it's running counter to so much bs propaganda so it has to bludgeon people over the head to make a point. Who knows. I prefer more of a nudge, wink approach - a bit of subtlety. But that's just me.

Anyway I might watch it again, perhaps I missed something.

I'm hoping "W" is more on the mark.

Critics might be off the mark on this one...

[Juicy92888 · 9/10 · 4 May 2008]

I thought this movie was a lot better than most movie critics are giving it credit for. Though it has its confusing parts of the plot, it doesn't greatly interfere with your understanding of the movie. That being said, If you're not open to more liberal political ideas, then this probably isn't the movie for you. I thought all the actors in the movie were outstanding. Each character has their funny moments and the audience at the Tribeca Film Festival was laughing throughout the whole thing. I thought the satire was a tad over the top in one particular area, but that's intentionally done. John Cusack is right in that although it's set in the future, it really makes you see the present.

Duff steals the show

[stephengraley · 6/10 · 21 May 2008]

You movie is basically a rant at America and the way they police/Destroy all minor nations real or in this case "Turaqistan" make believe. you then have your story within this with Mr Cusack, a down on his luck assassin sent to do a job in Turaqistan and all that follows to distract him from this.

The movie has some hilarious moments, basically every scene with Hilary Duff is hilarious. She plays Yonica Babyyeah an oversexed brat that performs a fantastic solo of "i'm gonna blow you.....up". Priceless and worth the admission price alone. You then have the tanks rolling around with advertising slogans like a Nascar.

the movie still could have been a lot better, at points it just seemed to muddle its way through with no real direction. In the first 45 minutes you don't always understand the scenario of the private security forces, the American soldiers, the company etc etc, it does get a little confusing.

However the performances of John Cusack and Hilary Duff are top drawer and with the humour this is certainly worth watching.

So....wasn't it supposed to be funny?

[joestank15 · 4/10 · 27 December 2008]

War, Inc. - Corporations take over war in the future and use a lone assassin Brand Hauser (John Cusack) to do their wet-work against rival CEOs. A dark comedy satirizing the military and corporations alike. It was often difficult to figure out what exactly was going on. I kept waiting for things to make sense. There's no reason or method to the madness.

It's considered by Cusack to be the "spiritual successor" to Grosse Point Blank. I.e., War is more or less a knock-off. We again see Cusack as an assassin protecting *spoiler* the person he's supposed to kill as he grips with his conscience. To be fair, John Cusack looks kind of credible taking out half a dozen guys with relative ease. The brief fights look good. The rest of the film does not. It's all quirky often bordering on bizarre. War Inc's not funny enough to be a parody, and too buoyant for anyone to even think about whatever the film's message might be, which I suppose might be the heartless ways that corporations, like war factions compete and scheme without a drop of consideration given to how they affect average citizens. Interesting, but the satire just doesn't work because it's not funny and at its heart the film has no heart. We're supposed to give a damn about how war affects Cusack's shell of a character rather than the millions of lives torn apart by war.

John Cusack gives a decent performance. His character chugs shots of hot sauce and drives the tiniest private plane but quirks are meant to replace character traits. Marisa Tomei is slumming as the romantic sidekick journalist. There really isn't a lot of chemistry between them. Hilary Duff tries a Russian accent and doesn't make a fool of herself. Joan Cusack just screams and whines and wigs out. Blech. Ben Kingsley might have to return the Oscar if he doesn't start doling out a decent performance now and again. Pathetic.

It's not a terrible movie, but in the end you gotta ask "War, what is it good for?" Absolutely nothing. C-

Simply terrible

[agent59987774 · 1/10 · 29 November 2008]

With this cast and budget you will expect more.

John Cusack has made a number movies that border on the strange, yet still work. Neither he, his sister, nor Sir Ben could do anything to save this travesty of trite poorly written garbage.

The movie is nothing more than a series of sight gags and poor ones at that. The plot goes nowhere, the writing is contrived, senseless and the characters paper thin. If you think of a movie as being three dimensional where the story and characters bring a depth to the imagery, this stinker comes across as flat as steamboat mickey.

Dan Akroyd's appearance in this brought back memories of another truly awful movie, 1991's Nothing but Trouble. Frankly this movie is the type of project that kills careers and gets agents fired.

Warrants a look, even though it doesn't quite hold together...thank you, John Cusack, for the many wonderful ideas and lines!

