Body Of Lies Case Study

I am doing a case study on the action/thriller film ‘Body of Lies’.

The film was directed by Ridley Scott and produced by Warner Bros Pictures.

The shooting of the film took place over sixty-five days from the 5^th of September to December 2007. It was filmed in the United States and Morocco, where scenes set in 10 different countries were filmed.

The film was released on the 21stof November 2008 and in its opening weekend earned 12.9 million dollars. It was ranked the third highest film that weekend and grossed 40% less than expected. Through-out its fourteen week theatrical run, the film earned $39 million.

I believe that the target audience for this film is mainly males of an adult age group. I say this because the cast is highly dominated by male characters; even the film cover and promotional posters only consist of males.

I think that we can tell that the film is targeted at adults due to the use of guns (which we can see on the film cover) and other forms of violence, torture and offensive language.

We know from the 15 age label on the film cover that it was made for people at and above this age group in mind.

Also, terrorism and political themes of the film will appeal to an older age group who will be able to understand these terms.

From looking at the IMBd database, I found that this film had positive views from a large number of people, and was overall rated 7.1 stars out of 10.

Here is an example of one of the positive reviews from the site:

“A cut above most of its kind” by ametaphysicalshark 10 October 2008

202 out of 258 people found the following review useful:

The main thing I was curious about with "Body of Lies" is what sort of film it would end up being. It could have been a post-Bourne action thriller, a serious dramatic thriller with a political edge ("Munich", "Syriana"), one of those intolerably dull post-9/11 films ("Lions for Lambs"), or something like Ridley Scott's brother Tony's "Spy Game", a movie with an interesting premise and disappointing execution.

I would argue that "Body of Lies" is the exact opposite on paper of "Spy Game". It's a movie with a questionable, sketchy premise and damn good execution. I'd always definitely preferred Ridley's sensibilities and films to Tony's, and his take on a story about a CIA agent working against agency politics is definitely superior as well, although a very, very large amount of my preference for "Body of Lies" comes from the script by "The Departed" scribe William Monahan. "Body of Lies" bizarrely manages to work as both a hugely entertaining, nifty action thriller and as a socially/politically-conscious drama. I can't believe I'm about to say this, but it really does go from "Syriana" to "The Bourne Identity" in a second, and does so without feeling ridiculous, contrived, or silly. It just somehow pulls it off, and I'm crediting Monahan with most of this success although Scott certainly handles the shifts in tone extremely well.

All you should know about the story going in is that DiCaprio plays Roger Ferris, a CIA field agent in an important position in the Middle East division, just below the leader of the division Ed Hoffman (played by Russell Crowe), a snarky, racist, and mostly unlikeable man who leads the missions remotely through his laptop and cell phone. Ferris uncovers a lead on a major terrorist leader potentially operating out of Jordan, and chooses to act on it, involving Jordanian intelligence leader Hani Salam, played brilliantly by Mark Strong. His performance is just the right side of slightly hammy, and works wonderfully well. There are twists and turns and it's a lot of fun.

Now here's where I'm going to start sounding really bizarre: I know I just said it was a lot of fun, but there's a good amount of substance here and a good deal to be learned about middle-eastern politics (having lived there for many years, I can assure you that this film works as a primer on the mindset and cultural feel of the locations it is set in, and of the political system there. Its observations on Jordanian intelligence in particular are very much spot-on. There are scenes where the film gets really dark and serious, and they completely work as well. In particular, for a white American screenwriter's work, this is incredibly perceptive and understanding of how Jordanians act and feel. Something like "Rendition" from last year, while generally just not a good film, was also hopelessly inaccurate on just about everything. There was no work there, just a message the filmmaker wanted to send. With "Body of Lies", every second feels (and is) authentic and real (outside, perhaps, of some of the details of the espionage aspects, although the writer of the book it was based on was CIA), and there's even some cultural jokes completely in Arabic, un-translated on screen, that basically no non-Arabs will understand. It's a remarkably vivid, real portrait, and considering Hollywood's past of portraying Arabs generally in a 'dem Arabs, we America' way, which completely ignored the basic dress and attitude of real Arabs, something like this is refreshing.

The movie isn't perfect, and there's a key scene at the end which feels very didactic and heavy-handed (although judging by the twenty somethings who left the theater talking about how cool one of the torture scenes was, even a message delivered this bluntly just isn't getting into their thick skulls), but it somehow gets away with being an enjoyable genre piece and a genuinely thought-provoking and perceptive film (but not one which focuses on these elements to the point of being overbearing), with actual understanding of mid-eastern politics and culture, wonderfully involving characters (including the refreshingly non-sexual love interest Aisha, played by Iranian actress Golshifteh Farahani), and even a surprising sense of humor. "Body of Lies" is most definitely a cut above most in its (overall quite poor) sub-genre, and one of the biggest surprises of the year.


As you can see, this is an honest review with some negatives, but many positives and gives a good review on the film, like many others that I have read. The mass of positive feedback shows that many people believed this to be a good film.


