One blog. Two opinions. One zillion films.

D.-

Such snowy nights are perfect for a trip to the movies. What a fine group you had; wish I’d been able to join you.

I may be coloring outside the lines, but because I suspect I’m not going to see this movie, I’ll relate a few observations my good friend Susan passed on about “Body of Lies.” Her take springs from a woman’s heart, a heart very sad and depressed over the world’s troubles. Wish she were here to write this.

Somebody get that girl a computer!

Susan was appalled by this film’s level of graphic violence; apparently she didn’t see any televised previews.

Oh, right…She doesn’t have TV! Luddite!

I don’t know why, but I could see the heavy duty violence comin’ a country mile off. Some movies are so violent that, if I’m watching them, I can’t watch. The heightened gore becomes so pervasive, positive attributes fade to black. Hands over eyes for two hours.

And I’m miffed, because DiCaprio and Crowe (big fat method boy!) are always great to watch. DiCaprio is an actor who can pull just about anything off, despite his boyishness.

Howard Hughes, for instance. Who would have thought he’d nail that bizarre, complex personage so adroitly?

Susan and I viewed “American Gangster” together, and that film was certainly violent; but in a different manner than this Scott film. “Gangster’s” sterilized violence didn’t bother me at all. I flipped over “American Gangster,” it was one of my favorite films, and the dumbfounding slight it suffered at (was it two years ago?) Oscar time made me want to go bury all Hollywood in a cement overcoat. That movie was a Russell Crowe venue, too, portraying an all-too-human cop.

Susan felt “Body” lost its message, whatever that message is. My impression was that perhaps this movie was meant to be a patriotic banner, as well as statement about global mistrust and terror, but that a morass of mucky violence and overly scripted action tripped it up.

Susan did not mention your Mark Strong, but she did remark on the actress playing DiCaprio’s love interest. Susan felt she was magnetic.

Hey, did you know there’s a spy-vs-spy museum in D.C.? How cool is that?

Susan left the theater feeling bleak. She does, however, think the movie will do well at the box office. What do you think? Is it in for the long run?

Swift Satellite: HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

T.

Weird, this snowstorm, like late November here in mid-October. Yet friends called who love that Ridley Scott. We foolhardies took to the greasiest of highways to join them for Body of Lies.

For a movie filigreed with hot-button issues — jihadism, torture, the Method Obesity of Russell Crowe — it’s entertaining and oddly irrelevant. The writing is there, with cues for a peace-love-understanding now and then, but Ridley Scott has polished his craft to a dull matte finish. It’s an action film. (His last, American Gangster, felt the same.)  What starts out looking like a timely examination of Bush’s counterproductive panic ends up being a picturesque thriller complete with the arrival of the cavalry at the last second.

Leonardo diCaprio is solid; maybe he’ll be Harrison Ford’s heir to those punchy trapped-Everyman roles. Crowe gives his all as a CIA bureaucrat, full of hubris and piety and an unfortunately tone-deaf Bubba drawl. Fellow Aussie Kirk Lazarus would have nailed it.

An actor named Mark Strong, however, steals the show as Hani, a suave, insouciant Jordanian spymaster. Now we’re talking: diverting fiction! Body of Lies is a well-knotted spy-v-spy-v-spy movie, John le Carré updated with cell phones that instantly connect halfway ’round the world and surveillance drones that can read today’s Garfield over your shoulder. Scary Commies are now scary Arabs.