The Kingdom

I don’t share the artificially formed cult around Peter Berg in this part of the world (Czech Republic). I consider him to be a reliable routineer who understands technical aspects and is good at pumping a movie full of pace, but he isn’t so good at drawing you into the story. Although the producer’s name draws the attention. Judge for yourself - Michael Mann. Sounds promising, huh? The Kingdom isn’t an action movie and isn’t at all a “hamburger movie", or at least as little as a potential blockbuster can be. It says neither one thing or the other. You find yourself believing that this is more or less what things would turn out in reality if an FBI team were really to assist in investigations in an Arabian country. Luckily it didn’t descend into a big-budget episode of CSI with naive natives and unerring, great Americans. Everything from political tricks through division of power to differences in cultures is addressed pretty realistically here. Even so, The Kingdom has one fundamental problem. But it isn’t the actors, who are outstanding and especially the Arabs headed by Ashraf Barhom in the role of Col. Faris Al Ghazi. The problem is the forcibly and completely unnecessarily grafted-on closing action sequence. Don’t get me wrong, it was excellent, raw and gripping... But only on its own. It seems like fifteen minutes of the highlights of Black Hawk Down, but it absolutely destroys the message of the entire movie and fits in like... Like nothing on earth. Which is a shame, because it’s good, it just should have appeared in a movie of a totally different kind. At least the last two sentences of The Kingdom saves the originally intended impression and pleasantly aptly remark upon the preceding events. (10/12/2007)

The Kingdom is a precisely constructed and directed thriller with a generic plot that very much conforms to the American geopolitical agenda of the time, but also attempts to disguise its propagandistic dimension by building kitsch-laden sympathies for some of the characters of other nationalities. In the end, it even allows itself to poke at the supposed moral superiority and unambiguous firm resolve. But, of course, it remains solely at the level of an easily digestible mainstream flick that resolutely does not go against the grain. However, the effectively built team of main characters, each with their own role in the narrative, and especially the action are definitely worthy of praise. Though viewers will have to wait until the end for that, it is the natural culmination of the preceding events and the depicted characters, and above all it is realised with an outstanding symbiosis of dramatic construction, spatial topography, nervous camerawork and quick editing, as well as astonishing physical dynamics. (01/12/2021)

The Kingdom is a technically solid and, with the exception of the bittersweet ending, rather intelligent thriller. Dealing with the pressing issue of terrorism is as important for the film as the spectacular yet realistically portrayed action. In the end, however, it is clear that Peter Berg is more at ease with the action. It’s also a pity that the movie ends at the moment when it finally gets going. This leaves the audience entertained but not satisfied. In time, The Kingdom will become outdated like, for example, Rules of Engagement. (10/04/2007)

A very strong four stars. Berg really knows his stuff. It begins with an ingenious collage of archive images of U.S - Arab relations combined with computer graphics. I'd even venture to guess that these are this year's most impressive opening titles. The approach to the subject is matter-of-fact, with no embellishments and unnecessary frills. The acting performances are all high caliber. I was very surprised by Jennifer Garner, the surprisingly "ordinary" Jason Bateman, and I have to take my hat off to the performance of the almost unknown Ashraf Barhom. The final action inferno ranks among this year's best, and I will stress once again that I don't mind shaky camera. So, my last words about the Kingdom? I'll just say this: In the end, we're all the same. (12/14/2007)

I pray that this is not a new filmmaking trend and a question comes to mind: Is everyone really going to unsuccessfully play second-rate Paul Greengrass from now on? The words of an overseas film critic who wrote that Berg invited a "permanently dancing monkey" to operate the camera sound true. Even in static shots, the chaotic shuffling of the camera from side to side, up and down, which, sitting about 10 m in front of the big screen, led to sore eyes and, after half an hour, I had the feeling I had overdosed on Kinedryl. Greengrass owns this filmmaking style, he's mastered it perfectly and gave Bourne an interesting flair. But in your case, Peter Berg, was it really necessary? Because otherwise the actors, led by the charismatic Foxx, were superb, the Saudi realism fantastic and the final action breathtaking in places. If Berg became convinced that his pseudo-documentary approach with a camera unleashed could draw the viewer more into the plot, in my case it completely missed the mark. The last two sentences of the film are great, a simple and yet so apt description of the never ending struggle between the Western world and the Islamic one! By the way, for the first time in my life I had the experience of being in the cinema completely alone! (10/28/2007)