Beirut

As a movie this is a solid, dependable thriller with a really solid performance by Jon Hamm, as well as by a range of supporting players who turn in good, taunt performances. The one exception is Rosamund Pike whom is a great actor, but is ill-used. I suspect there were a number of scenes left on the editing floor.

This movie will be controversial because of its depictions of Beirut, as well as lack of agency of the Lebanese people. These criticisms are valid, but at the same time it is very hard for Hollywood, let alone a Western director and writer to get the right nuance and tension of the period AND make a successful movie. To the critics, you have a point, but this is a thriller, not a documentary.

If you are looking for a modern spy/espionage movie, this should be on your list. Plus I would love to see more Jon Hamm in these types of roles...well done.

Why are people so upset that it's not historically accurate? It never purported to be a history lesson. Snappy dialogue and a few twists and turns and Jon Hamm being Jon Hamm. I thought it was good.

One reviewer indicated this was not filmed in Beirut and the city wasn't in the condition as depicted. Not ever having been there I won't dispute but the images of the damages and treatment of individuals were horrifying and set the tone for the film. But, terrorist activities in the area has been well documented since recorded history. Jon Hamm was exceptional in the development of his character and Rosemary Pike may have been somewhat miscast but she managed her character fairly well. What was most disturbing was the probability of sacrificing one to maintain a precarious "peace" in the Region. And, of course, there is the issue of corruption by a U.S. official in another country (go figure). All in all it is a complex story with something of an unlikely conclusion but it was still extremely entertaining.

Expected more in all honesty. Gives a very brief outline of an aspect of a very complicated conflict. Solid performances from the cast and solid direction from Brad Anderson. Middle of the road Middle Eastern thriller which just lacks cohesion and at does drag at certain points.

Tony Gilroy's thriller "Beirut", tautly directed by Brad Anderson, propels that iconic "Mad Men" tv star Jon Hamm into the long-vacant Hollywood position created in the '40s by Humphrey Bogart. It's a character persona of disillusioned, world-weary masculine presence that springs into action, however reluctantly, when absolutely necessary.

Previous IMDb reviews of this exciting film either have been premature (of the "Gee, I can't wait to see it" non-review content) or ignorantly dismissive, as if fiction had to be judged by reality standards, or location hunting be abandoned in favor of merely using the practical "real" places from the script. I guess Matt Damon in "The Martian" was somehow exempt from that latter idiotic requirement.

Several hit films come to mind, clearly "Argo" the most relevant in terms of demonstrating box office potential, and Hamm is blessed with a talented and selfless co-star in a key yet subdued role by Rosamund Pike, coincidentally having risen to stardom in "Argo" maestro Ben Affleck's "Gone Girl". The director cites Peter Weir's "The Year of Living Dangerously" as a key influence, and that's a fine source to draw from.

I appoint Hamm as the next Bogie because in addition to his classic good looks as leading man he captures here and in "Mad Men" the uncanny ability to define a film noir hero -self-divided, prone to hitting the bottle, and winning over a viewer no matter how close he comes to betraying his best moral instincts in service of self-interest. Certainly he could handle a remake of "Casablanca" (perhaps with currently hot-hot Scandi star Alicia VIkander as co-star) without much of a stretch.

Though low-budget and closer to pulp than a major Hollywood blockbuster, "Beirut" succeeds because it is fun, not because it is giving us a history lesson. The cliches of its genre and the unfortunate real-life cliches of the Middle East as a quagmire work very well in the traditional roller-coaster ride that is what Hollywood does best. Quibbling over accuracy is absurd; rather Gilroy should be commended for fashioning, over a period of several decades, a tight script that makes its historical points while firmly inhabiting the fantasy land of movies.