[inkblot11 · 7/10 · 28 July 2008]

Brand Hauser (John Cusack) is an assassin for the CIA. He is ordered to go to the country of Turaquistan, a nation that the United States has "liberated", and kill a businessman named Omar Shariff. This is because the American conglomerate, Tamerlane, that is putting the country "back together" will not stand for Shariff, an oil man from a neighboring state, laying down his own pipeline through war-torn Turquistan. But, once there, Brand runs into difficulties. One, he meets a determined journalist, Natalie (Marisa Tomei) who wants to tell the American public the "true" story of the region's conflict...and of Tamerlane. But, Brand is aghast to realize that Natalie's pretty face and sharp mind instantly and unconsciously compels him to lose focus on his mission. Also, his cover as a trade show host forces him to meet the country's pop-singing princess, Yonica (Hillary Duff), who will be getting married at the convention center. She is a young diva whose wedding arrangements also turn Brand's attention away from the coming assassination. With other inept underlings and complications, will Brand be able to carry out his mission, for the satisfaction of Tamerlane's BIG boss, the former vice-president (Dan Ackroyd)? Good for you, John Cusack, to make this film, even though it doesn't quite hold together. Shot in Serbia, it is a worthy look at what present-day Iraq must be like, a country turned upside-down. In a stroke a brilliance, the green zone here is called "The Emerald City" and aptly so, for this Oz-like neighborhood attempts to keep out the ravages of war going on elsewhere in the metropolis. The cast is very fine, with Cusack doing a nice job and Tomei, Joan Cusack, Ben Kingsley, Ackroyd and others backing him up in style. Duff, especially, does a great turn as the heavily-accented, heavily made-up, potty-mouthed singer. The recreation of war-riddled Baghdad is so real that it hurts while the costumes and other production values are top-notch. As for the script, it isn't always cohesive but it certainly has some tremendous dialogue and scenes. For example, a young Turaqui boy offers to show Brand an enemy hideout, in exchange for money and candy. Brand produces the cash but, because he has no candy, the boy burns his vehicle anyway. Brilliant! Then, also, the direction is not a total success but doesn't lag very often. No, if you have conservative leanings, you probably won't like this film one bit. But, if you have an open mind and want to see a satirical view of the "war on terrorism", this is quite a good show. Therefore, do make an effort to view it, as you will be supporting those filmmakers who choose to make movies far away from those old studio "formulas".

Awful

[peruilken · 1/10 · 28 November 2008]

Quite possibly the worst movie that I have ever seen. When has Hollywood ever made a successful movie that attacked Republicans? Why don't they learn. The Dixie chicks haven't. These Lefties live in their own elite bubble interacting among themselves; oblivious to the fact that most of America is much further right than they are.

The best Hollywood productions are not partisan and are rarely political at all.

Dan Akroyd's imitation of Cheney was bad.

I would have thought Cussack could have landed better movies.

It wasn't funny.

A hit-and-miss-21st Century "STRANGELOVE"

[george.schmidt · 7/10 · 27 May 2008]

WAR, INC. (2008) **1/2 John Cusack, Marisa Tomei, Hilary Duff, Joan Cusack, Ben Kingsley, Dan Aykroyd, Sergej Trifunovic, Lyubomir Neikov, Ned Bellamy, (Voice of: Montel Williams)

A hit-and-miss-21st Century "STRANGELOVE"

John Cusack – who co-wrote the script with Mark Leyner and Jeremy Pikser – stars as a jaded hit-man named Brand Hauser who is burnt out but decides to follow thru on one final assignment by icing a Middle-Eastern oil minister named Omar Sharif (yes, not THAT Omar Sharif but you get the tone here from this misfire for a laugh) commandeered by the ex-Vice President of The USA (Aykroyd, Cusack's old "Grosse Pointe Blank" co-hort, doing a mean Dick Cheney manqué turn here), enlisting Brand to do the deed under the guise of a Trade Show Producer in mythical Turaqistan (read: Iraq/Afghanistan) for the American private corporation Tamerlane (read: Halliburton).

While being briefed Brand is faced with a moment of clarity when he comes across intrepid journalist Natalie Hegalhuzen (Tomei) and eventually falls in love with her.

Meanwhile Tamerlane is sponsoring the unlikely union of Eastern European teen sensation Yonica Babyyeah (a surprisingly decent Duff aping her own celebrity with tongue- through-cheek) and the idiot son of the country's leader.

What follows is a bold attempt for a 21st Century black comedy a la "DR. STRANGELOVE" but for all intense and purposes there are sadly more misses than hits in this broad try for laughs amidst political message (an unjust war being outsourced by American capitalism, check!)

