All the major film festivals have been hit hard with Iraq War-themed films this year, and you're likely to see a few of them crop up again come Oscar time. Peter Berg's The Kingdom probably won't be one of them, but it might be the one to make the biggest dent in the box office. A comparatively slick, mainstream film, The Kingdom is three-quarters geopolitical mystery-- sort of a post-9/11, internationally-staged CSI-- and one quarter action thriller, with the film's slow and suspenseful build-up suddenly exploding into a final half hour of breath-halting mayhem.
The film isn't actually set in Iraq-- it mostly takes place on Saudi soil-- but there's no denying its Iraq War consciousness, or the fact that it's aiming for some grand political or ethical statement. And indeed, to a certain extent, it pulls it off-- the final minute or two of the film are haunting, suggesting a hopeless cycle of violence as an inescapable part of the human condition. But it's also got some problems; as much as the film tries to avoid jingoism or xenophobia, going to some lengths to give us a few noble-hearted, brave Saudis, once the action begins, the movie loses its balance, with good-guy Saudis and bad-guy Saudis killed indiscriminately, leaving audiences to cheer at the American dominance without pausing to reflect on what it really means. (Brandon Fibbs makes some thoughtful comments to this effect in
his review.)
Berg-- who previously directed sports film Friday Night Lights-- does an admirable job filming a rather difficult film, using handheld camerawork to bring intimacy and authenticity, juggling a number of characters without losing track of the broader picture. He falters mostly when he provides condescending subtitles to explain who certain characters are; the movie isn't anywhere near as complicated as, say, Syriana, and we don't need help figuring out what's going on.
The script, likewise, does a good job maintaining perspective with such a grand, global scope, but in doing so it sacrifices the characters, leaving the four lead actors mostly to play on their own well-known personas. Jennifer Garner is basically the same sexy-but-tough agent she played on Alias, and Chris Cooper gives the same gruff performance he's given dozens of times over. Jason Bateman-- arguably the best actor to go to if you need sarcastic barbs delivered to maximum effect-- is basically playing a military version of Michael Bluth, though he's still hilarious at just the right times. Only Jamie Foxx is given something interesting to do here, playing a sophisticated badass as only he can play it.
It's a tough balancing act-- trying to be both a conscientious political statement and a crowd-pleasing artistic one-- and the movie topples under its own ambition more than once, but the mere fact that it's trying so hard makes it a movie that's hard to dislike. Its heart is in the right place even when its craft falls flat due to overreach, and even if it doesn't reach the complexity or sophistication it strives for, it will at least maintain your attention and keep you solidly engaged.
