phd_travel
This movie is disappointing. It's mostly about a hostage exchange but not that much about the Lebanon conflict around the time.Jon Hamm plays an alcoholic negotiator who lost his wife. The story seems a bit one sided and shows all is okay if the U.S. personnel are alright. No matter what happens to the Middle Eastern characters. The photography is dark during crucial scenes especially the final climax. and they shout out names like you are supposed to remember who they are. Rosamund Pike seems out of place here. Sticks out like a sore thumb.Don't bother.
julie-kohn
Just saw Beirut and was very impress with the film, acting and story line. I was surprised it has not gotten better reviews. For people complaining it was not filmed in Beirut, that seems ridiculous. It was realistically shot in similar terrain and seemed authentic. It was a well put together story and interesting to watch. Good cast as well. With so many super hero, action movies getting attention, it is important we support thought provoking, smaller budget independent films.
lavatch
Responding to a devastating bombing in Beirut that took the lives of American Marines stationed there in 1983, President Ronald Reagan tried to put a noble spin on the atrocity by saying, "Our goal is for peace in the region." Thirty-five years later, the film "Beirut," as well as American foreign policy, seems frozen in the same quagmire in the Middle East.There is an especially poignant moment in the film that has nothing to do with the main, melodramatic action. A man and a woman are dressed in bridle attire and posing for their wedding photo. But there is no wedding entourage and no celebration. The couple is merely standing in the rubble in Beirut that resembles nothing less than war-torn Berlin in 1945. That images speak volumes about the chaos in Lebanon, which is described in the film as "a boarding house without a landlord" filled with conflicting Muslims, Jews, and Christians. Hamm is good as the fast-talking, hard-drinking negotiator Mason Skiles, whose wife is killed in a terrorist attack while he is serving in a diplomatic post in 1972. Ten years later and an alcoholic, Mason is brought back to Beirut to negotiate a hostage crisis. Mason''s style is to simply keep talking and dicker with his opponents in order to free his old buddy Cal. The hyperactive Mason refers to this process as "cross-cultural arbitration." The strongest part of the film was the first half that shed light on the enmity, violence, and anarchy that turned the formerly beautiful nation of Lebanon into an inferno. But the second half of the film faltered, as the thrust shifted to a straightforward hostage rescue drama. Still, the scripting of "Beirut" included snappy dialogue that moved along at a fast pace, and the cinematography and location shooting gave a flavor of the heat, the grime, and the ever-present prospect of terror. There was a cynicism in the film, suggesting that American diplomats and intelligence officers are a slippery lot, working at cross-purposes and never failing to have someone using personal power for personal gain. The ultimate take-away from the film is that "peace in the region" of Beirut is but a pipe dream.
leo-143-555634
You want to make a whole film that takes place in a city, well first thing first: move your ass to that city otherwise just call it Tangier. Might also work!
Next time try to make a film called New York that filmed in Singapore!
AD