While Cusack riffs on his Martin Blank from the aforementioned "Pointe" he does add some nice touches of his man in black (he does shots of Tabasco sauce to take the edge off), the rest of the cast plays catch up (except sister Joan who is a riot as the high-strung aide- de-camp for Hauser and has one of the film's funniest laugh-out lines: "My mass communications skills are finally paying off") for the most part.

Cusack visited the Iraq War earlier this year in the 180 degree different "Grace Is Gone" and here he allows his political views wear on his sleeve ; while admirable overall the film's pace and rhythms are off largely no-thanks to first time filmmaker Joshua Seftel making his directorial debut here (and it is noticeable) except for maybe the well-choreographed fight Hauser is involved with Babyyeah's idiotic fiancé's entourage.

A nice attempt yet a misguided failure ; maybe next time Cusack won't try so hard and let the idiocy of war speak for itself instead of doing the heavy lifting by himself.

Appalling

[renjosh2 · 1/10 · 21 October 2008]

Just utter trash. I'm a huge fan of the Cusacks, this being the sole reason I watched this movie, but the only reason I can see for their presence was the reprise, in complete and depth less quality, their exact roles from Grosse Point Blanc. Apart from that, the films' role as a political satire fails miserably as being too obvious for even the most moronic out there to serve any purpose. And to bill it as a satirical satire would be just plain insulting even to chimps. Imitation is, apparently the highest form of flattery, but seeing as though this is nothing near Grosse Point Blanc and in the same league as meet the (watch if your a moron) Spartans in terms of political satire, lets leave well enough alone and let this one fade into the obscurity it absolutely deserves.

A satirical view of today...

[maple_a · 6/10 · 10 June 2008]

A satirical view of today's world. A movie which allows you for once to step back and take a look at our world from the outside. Things might not seem so right and correct. Successfully points out some of the most typical features of western society which we have turned out to be accustomed to. Even though it proposes a quite fictional view of the American role in the world, showing a country ruled by the Us in a sort of parallel world controlled through cameras and secret services. Somehoe reminds of Orwell's 1984 or Huxley's A brave new world. The story is not very involving sometimes turns out to be a bit hard to follow and some scenes seem to be just useless and inappropriate, while the acting is good, the main actors have done a good job. A the soundtrack is often fitting in the scenes, contrasting, adding some irony to the story. In all a pleasant movie good to watch.

Simply crap

[hale1d · 1/10 · 18 December 2010]

Exceeding shallow, contrived leftest parody of the US war on terror. Very predictable plot with the actors just moving through the endless 106 minutes of this with no life or feeling. No real plot or story ark. Just constant easy, shallow jabs at the US armed forces and the US actions in the mid-east. Typical jump-on-the-bandwagon, hate America stuff that some in Hollywood think is great social commentary.

In short - not funny - not engaging - not well acted - really not well written.

As I stated in my summary...

Simply crap.

A thoroughly entertaining film.

[inspire_aspire · 10/10 · 11 May 2008]

Let me start by saying that "War, Inc" is not everyone's cup of tea. It is, however, very enjoyable (and gets you thinking - "Oh, crap"). The comedy involved the film isn't obvious at all - it's quite subtle (Tamerlane tanks, dry-cleaning service etc), and it changes with the twists & turns in the plot.

I may be the only one, but I won't compare this with "Grosse Point Blank", because, it's different. John Cusack - I wouldn't say he was "amazing" or "brilliant" - but he was good. On the other hand, his sister (Joan Cusack) was incredible in her delivery of lines & comedic timing - even though she was hardly in the film (I'd say the same about Ben Kingsley).

Marisa Tomei plays a convincing reporter, and manages to pull it off. Hilary Duff is very commendable for her role as central Asian pop star Yonica Babyyeah. Duff's development as an actress is very noticeable in the film, and she does a very good job (even though her accent is a tad unreal).

Overall, the film is what I would call "entertaining". It doesn't have a particular storyline, and it's quite silly at times, but it does have a subtle message. I'd say it's worth a watch.

An Average Political Satire

[ad_upclose · 6/10 · 19 May 2008]

Starts of in quite an interesting fashion, but seems to go off track mid-way. Now for those who didn't get the various undertones of the fantastic Charlie Wilson's War, well this is not for them. This one also points a lot of fingers at America, this...(read more) time using Iraq as the subject in its fictional setting/re-creation. The story could've better executed had the film not diverted from its initial promise.

