# Three Kings (1999)

### reviewed by
Mark R. Leeper

                                  THREE KINGS
                        A film review by Mark R. Leeper

                   Capsule: Set in the day or two following the
              Persian Gulf, THREE KINGS begins as a light-hearted
              caper film but turns into a grim view of the
              realities of the Middle East and American policy.
              This is an adult film, demanding but intelligent.
              A good film even if it is not always pleasant.
              Rating: 8 (0 to 10), high +2 (-4 to +4)  Spoiler
              warning: there are mild spoilers of the first
              quarter of the film in this review.

It is in the hours after the cease-fire in the Persian Gulf War. Iraq is still in a state of chaos and barbarity even as the war ebbs from it. We focus on volunteer soldiers, none of whom actually fought but jubilant over the victory. Nevertheless their duty continues as captured Iraqi soldiers are being strip-searched before being interned. One is found carrying a map in a well-protected place. Sergeant Troy Barlow (played by Mark Wahlberg), Staff Sergeant Chief Elgin (Ice Cube), and Private Conrad Vig (Spike Jonze) realize that the map must show where the Iraqis have hidden gold bullion looted from Kuwait. They decide to make a little extra-curricular expedition to liberate the gold for their own purposes. Special Forces Captain Archie Gates (George Clooney) has been escorting TV journalist Adriana Cruz (Nora Dunn), but when he gets wind of the treasure map he decides to ditch Cruz and push his way into the expedition and a share of the gold.

The village where the gold has been stored is a hotbed of Iraqi rebels who have been promised American support if they would fight against Saddam. They are overjoyed to find four armed Americans show up at last to help them defend themselves. However despair returns to them when Iraqi soldiers show up. The leader of the soldiers offers the Americans a compromise. The yanks can take the gold and leave the rebels to the Iraqi army. They even are happy to help the Americans load "Saddam's gold" onto the American vehicles in order to be rid of the conquering army and to proceed with their sadistic duty against the rebels. The Americans are only too happy with the deal until Gates realizes what his complicity in the betrayal of Iraqi rebels will mean. He decides he cannot leave the villagers to their fate. This sets in motion the most deadly chapter of the war for the four volunteers.

Essentially the plot could have been a Western with just a few substitutions. However the plot is less important than the background of THREE KINGS. The film really becomes a serious political examination of Americans in the war, America's clumsy and dangerous foreign policy, and just how it affects other cultures. In it bleak characterization of political policy it stands with films like THE KILLING FIELDS. In the eyes of this film as the Iraqi government suppresses and tortures its own people, the Americans blunder around in quest of low oil prices. Meanwhile opportunistic news reporters fight for new stories of what is happening, losing interest once a story has already been covered by someone else, trying to get ahead in the world of news industry politics. And even while this is happening people like the Iraqis struggle to get American style appliances like blenders and cellular phones in the callous struggle for another culture's idea of the good life. This is very dark and very angry.

Adding to the deliberate pain of watching the film is the photography of Thomas Newton Sigel (who filmed THE USUAL SUSPECTS). He intentionally washes out the color to give a feel of the hot sun to the Mexican locales standing in for the Iraqi desert. Occasionally the photography becomes a bit gimmicky, predominantly in the more violent scenes. David O. Russell directs his own screenplay to be certain to get each little angry note. The Iraqi rebels come off the best, but American policy, the Kuwaiti consumerism, the supposed stupidity of American Southerners, and the Army bureaucracy, all get their turn under fire.

THREE KINGS may not be a pleasant film to watch, but it is intelligent and certainly has to be the best film about the Persian Gulf War yet. I give it an 8 on the 0 to 10 scale and a high +2 on the -4 to +4 scale.

                                            Mark R. Leeper
                                            mleeper@lucent.com
                                            Copyright 1999 Mark R. Leeper

The review above was posted to the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due to ASCII to HTML conversion.

Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews