War Inc.

The key in this case is not the director, but the producer, who promptly also took on the lead role. Yes, John Cusack, who, when it comes to political views, stands on the left wing of the Democratic Party, so during the presidency of George W. Bush, he genuinely suffered and decided to deal with Bush's legacy through this film. The film takes shots at the defense of American interests under the guise of exporting democracy, militarism, exaggerated American patriotism, etc. When it comes to political views, mine are similar to Cusack's, and in many cases, he knows how to hit the nail on the head. In the scenes where he openly mocks the corrupt American journalists who let themselves be fooled by the whirlwind of virtual reality, or the privatization of war when private security agencies or even private armies take the initiative in Afghanistan or Iraq, who naturally don't have to be accountable to the public and whose interest is not peace, but rather prolonging the war for as long as possible, and thereby their deals, the film works well. However, for political satire to work, it should be delivered delicately, so films like Wag the Dog or Being There are the best examples. But Cusack combined satire with a somewhat clumsy parody of spy films like the Mission Impossible series, and he presented it in the style of American mainstream humor, which in the end doesn't work as well. On the one hand, it's understandable, as he put his own money into it and doesn't get paid that much, but for the effort to sell the film to the average American viewer, the overall result is tasteless and bland. In addition, director Seftel wasn't very experienced, and it doesn't seem like he has any extraordinary talent - so even though I like Cusack as an actor, my overall impression is only 45%. (04.03.2010)

I had a surprisingly good time, and I can’t believe that Big Brother gave this the green light. It's not even a comedy, I’d call it a well-aimed satire about an increasingly topical issue. You can also see the movie from a completely different point of view, it's just that you won’t find it so hilarious. I mean, it’s much better to laugh at the tanks with ads on them and save the darker thoughts for later. For a movie that clearly didn’t have the highest of budgets, there's an unexpected amount of food for thought, which I appreciate. 4*+ (27.12.2021)