John Cusack was good, Duff was also better than expected playing an over-the-top Mideast pop star. However, the acting prize clearly goes to Joan Cusack, who was witty and funny on quite a few occasions. It was a shame she didn't have a larger role.

Overall, this movie was mildly entertaining, pointing fingers in many directions (though nothing most people didn't know). However it just lacks the 'bite' left by the much better 'Carlie Wilson'.

A Mess by any other name is.................

[bob-rutzel-1 · 2/10 · 11 November 2008]

Assassin Hauser's (John Cusak) mission is to whack a Mid-Eastern oil minister, whose name happens to be Omar Sharif (Neikov), in the country of Turaqistan which is run by American interests. Hauser poses as Trade Show producer to allow him to get to Omar.

Sometimes a satire can be so overdone it becomes most annoying. Here it does too much: the government, politics, music, war, people not generally accepted by society, and did I mention "war." And, that is what we have here - a most annoying movie that borders on a very bad nightmare brought to life. I am still asking myself why I continued with the DVD. Also, there are so many Cusak family members in this that John Cusak appears embarrassed by the family just being there, or is that just me?

It used to be that a John Cusak movie, while a little offbeat, was, in the end, rather good. Not here. Believe that John Cusak had a hand in the writing and producing of this mess. Make of that what you will.

There is too much going on in the movie accompanied by constant gun-fire, bombings, and shouting that you really cannot focus or was that the point? Probably. It just takes too long to set up the hit, which is largely forgotten until the last 15-minutes. In the meantime we have meaningless banter among all in the cast. And, chemistry between John Cusak and Marisa Tormei? I don't think so, but you know: the boy – girl thing ……and they needed something to take up more time.

Yes, for what they were supposed to be, (offbeat and annoying) the performances of Duff, and Kingsley were good. But, when I saw Dan Aykroyd's character, in the beginning of the show, sitting on a toilet taking a dump, I knew the rest of the show would go to the tank as well. I was not wrong. I am sure some will sing praises of this effort, but if a rose is still a rose by any other name so, too, is a mess……………

I now remember why I continued with the DVD. I was hoping that the story would somehow level out and save itself. Never did.

Violence: Yes. Sex: No. Nudity: No. Language: Yes.

Better War Comedies out there.

[The-Sarkologist · 4/10 · 25 October 2021]

This is apparently the sequel to Grosse Pointe Blank, not that that film actually required a sequel. Mind you, while some of the actors are the same, and they play similar roles, they have different names. Actually, the way the film has been set up you could easily see how the characters are the same characters (though I was under the impression that Dan Akroyd's character was killed at the end of Grosse Pointe Blank). With what is revealed during the film as well, you can sort of see why the main character decided to go back to being a hired killer.

However, the film seems to be more of a criticism of the Iraq War, and while the movie is set in a central Asian republic that has been liberated by the US (using contracts to conduct the war and to set up peace keeping operations) it is pretty clear that it is supposed to be Iraq. The problem that I had with this film though was that it seemed to be all over the place and it didn't have any real plot to it, even though a number of reveals were made at the end.

I guess the whole point of the film was about how the corporations had pretty much taken over the art of making war, and while they aren't entirely correct with the suggestion that for the first time in history war had become privatised (the modern concept of the standing army is actually relatively new, and lots of wars throughout history have been fought using mercenaries), it does a lot of criticse the way the corporate world has infiltrated everything. The fact that gift bags are regularly being handed out is a case in point.

Another thing that is explored is how wars are being massaged for the media. One of the main characters is a journalist that wants to leave the Emerald City (which is basically the Green Zone in Bagdad), but is prevented from doing so because 'it is too dangerous'. However, the main reason is that the powers that be want to prevent the journalists from reporting on the atrocities that are being committed out in the regions.

The name of the corporation that is conducting the war is Tamerlane, which is a reference to Tamerlane the Great, a conqueror that took over the middle east and was considered one of the last, great nomadic conquerors. However, the reference is no doubt to the fact that they are a foreign power that has come to take over the regions. It is also interesting how all of the tanks have advertising on them, which is another reference to how the corporate world is taking over the role of the military.

However, this film wasn't really all that great. Sure, it is certainly being critical of the way modern wars are being conducted, or at least the wars that were staged in the Middle East (which have all seemed to have petered out now, since the conflicts are now moving over to the far East, this film is starting to feel somewhat dated). Honestly, in the end, there are better films that explore these concepts, and even though this is supposed to be a black comedy, I personally didn't find it all that funny.