sharky_55 It is called Three Kings, because presumably, that is how these soldiers view themselves, strutting in their gear, towering over the common foreigners and by waving a piece of paper, able to stroll in any camp or village and take what they please. One is a party animal. Another is shameless womaniser. They all stink of the same material greed and unethical practice that dries them towards the stash of bullion gold that will make them rich if they can just sneak by unawares and avoid a court marshalling. But by the end of the film they have been struck by their innate goodness, heart and compassion and therefore give up (most of) the gold so that their refugee friends may cross the border.Is this change gradual? Not exactly. Grit is not so easy to pull off, especially in a such a politically precarious situation like the American military presence in the middle east, so Russell has gone in the completely opposite direction. The entire film has been cross-processed to produce those hyper-saturated, eye-popping colours that give the war zone a comic dreamland feel. Great billowing oil fires become little chimneys puffing up cartoon pillars of smoke. The sky takes on a garish, bubble-gum shade of blue. The never ending plains are not a desolate, parched wasteland, but rather a brightly lit playground. This might have worked if Russell had gone all the way with it and embraced his zany, ultra-stylised approach with a satirical relish. But for every kinetic, high-flying action sequence with whip pan and smash cut galore there is another that uses the same intense style but without a hint of irony. Russell can't expect the audience to laugh along when a truck is flipped on its side and skids to a grinding halt just centimetres from a mine, and then suddenly appreciate the gravitas to the silenced, slow-motion shootouts and the cold-blooded execution of a mother. Another example - Barlow is captured by the Iraqi army and tortured viciously. They are not necessarily bad people, but they are angry at this war and how the Americans have made promises they have not kept and left their country in disarray. The interrogator simply talks - he asks Barlow how he can answer for the mass bombings and how they have taken away his wife and child. He appeals to their shared fatherhood. Barlow has no answers to these difficult questions, of course - the segment is deliberately posed to force the same reflection in the audience, and although it's a little on the nose, it works. But this is coupled with the most ridiculous spiel about Michael Jackson and a American racial conspiracy about the colour of his skin that is so obviously designed to make us laugh, and on a second level, take the interrogator less seriously. The entire film Russell is leaning on these moments, hiding behind the comic absurdity that he creates himself and hoping no one will notice that he has posed the hard questions, but given nothing in response but the simple morality behind that saccharine, Hollywood ending.

Screen_Blitz The Persian Gulf War is the one of the least touched topics Hollywood has brought to the war genre, the war intended to bring down the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein who was running domination over Kuwait. So there aren't a whole lot of films out there centering on the Gulf War, with 'Courage Under Fire' and Jarhead' to name a few. David O. Russell, however, dives deep into height of the Gulf War with this dark comedy set in 1991 during the aftermath. With the war reaching a stopping point, four soldiers: Major Archie Gates (played by George Clooney), Troy Barlow (played by Mark Wahlberg), Chief Elgin (played by Ice Cube), and Conrad Vig (played by Spike Jonze), are delusioned by the lack of action they face during active duty and are on their ways of retirement. This is until one day where they capture an Iraqi prisoner who has a secret map hidden where the sun don't shine. These four soldiers discover the map leads to a hidden gold stolen from Kuwait. They embark on a quest in search of the stolen gold inside the bunker of a base camp filled with Iraqi refugees, but witness a violent uprising by rebels sent by Saddam Hussein. The foursome must make a desperate decision to run off with the gold or save the refugees from the atrocity. This picture isn't your average, everyday war flick that shines the spotlight on the horrors of war and how its dehumanizing effects on soldiers, although there is plenty of combat and death. This film takes a lighthearted turn on portraying the Persian Gulf War, while conveying many liberties. What director David O. Russell makes of this war film is a dark comedy sprinkled with violence, surprising humor, and plenty of liberal political commentary. The plot sets in on the main characters' departure to the base camp where they quickly witness the sadistic rebellion of Iraqis associated with the cruel dictator who has Kuwait under his domination. Mothers, fathers, and children are seen suffering starvation, torture, and vicious beating that become eye sores to the main characters who develop the heart to push their mission aside and save help these poor victims from the atrocious acts. And these scenes lead to some thought-demanding political discussions, including a suggestion that the Iraqis were told by our government to rebel against Saddam Hussein. So the characters express anger against George H. Bush who was the president at the time of the setting that some viewers, particularly Bush fans could take offense to, but at the same time, it generates a bold and powerful political undertone with plenty of surprisingly funny dialogue thrown around as well as some intense, bloody gun fights between the characters and the rebels.The cinematography functions as a great aspect of the film. With the Casa Grande desert in Arizona serving as the backdrop for the Iraqi desert, the film features a oddly saturated picture with high contrast in the bright colors and dark colors to give the the film a look of a film reel lost in the desert. The camera-work really fits the themes of the plot and an inspiring aspect. The cast however, really steals the show here. George Clooney, Mark Wahlberg, Ice Cube, and Spike Jonze give off some spectacular performances. Spike Jonze delights his presence with plenty of comic relief and probably delivers the most comedic lines out of the whole cast. These four actors are very convicted in their roles and demonstrate some great chemistry together. Nora Dunn who plays a journalist who is also an eye-catcher here and perhaps slightly underused. Three Kings is both a bold and spectacular experience sparkled with sheer violence and shocking humor along with a intensely talented cast who knocks the ball out of the park. This is honestly one of the most underrated films by a very talented director, and definitely doesn't quite get the attention it deserves. If you come across this film, this one may be a good pick.

