One has to have been living in a cave not to have noticed the recent increase in domestic terrorism on American soil. Once a problem of "distant lands" and something viewed by most with passing interest on the evening news, such recent attacks have shown that the U.S. isn't impervious to such hostilities. Accordingly, the average citizen is now readily aware of the nation's, as well as his or her own individual vulnerability.
Not surprisingly, Hollywood didn't take long to tap into his acknowledged fear with the high profile release of "The Siege." Although terrorists have long been a staple of cinematic villainousness (such as in the "Die Hard" films, "Air Force One," and many, many others), they've rarely elicited the big "what if" scenario that this film proposes.
And that pertains to the notion of things getting so bad that the military is finally called in to "solve" the problem. It's an interesting premise, and for the most part this film from Edward Zwick -- the director of "Glory" -- does it justice.
Part cautionary tale, part morality play, the film has its share of big action moments, but turns out to be more of a political thriller in the vein of "Patriot Games" (although not as good) than an action yarn along the lines of "Red Dawn" (where the Russian military enacted martial law on American soil).
As such, it involves the obligatory U.S. government involvement in foreign affairs -- which, to no one's surprise, comes back around and bites Uncle Sam on the posterior, so to speak -- but it also contains something of a haphazard and occasionally perplexing first act.
Whether Zwick does this on purpose to elicit a wary and apprehensive reaction from his viewers is debatable, but it certainly gives the film something of a "sloppy" feel and prevents it from fully engaging the moviegoer as it should.
Part of that also lies with the fact that the "villain" is more of an anonymous group than a personified individual. Although that gives the film more of a realistic feel (since most terrorists aren't known until they're caught or killed), it somewhat hurts the film.
While such anonymity does add tension due to that "unknown" factor, drama usually works best when the protagonist faces an equally strong and identifiable antagonist, and this film lacks in providing ample amounts of that.
Although Zwick was able to pull that off in "Glory" (where the enemy was the Confederate Army but the conflict emanated from characters working on the same "team"), such tactics are less successful here. Despite the star-powered cast, their solid and generally good performances, and the decent premise, the film never quite manages to fire on all cylinders. Whereas it's easy to identify the conflict between the FBI agent, the CIA operative and the military general, there's something lacking regarding such matters.
That's not to say that the performances are bad or unbelievable. Denzel Washington ("He Got Game," "Fallen") is as good as ever and delivers a solid take on his character -- eliciting a believable intensity the audience completely and easily buys into.
Bruce Willis ("Armageddon," the "Die Hard" films), while not playing a character that's much removed from most he's played in the past, is good in the role and delivers what's expected from him. Annette Bening's ("The American President," "Bugsy") performance, on the other hand, often comes across as enigmatic as the character she portrays. While she's most likely playing the character properly, the end result is that the role doesn't come off as well-defined. Supporting performances, including that from Tony Shalhoub ("Big Night," TV's "Wings"), are also decent.
Nonetheless, the film never manages to get out of second gear. Although it's easy enough to watch, it never quite takes off and certainly doesn't reach the level nor intensity of Zwick's earlier efforts, "Glory" and "Courage Under Fire."
Somewhat emitting the feel of a well-conceived and executed, but truncated TV mini-series, the film just lacks that certain cinematic oomph needed to stand out on the big screen. While clearly not a bad film by any means, it's overall blandness undermines the compelling story it's trying to tell.
Regarding the supplemental material -- a lone theatrical trailer -- there's very little present to satisfy the film's fans or those more curious about its production, stars and crew.
![[Logo]](/images/screenit_logo2.jpg){kind=logo}
