Universal Pictures | Release Date: March 12, 2010
6.5
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 222 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
128
Mixed:
64
Negative:
30
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
3
MarkMMar 20, 2010
I really wanted to like this film. I'm as liberal as anyone but this was way over the top in my opinion. "Wish fulfillment" is the best diagnosis of what went wrong here--with crappy dialog and overly simplistic, one-dimensional I really wanted to like this film. I'm as liberal as anyone but this was way over the top in my opinion. "Wish fulfillment" is the best diagnosis of what went wrong here--with crappy dialog and overly simplistic, one-dimensional characters (poor Greg Kinnear) it felt like a 12-year-old writing a historical-fiction war story for a creative writing assignment. Normally like Ebert, but he was way, way too kind to this film. Entirely forgettable film meant to cheaply evoke frustration over a national tragedy for commercial gain. Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful
0
JoshWMar 14, 2010
This movie is driven purely by politics, complete revisionism covered up with cosmetic truths about the beginning of the war. Again Hollywood insults us with the belief that we care about their political opinions.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
GregFMar 13, 2010
It's not surprising that Damon would agree to star in a movie that is just another slice of 'progressive' pie.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
2
JasonBMar 13, 2010
Anti-republican propaganda at it's best.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
3
IsaacV.Jun 22, 2010
Just didn't really enjoy it. not deep enough and the action is pretty sensless. Very little good things to say about this film.
2 of 3 users found this helpful
0
JamesF.Mar 12, 2010
Silly hyper liberal BS. Newsflash folks, we won.
1 of 2 users found this helpful
1
EddieMar 13, 2010
Complete distortions of the facts!! Hopefully this movie will bomb!
1 of 2 users found this helpful
0
MendaxJul 19, 2011
I've long believed that the more incompetent the Director, the more likely he/she will cut a film into untold billions of cuts. Loved the first Bourne movie. Nos. 2 & 3? No. And no-er. Do you really need 6 or 7 different 1 second shotsI've long believed that the more incompetent the Director, the more likely he/she will cut a film into untold billions of cuts. Loved the first Bourne movie. Nos. 2 & 3? No. And no-er. Do you really need 6 or 7 different 1 second shots showing a suitcase being put into a locker, or of someone entering a cab? Green Zone? Worthless. Irrespective of Ideology, a film should be viewable, watchable. Paul Greengrass, by this metric, is a complete hack. And this is the last movie of his I will ever see. Methinks Porn is his calling. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
0
JohnNMar 13, 2010
Worst Iraq/Afghan movie, ever! Not realistic in the least. Boring and slow. I actually walked out of the movie, because the identity of "Magellan" was to obvious....and, the scenes are just not anywhere close to authentic. Really, troops Worst Iraq/Afghan movie, ever! Not realistic in the least. Boring and slow. I actually walked out of the movie, because the identity of "Magellan" was to obvious....and, the scenes are just not anywhere close to authentic. Really, troops riding around with no doors on the vehicles? Bikinis and beer? Really?!? Not a shread of research was done to make this movie reflect the actual conditions in Iraq. Zilch. I was angry, and sleepy---so, I left. Don't waste your money. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
SPMar 21, 2010
Boring movie. Wish I hadn't gone to see it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JohnFMar 13, 2010
If you believe that Bush lied us into war and we fought it "because of WMD" in order to impose a "modern Democracy" there, you will love this film. Amazing that this crude, awful script was greenlighted, even by these Brits (Greengrass, If you believe that Bush lied us into war and we fought it "because of WMD" in order to impose a "modern Democracy" there, you will love this film. Amazing that this crude, awful script was greenlighted, even by these Brits (Greengrass, Fellner, Bevan, etc.). Loved the last shot of the oilfield, guys. And really clever having Judy Miller work for the Wall Street Journal instead of the NY Times. One cliche after another, including the handheld visuals which were a carbon copy of "Hurt Locker"'s. It was, quite simply embarrassing to watch. Collapse
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ReeceNApr 2, 2010
General same-y sort of action film. Doesn't really bring anything new to the table of movies, and its a plot that sounds like bbc movie night, with a bigger budget! I almost fell asleep multiple times and the only think that woke me up General same-y sort of action film. Doesn't really bring anything new to the table of movies, and its a plot that sounds like bbc movie night, with a bigger budget! I almost fell asleep multiple times and the only think that woke me up was when I went to the toilet, and stopped off at the candy counter on the way back. Although through this, I thought the filming and camera work, although nauseating at times, was quite good, but acting was really the same old action star stuff, not too persuasive. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JasonMar 15, 2010
The plot was very simple. The acting was aweful, and the action wasn't even that great. Add to that some nonsense about a government conspiracy that led us to war, and you get one bad movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
BobLJun 24, 2010
One of the worst movies I've ever witnessed.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
sapient254Aug 27, 2010
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Green Zone is an obvious anti-Republican movie aimed at slandering the Bush party's decisions to invade Iraq. It portrays senior Republican leaders as oil-focused fact-creating greedy war-mongers that will do anything to keep the American public believing that WMDs exist in Iraq. From the start, the movie's agenda is painfully obvious as Matt Damon's character, Roy Miller, is in charge of a special task force whose sole purpose is to seek out Iraq's WMDs. As they go from site to site, donning chemical masks and special equipment designed to retrieve them, they constantly come up short. As Miller looks through his intelligence reports, once phrase continues to pop out at him (mostly because it's written in bold red text): "A source has confirmed that chemical and biological weapons are stored..." etc.
"What's the source?" Miller asks during an intelligence briefing. "These intelligence packets have all been vetted. They're good.", says a high ranking puppet of the Bush party. "You're job's to execute them, not worry about how they're put together." As the movie progresses, we are led to believe that High ranking military officials, senior leaders of Special Intel Units at the Pentagon, and members of the Special Forces are all working together to cover up the truth about the existence of WMD's in Iraq. Do the creators of this movie believe we are all so gullible? Do they honestly think that we are to believe that our senior leaders used made-up intelligence and sacrificed countless American and Iraqi lives as a front to invade Iraq for the sole purpose of tapping into their oil reserves? Though the creators of this movie did not mention oil at all during the course of the film, they made their statement obvious during the ending credits as Damon drives off into the distance with a nice oil refinery backdrop. Again we come across Hollywood's pathetic attempts to use their seemingly countless movie-funds as a weapon against those who are unsure of their political stance, or those just too ignorant to know better. Well I for one am not won over, nor am I fooled.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
psychdoctorJan 24, 2011
In short: Trash. I went into this movie cold; not knowing the plot or movieâ
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
CharlottePApr 13, 2011
I was ill-disposed towards this film almost from the start due to a physical aversion to the jerky camera work which now seems to plague every film of a certain type: spending millions of dollars to make it look as though the action scenesI was ill-disposed towards this film almost from the start due to a physical aversion to the jerky camera work which now seems to plague every film of a certain type: spending millions of dollars to make it look as though the action scenes are filmed by a passer-by who's less than familiar with how to use their video camera (jumping up and down, unable to hold the thing still even in a static setting, zooming in and out of focus, on the wrong settings at night, and so on). All totally unnecessary, and guaranteed to induce queasiness almost immediately. Had the film been better, perhaps it wouldn't have mattered; but unfortunately this was an over-simplified, unconvincing and frequently irritating movie which raised many more questions than it answered. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews