VOD (1)

Plots(1)

Big oil means big money. Very big money. And that fact unleashes corruption that stretches from Houston to Washington to the Mideast and ensnares industrialists, princes, spies, politicos, oilfield laborers and terrorists in a deadly, deceptive web of move and countermove. (official distributor synopsis)

Videos (1)

Trailer 1

Reviews (10)

Lima 

all reviews of this user

English In the gravity of its message and in its structure (directly or indirectly intertwining storylines) Syriana is very reminiscent of Traffic, except that director Stephen Gaghan (the screenwriter of both films) has swapped drugs for the strategic commodity around which the whole world revolves, oil. I don't deny that when I first saw it I got lost in the story of the merger of Connex and Killen, in the jumble of names and facts, but the fates of Clooney's CIA agent, Prince Nasser and the two Arab boys were very interesting and captivating nonetheless. Gaghan doesn't mince words, he doesn't spare the CIA, his country's foreign policy ("When a country has five percent of the world's population but does fifty percent of its military spending, then the persuasive powers of that country are on the decline."), he points out corruption, he touches on the issue of Islamic fundamentalism, but the problem is that his narrative comes across as somewhat cold and distant, which may put some viewers off. But I am able to forgive a film that has an idea, an ambition to convey something important and, moreover, you can feel honest filmmaking (cinematography and design with suggestive Arabic realities). PS: Clooney is no longer the one who, in the words of Steven Spielberg, twitches his head like a pigeon, he is pleasantly surprising with his artificially mature expression, he is becoming a great actor. ()

kaylin 

all reviews of this user

English The Middle East and the East further beyond the Persian Gulf continue to be very pressing issues that afflict the population and, of course, politicians. How to respond to the terrorist threat, what tools to use? And what about the people, our own people, who have done quite dirty work for the government but are becoming at least inconvenient for further progress? Some government practices are simply unjustifiable, but all the more reason to know about them. The film "Syriana" shows what can happen to people if they pursue goals they believe are in the nation's best interest. But is it up to a select few to recognize and decide this? The question is quite unnecessary, because that's just how things work. We don't know what the government does with individuals, we only know what it does for the entire nation. Agents don't have it easy, not only because their enemies can do as they please with them, but sometimes they can't even rely on their closest allies. George Clooney finally got a role in this film that earned him an Oscar. It's a beautiful example of how a TV actor can become a respected actor, but also a creator, because he is also a director and screenwriter, and he has nominations for an Oscar in both categories. The role suited him perfectly, but he doesn't have that much space here. His performance in the film also depends on the fact that he has gained some weight and learned foreign languages. I have to say that he didn't impress me otherwise, but I don't think it's because of his performance. "Syriana" in general did not sit well with me, mainly because I haven't been enjoying political films lately. Perhaps I should save them for a more suitable mood. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/11/sahara-stormbreaker-syriana-andelsky.html ()

Ads

Remedy 

all reviews of this user

English Exactly the kind of film that pontificates on a very pertinent and topical subject but in a completely uninteresting way. Too many plot lines that somehow fit together in the end, but at the same time cause almost certain viewer death. As a political study of international relations focusing on the oil industry, this could work quite well. It's too convoluted a subject for a feature film which is also portrayed in an extremely unimaginative way. [50%] ()

Othello 

all reviews of this user

English Just a little statistic by way of introduction: As of 02 March 2012, the reviews of Syriana contain the word "boring" 13 times, the adjective "derivative" 22 times, the label "complex" 14 times, 10 users call this film "incomprehensible", and 6 users call it "confusing", thus enabling me in my elitist sensibilities. Not in the sense that I would just eat it all up and fully understand it, but in the fact that the film made me read the extensive breakdown and simplified explanation of the plot on IMDb, not to mention the six cigarettes smoked over Wikipedia, which was probably the point. Syriana is challenging. It doesn't introduce the issues, it doesn't explain the terms and connections, and the characters don't have a backstory but only paint one behind them as the film progresses. The audience-identifying element, George Clooney's anachronistic agent, gets his ass handed to him (figuratively and literally) in every other scene throughout the film, and though he was once an ace in clearly divided Middle Eastern politics, he painfully discovers that the tightrope of the Middle East as he knows it has been shredded into hundreds of tiny threads. In the 80s, the parties to the conflict were divided into A, B, and C, only to nowadays use the entire alphabet, even with accents. _____Syriana tends to be depressingly cyclical, but this is disrupted by the storyline of the Pakistani boys and their great Arab buddy with the bomb and the ball, who is the only one clearly oriented to his goal, but also the most understandable in his portrayal, and thus the motivations of the suicide bombers are the clearest thing about the film. They have a clear start and goal, which turns them toward the viewer. The purpose of the film, then, IS to be at first glance an incomprehensible mix of subterfuge, corruption, insiders, and interventions so as to grasp the sad reality of the Arabian peninsula and the unpredictable power of an exploited and terror-prone Arab nation (albeit in this case, Pakistan). ____ In terms of form, Syriana is practically perfect, which is mainly due to Elswit's cinematography (one of the best cinematographers at present), excellent performances, and perfect casting. Mark Strong gives you goosebumps, even when he's not ripping anyone's fingernails out, and in general I consider the whole torture scene to be the highlight of the film. Matt Damon, on the other hand, is a classic suburban careerist with a family, shedding his illusions, which suited him perfectly typologically (the dialogue with his wife at the fountain is simply brilliant). Syriana is perfect, and will be particularly appreciated by people who watch movies and don't nibble at their ears, do the ironing, and wait for George Clooney to shoot the cunt to shit in the finale. ()

POMO 

all reviews of this user

English Mature in its opinions, Syriana is an intelligent political thriller involving the business machinations carried out among oil tycoons. However, most of the connections escape ordinary viewers (i.e. those who are not familiar with the given issue) and only the decent atmosphere, the cast and the impressive ending are memorable. ()

Gallery (48)