New technology such as the official Body of Lies website: http://bodyoflies.warnerbros.com/index.html has meant that people can find out about the film much easier than they will have been able to in the past.
The Body of Lies official website as well as other sites such as Wikipedia and IMBd have also been useful for me when finding out information relevant to my case study. These sites will make it easier for those who have not watched the film in its theatrical run to look it up and make a decision on whether or not to purchase or rent the film on DVD, based on finding out the basis of the plot, themes that it may involve and how people have reviewed the film.

The film begins with a black-out picture and quiet non-digetic music playing. There is then a deep bass as ‘Manchester, England’ appears on screen, making this place seem quite a daunting/scary and unsafe place to live.

We know that a UK-based al-Qaida operative planned a bomb attack on Manchester city centre as part of a terrorist plot targeting the UK in 2009. We next see this paragraph appear:

I and the public know,
What all schoolchildren learn,

Those to whom evil is done,

Do evil in return.

W.H. Auden

This paragraph suggests that these people have made these attacks in retaliation of the evil that has been done to them. We also know that the Americans declared war on the Muslim world after 9/11 and it was Muslims that were involved in the terrorist attacks around the UK.

The screen is still black and we can hear a foreign voice, which we are focused on as it is all that we are currently given to think about. The fact that we cannot yet see him makes him seem a very mysterious character.

When the black-out fades and we do get view of this man, there is little light on him, so this mystery is still kept.

He is traditionally dressed in Muslim clothing. The patterned wallpaper behind him and the music which we later hear playing also seems of a Middle East origin. This instantly tells us about these people’s religious views and where they are from. These things also tell us that our prediction of the films theme on terrorism is correct and is based on these attacks.

The man that we can see is in very dark lighting so that we can only see very limited parts of the face, not even the main aspects. The lack of light shows that this character has a very dark agenda and personality. If light represents god and symbolises good, then this character is not being favoured.

There is aggression in his voice and he is waving his finger in an aggressive manner. His closed-in eyes also seem evil and aggressive; he is not a nice character.

Since we have already presumed that this film is based on terrorist attacks, we can relate to videos/recordings that have been made previously in these situations to threaten countries, and we understand that this man is recording himself for that purpose, which he will then broadcast to the internet or send to countries such as Britain and the USA. Usually, it is a threat of attacks which will be carried out if the country disagrees to give or do what is asked of them, or as in this case, it may be a warning to cause fear. We can tell this is more likely to be the case from what the man says throughout the recording:

‘As we destroyed the bus in Sheffield last week, we will be ready and prepared for the operation in Britain. We will avenge the American wars on the Muslim world. We will come at them, everywhere. We will strike at random, across Europe and then America, continually. We have bled. And now… they will bleed.’

This shows that there is no way to stop these terrorist attacks from happening, there is nothing that these people want as a result apart from revenge, heightening our interest and fear in what will happen.

The camera goes from a close-up shot that was focusing us on the face of this man, to a more zoomed out perspective, enabling us to see more of his surroundings. We can see a large gun propped up against the wall on one side of him and a belt of large machine gun bullets the other side. He is surrounded by dangerous weapons which make him seem powerful and dangerous and shows us that these people have the ammo to do serious damage.

We can also see as the camera zooms out that the place looks very run-down and dirty which may suggest that these people are not worried about their living conditions, or what they have to go through, their only focus is on planning their revenge. I think that it also makes these people look more like animals than human beings, this is not how we would look after our homes in our society, their way seems odd to us and is a factor towards us disliking them.

A low angle camera shot is used as we enter the terrorists’ apartment. This shot gives the effect that we are prying into someone’s life, getting a view that we would not typically be able to see.

The room that we then enter contains lab equipment which we presume is for bomb making to follow out their threat.

The character using the equipment is wearing glasses which we associate with someone who is clever and will make the right decisions. However bomb making does not seem to be the right decision, which gives us even less faith in these people. They have the TV on which is broadcasting the video we saw being made in the first shot.

We also at this point can hear the barking of dogs, which seems quite unusual, and we later realise that there are guard dogs outside.

We then see another character holding the religious book the Qu-ran close to him, which would signify he is trying to be close to god and follow the book’s teachings well. However he is looking away from the book into a dark area, which symbolises that he is not following the teaching of the book well, he is taking a much darker approach. He may also be looking away from the book because the dark path that he has now chosen has changed his views and beliefs to not follow the Qu-ran any more.

Here the camera shots change from the effect of shaky, home-made footage which suggests that these people are unstable and unprepared, to much more still and focused professional footage of the police and Special Forces, where the controlled movement suggests that these are the people who are much more organised and in control.

These more controlled camera shots are short and snappy, showing us the police force that have closed off an area of the street and appear to be getting ready to raid the building. The quick cuts between each shot helps to create pace and build up tension for the audience.