jimbo-53-186511 At the end of the Gulf War, 4 soldiers acquire a map from the most unlikely of places and discover that this map may contain the whereabouts of some hidden gold close to one of their bases. The 4 men set out on a journey to find the gold, but this is less than straight forward and the 4 men encounter both danger and some unexpected assistance along the way.I haven't read John Ridley's novel (upon which this film is based), but it seems that Russell's has given Three Kings a very tongue-in-cheek feel - this is perfectly fine with me as I'll always prefer a serious film that's laced with humour as opposed to one that is deadly serious throughout its running time. The humorous tone that Russell adopts through most of the film serves it well and the camaraderie is top-notch between the likes of Clooney, Wahlberg and Ice Cube. Although I like serious films with humour thrown in I do think that filmmakers should be careful about how much humour is injected into a film - using war as a backdrop gives the film serious undertones and these undertones shouldn't be forgotten. I personally felt Russell may have overdone things slightly here, but I definitely felt it was a case of more being right than wrong. The soldier's camaraderie is a major strength and it's therefore a shame that Russell makes very little attempt to develop their characters - there is a little insight into Wahlberg's characters life, but nothing is afforded to any of the other characters. Had their characters been developed a little more then it probably would have made it easier to invest in them as people.Despite the picture having a generally humorous tone, Russell still manages to deliver the goods when it's time to get serious. The film has a very realistic feel to it which is probably helped by the fact that some real-life refugees were used in the film's production. I also noted that Mark Wahlberg was actually electrocuted in the scene where he is being tortured - you can't ask for much more realism than that!!! This is perhaps the reason that the film feels so realistic and despite seeming silly at times Russell also remembers to give it a sense of realism as well.Although war and politics play a part in Three Kings it is a film that is more about human values and common decency and whilst it does have some minor weaknesses its many strengths more than outweigh these weaknesses.

lewisfclark Confusing evolution of a relatively simple plot line. Lots of gratuitous violence and strong language. While there were plenty of Saddam's treasures hidden around the country and some GIs may have been tempted by their recovery, the story is essentially far-fetched and grim. A liberal political message, albeit uneven, runs through the dialogue and can be summed up as pretty naïve. Having spent several weeks in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and along the Iraqi border (in the oil fields) on business days after the conflict ceased in Spring 1991, I found the film basically unpleasant and of minimal entertainment value. Given the intensity of the action, it was hard to judge the individual performances by the key players. I would not wish to see this film again.