zkonedog While watching this film for the second time about a week or so ago, the first thought that came to my mind was "Wow, this is exactly the kind of political/dramatic intrigue that the TV series '24' tries to accomplish each and every episode". A weaving of action, political subject matter, and gut-wrenching emotional moments puts "The Siege" up towards the top of my list (just below "A Few Good Men") of politically-based thrillers.The basic plot of the film centers on a terrorist cell that launches a series of attacks based in New York City. Denzel Washington plays a government agent given the task of coordinating the effort to subdue the terrorism, while Bruce Willis is the military general brought onto the scene when the situation begins spiraling out of control. It is rather remarkable that this film was actually made BEFORE 9/11, as it deals with some of the exact same subject matter, including the reaction to terrorism, internment camps (this time for Muslim-Americans), and the ideological clash between the Eastern and Western world.Acting-wise, Washington is at his brooding, intense best throughout the entire movie, culminating with his "bend the law, shred the constitution" speech when dealing with the issue of torture. Willis' military character is actually sorely underutilized, yet provides the perfect antithesis (but not antagonist) to Washington. Annette Bening is the other primary lead character, and she also gives a competent (if not over-the-top at times) performance.About the only reason I give this film four stars instead of five is because, although it is compelling, it falls well short of the mark now set by "24" which provides just as much political drama/action in a arc of episodes as this movie does in its entire runtime (although that is more of an affirmation of 24's genius than this film's shortcomings). If you are a fan of political films that will really make you think, you will heartily enjoy the entire experience. Plus, it could be your stepping-stone to an entirely new saga of political drama..."24".

Richard Dominguez An Excellent Movie ... NYC Is Under Attack By Terrorist Enemy ... How Far Can You Go And Still Be The Good Guy ... I Am Reminded Of Benjamin Franklin Who Said "Those Who Would Give Up Liberty For Security Deserve Neither" ... Denzel Washington As The FBI Agent Trying To Stop The Enemy Without Becoming The Enemy ... Bruce Willis The General Who Promises To Stop The Enemy No Matter The Cost ... Annette Bening The CIA Trying Desperately To Stop An Enemy That They Helped Create ... More Action Than You Can Shake A Stick At ... This Is A Scary Scary Movie About What May Happen When You Are Willing To Do Anything To Get The Job Done .... My IMDb Rating 9 Out Of 10

inspectors71 What in the wide world of sports is wrong with Hollywood? Can they not wreck a great concept, a thoughtful theme, a movie for grownups?Ah, I know the answer already.I'm really enjoying Edward Zwick's The Siege, a pre-9/11 examination of what Bruce Willis' character calls "the corrosive nature of martial law." Terrorist acts are beginning to rip at the fabric of American life, and the temptation to lock down the Muslim population in Brooklyn simply becomes unbearable. Denzel Washington plays, well, Denzel Washington, Annette Bening looks great in one casually stylish outfit after another, Tony Shaloub makes a flesh-and-blood sidekick, and Bruce Willis is the US Army general officer, with the President's ear, who warns and warns against using a "broad sword, not a scalpel" in rooting out terror cells in New York. All the characters, goodies or baddies, whether clichéd or not, are interesting, but it's Willis who adds the spice to the stew by being cold, dangerous, and right in imploring an executive council to not use martial law as a way of restoring order.And, of course, Hollywood has to lift up the movie's tail and screw the pooch.So that we can have a deep discussion about civil liberties and whether or not, as Lincoln put it, "the Constitution should not be considered a 'suicide pact'," we have three quarters of an above- average action movie. Then, instead of portraying Willis' character as a man who follows orders he finds legal but repugnant, General Devereaux becomes General Jack D. Ripper, torturing and shooting and self-righteously enjoying every minute of it!Kee-ripe's sake, why ruin the most important person in the movie? Why make it a clichéd the-army-is-eevil skreed? Of course, if you don't care, and you just want to see a pretty good movie (with a piddle-poor resolution), have at it! For me, I want to start waterboarding some screenwriters.

Wuchak Released in 1998, "The Siege" chronicles events as New York City becomes the target of escalating terrorist attacks after the abduction of an Islamic leader by the US military. The head of the FBI's Counter-Terrorism Task Force (Denzel Washington) teams up with a CIA operative (Annette Benning) to hunt down the terrorist cells responsible for the attacks. Ultimately, the US government declares martial law and sends in the troops, led by General Devereaux (Bruce Willis). Tony Shalhoub plays the FBI agent's Arab-American partner while Sami Bouajila plays a seemingly suspicious Arab-American.While clueless PC morons have criticized this movie as "racist propaganda" it dared to show the awful truth in the late 90s and was nigh prophetic in light of 9/11 occurring less than three years later. There are numerous noble Arab-Americans, and the movie emphasizes this, but – let's be honest – there are also Islamic whack-jobs in our midst who enjoy blowing themselves up with as many innocents as possible so they can go home to Allah and 72 virgins (or whatever).I like the fact that General Devereaux (Willis) isn't a black or white character and viewers can have completely different views about whether or not he's actually a villain. The movie shows that he's a professional soldier who warns the governmental leaders exactly what would happen under martial Law, a suspension of all civilian rights guaranteed under the constitution, clearly cautioning them that they might not like the form of medicine martial law dishes out. But it's a desperate situation and they give him the go-ahead, so he offers up exactly what he said he would give. He has his methods to protect his country and performs them with conviction. The terrorists were killing masses of innocents and he's commissioned to stop it, which is what he does, PC or not. Does this make him evil? These are questions the movie provokes and you'll have to answer them for yourself.This is a quality movie that frankly addresses relevant topics and tries to be fair and balanced, but it sorta shoots itself in the foot at the end. Read the spoiler commentary below for details.The film runs 116 minutes and was shot in New York City with a couple scenes in California.GRADE: B- ***SPOILER ALERT*** DON'T READ FURTHER IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE FILM One of the main points of the movie is that it's wrong to mistreat Muslim-Americans by profiling them, rounding them up and subjecting them to investigation outside normal procedures because it's equivalent to the internment of Japanese Americans during WW2. There are two problems with this: (1.) It isn't the same issue. Interning the Japanese was wrong because the government was rounding them up based on their ETHNIC HERITAGE. The Feds would've interned German-Americans if they used the same logic. The issue with Muslim terrorism isn't ethnicity, but rather religion. Statistically, most terrorists against the US are Muslims of Middle Eastern descent. Therefore "profiling" them is simply acting in accord with statistics. That's just cold hard logic, not racism. By contrast, interning Japanese-Americans during WW2 wasn't logical.(2.) More importantly, the movie undermines itself by having Samir turn out to be a radical suicide bomber. This revelation demonstrates that peaceful Muslims can't be trusted, just as the Army and their supporters believed (in the movie). There's no reason to assume that any of the rank-and-file Muslims depicted couldn't have turned out to be terrorists just like Samir. This being the case, the army was right to intern and interrogate them. As you can see, the movie takes a noble position and then inexplicably contradicts it.