The Special Forces are all in black, which again if we are referring to light and doing good in the eyes of god then these people do not seem favoured. Although, they need to wear dark clothing to remain in the shadows and hopefully be able to creep up on the terrorists. The lack of emotion that we see from them makes them seem like one-minded killers who are generalising these people, and this makes them look like the bad guys. However, these terrorists do have a total disregard for human life and don’t care who they hurt, man, woman or child and need to be stopped. Also the fact that we have seen into the home of the terrorists and their agenda but do not know the background of the people working in the Special Forces makes us feel we have less understanding towards these killers. They are using a harsh method of dealing with these people, and seem to have more weapons than the terrorists who are supposed to be the bad guys! It gives the sense that although we may be more well off than these people, have more money to buy more weapons, we do not necessarily think and deal with these situations correctly. We see that this operation has failed; the Special Forces are heard and the apartment is blown up. Ed played by Russell Crowe disrupts another mission because of his impatience later on in the film.

The digetic noises that we can hear outside, such as guard dogs barking suggests that this is a very serious case that is potentially extremely dangerous. We can also hear the train and other general city sounds to remind us of our location and keep things realistic. After watching this opening a few times, I realised that the Special Forces use the passing train to move into position without being heard. At this same time, there is a milkman who is let through the closed off area. My initial thoughts were that the milkman was part of the group of terrorists inside the apartment and he was giving them a signal when dropping off the milk, but I then realised that he is there to help out the Special Forces. He is let through when the train goes past, as the Special Forces advance, and helps to add to their cover. He delivers the milk to make things seem as normal as possible to the terrorists inside, so that they are relaxed and do not expect anything out of the ordinary. The fact he is whistling ‘Rule Britannia’ could show his hope that Britain are going to win in this situation, he believes in them.

The Special Forces carefully break the lock on the door and enter the building very quietly but unfortunately, the people inside hear and make sure that another member – the one lying on the bed has heard. The man on the bed puts down the Qu-ran which may suggest that he has stopped following its teachings now altogether, and is using a much darker form of action that would not be approved.

They speak in their language, un-translated for us and we don’t know what is being said or going to happen, the intensity of the situation heightens.

The man with glasses says something that we do not understand, but by the way it is said it seems like a prayer or hope that he is doing the right thing, we then see him press a button on his phone.

There is an explosion which we first see from the point of view inside the building, and we are shown members of the Special Forces in this explosion, showing us that they have been killed. We are then shown outside the building. The shots used to show this are very shaky which disorientates us as to what is happening as we cannot clearly see and shows us just how massive this explosion is and the effect it is having on its environment. When shown the explosion from the top of the building, this shows us the shire size of it and the effect it has had on the surrounding area.

The noise of the explosion fades, as does the lighting to blackout. Muslim music begins to play. The music is quite solemn, probably to show the devastation of the situation, but also to show that the Muslims have won.

The title of the film is then shown. It flashes up in a way that seems technological and there are flashes of what seems like a tracking device of a certain location which suggests further tracking of these people. The flashing of the title shows the uncertainty and disorientation of everything in the film. This technological interference is present in many other thriller themes, such as when the radio looses signal in the opening of “Vacancy” and when the TV signal cuts out at the end of the opening of “Final Destination 2”.

Before the title disappears, it flashes from white to the colour red. Red is often used to symbolise blood and death, especially in thrillers and may have been used to suggest the blood shed that will happen.

In this opening, we are shown the Muslims as a minority ethnic group, who have a different cultural background, and different views and beliefs than the rest of the population that are shown.

I think that the fact that a Sikh plays the milkman is important to get across the idea that not all people of foreign religions act in these negative ways. This is important to show because the Muslims seem generalised in this opening as bad people; all of the Muslims shown are terrorists and this is clearly not the case in society.

Because of past bombings and terrorist attacks carried out by Muslims, many people may stereo-typically judge them in the way that this film does. But I think that having a Sikh milkman, although he is not of the same religion helps to lower this stereo-typicalisation in the opening. Of course, they couldn’t have used a milkman of the same religion in the opening to deliver the milk and play as a ‘good Muslim’, as the audience may have miss-interpreted it incorrectly and thought that he was related to the Muslims inside the apartment and working for them, possibly delivering the milk as a sign.

I think that the fact the Sikh is not of an English background, but is trusted to help out the Special Forces shows that we do not generalise against people from a foreign background, and would not do so to the Muslims, it is only because they are making these terrorist attacks.

I feel that the Sikh also shows the working class of many people who come to Britain from a foreign background. Britain is a very highly economically developed country, and one that people from lower economically developed countries would generally wish to live in. However many of these people (such as the Sikh) end up with low paying jobs – which again could be classed as generalisation or discrimination. Although it is probably due to their lack of facilities such as teaching in their countries that mean they are not qualified for higher paid jobs.

The fact that women are not shown in this clip brings up the stereo-typical thought that has been around for many decades - and although has begun to improve, has not been completely resolved, and it is still thought in some cases that men are superior to women.

This scene is very violent, and circumstantially turns out to be very dangerous. It may be suggesting that women should not be in these harsher situations, either because they are ‘weak’ or because they should be ‘protected’. Men are seen as more powerful, strong and superior beings that should be the ones to carry out this dangerous work - either because they do not think that women are capable enough to handle it, or in a more positive light, that they should not have to deal with these dangerous situations and should be protected from them (men being the ones to do so).

Even though this opening is very short, it can be viewed with reference to the Micro, Macro theory. The principal use of male characters in this clip on a small scale can be used to show the much bigger fact of gender discrimination.