Genres

Visitors Review

captainmorgynne 2012-05-25 17:08:03

Truth is stranger than fiction

And since when does a movie have to be factual, realistic or based ontruth to be noteworthy? I don't care about the implications of thismovie so much as the intriguingness of the way in which it is presentedto the viewer. It in some way says "we all fear for our ownsecurity/safety". Maybe its a little over the top, blunt and notpolitically correct, but movies are meant to provoke us, to entertainus.. not to feed us facts - unless of course, we are watching adocumentary :) The first thing I thought after seeing this movie was "wow, that wouldmake an awesome screen play for theater". I wasn't really committed toor concerned with factual events, presentation of ideas (political,social or otherwise), or what I would take away from it. I did, howeverenjoy the intent of the director to provoke the viewer to think forthemselves a little. There was not enough information presented to drawfactual conclusions regarding the character of either "victim". Infact, I am not certain the word victim is appropriate. Were they? Orare we? I liked that it left me with that thought. I think everyone hasan opinion regarding the events of 9/11 and I think this movie drawsthose opinions out in the viewer and re-validates them a bit. Good orbad. Very original presentation of a not so original plot.

cjmbabsc 2012-05-25 07:12:51

Too many people seem cavalier, until their rights are infringed...

The format, writing and direction of this docudrama could be improved,but the premise is too important to ignore. Two people, in oppositeparts of the world, seem cavalier about their rights and freedoms,until they are violated, then dumbfounded about what authorities do tothem. We'd all like to feel safe in our home, community and Country.However, to what extent would we give up our rights and freedoms, to bemore secure and safe? And... If our rights and freedoms are lost, howsafe and secure would we be? You may find this film boring. It lacksgratuitous violence, obscenity and other things, one might proclaim,makes for entertainment, but the valuable message it portrays, makes ita, "Must See!". If this show peeks your interest, try a, "Star Trek",(The Next Generation), Episode called, "Drumhead", in which mankind hasventured hundreds of years, into the future, into space and evolution,yet still succumbs to fear, created by the potential for terrorism...

pinkladynj 2012-05-24 21:54:07

Would they have made this movie in another country?

Let me preface this by saying that I would not ever have sought outthis piece of garbage if I wasn't such a big fan of Ken Leung. I can'tbelieve that intelligent people would actually think they'd beenlightened by this. This is liberal propaganda at its finest. Theexcessive nudity was put in place to shock the viewer or repeatedly tryto drive its its liberal message home. The dialogue was awful althoughthe performances of all the actors, especially Maggie Gyllenhaal wasexceptional.My question is: would they have made this movie in Iran or Iraq wherefreedoms are truly limited? My guess is no. Only in America, would afilm like this be aired and eventually circulated. I'm glad HBO pulledthis nonsense off the air. It's not worth the time, energy or moneyspent.I would love to see a movie about how many innocent lives were SAVED asa result of the Patriot Act.God Bless America!

FadedOut 2012-05-24 15:02:26

Why the Paranoia

This film highlights what was probably going on after 9/11 but less sonowadays since people have had time to get their head back on straight.The Parallel stories show how similar the paranoia about terrorism isaround the world even in countries as different as America and China,and that certain about you and bad luck in todays world can land you inthat situation. Why was the nudity so apparent couldn't they just havemoved past these scenes as they would make the movies rating towardsthe adult rating.Why was only the Americans girls family shown reactingto her arrest the guy in the story might have had family reacting badlyto his arrest, this would have shown how he had a life to lose also.The abuses endured by these characters are atrocious shouldn't thepeople involved have been looking for real terrorist since it wasobvious these people were most likely innocent people caught up in thepost 9/11 paranoia. Overall I liked this movie although it did leave meworried about the cheapness of freedom. compared to making people safe.Why the interrogators asked the same questions and were given the sameanswers to them still eludes me as they could have made the questioningreflect the person who was being question.

Ron Dahly 2012-05-24 13:52:20

Eye-opening

Shocking! Every American needs to see this movie. A previous commenttitled"Duh", at first glance, makes us all seem as though we are somehow keenlyaware that civil rights are being denied...in America. But until I sawthismovie, I couldn't parallel being arrested, tortured, and denied access toany outside help in China, to the same thing happening here. Somehow, theidea of these things taking place here didn't seem so terribly awful, andfearful, until I put myself in both of the actors roles asvictim.Strip Search is one of the best, thought provoking movies I have everseen.The acting was absolutely superb; making it easy to be drawn into everyscene, and Maggie Gyllenhaal's performance was no less than stellar tothatend. For short, I was IMPRESSED!

jennifer-alicarty 2012-05-24 05:12:14

A what if scenario that is both relevant and shocking.

This film begins in a classroom with a professor asking his students ifit was acceptable to give up your rights for 1 day if the governmentcould guarantee that it could get rid of terrorism. He then proceeds toask the same question, but extending the time period from 1 day to 10years.The director then examines two identical situations differing only intheir location. The first scenario is of an American woman beinghooded, and then abducted by Chinese security forces and then taken toan unknown location where she is asked some uncomfortable questions.The second scenario is of the same thing happening to an Arab man (theynever really say which country he's from) being hooded and abducted andtaken to an FBI building where he's questioned.This film is effective in asking the viewer whether the US wishes tofight any war in a manner similar to how Communist China (with nosupposed civil freedoms) fights a War on Terror. Additionally, theviewer is asked whether civil liberties which have taken many decadesof struggle to obtain and keep are so worthless that they can bediscarded for any period of time. One of the most ironic parts of themovie is that the quote by Thomash Jefferson "The tree of liberty mustbe refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."is used by the Arab suspect in his political science thesis and thenthe FBI agent questioning him asks whether the use of this statement isa call to violent dissent.The problem with this film is that both scenarios use precisely thesame dialog and this while initially effective gets pretty boring atthe end. Also in pre-Abu Ghraib world people could be happy at therealism of the level of abuse that both parties experience, but we nowknow that a lot worse can and does happen.I can understand why this film isn't shown more in the US, no-one wantsour country compared to Communist China, and certainly not at thistime. Whether this is a valid point for not showing the film isdebatable.

ankhdragon2002 2012-05-22 05:27:30

A brave, important and powerful film

In the post 9/11 world, fear has been indoctrinated into most aspectsof our lives. Governments worldwide manipulated and capitalized on thisfor their own gain - financially, politically and strategically. TheBush-driven Patriot Act has seen many people (guilty and otherwise nodoubt) detained, tortured and dehumanized. Since a large percentage ofthe population are unaware that political agendas of media ownersexist, they passively believe what they see on their nightly TV news orread in their daily newspapers. They are taught to fear the unknown, totrust their leaders implicitly (because they use nice words in speecheslike 'freedom' and 'family') and not to question motives.'Strip Search' is a deliberate attempt to throw the light of realityinto this collective 'un'consciousness.The storyline involves parallel stories of two people being detained incustody: an American woman in China, and a Middle Eastern man in theUS. By using almost exactly the same dialogue, we are shown how tothink outside the usual spectrum, and to feel compassion for bothpeople. Without the twin story of the American woman, people wouldundoubtedly walk away from this feel feeling a lot differently.The acting is astonishing. One feels that this film meant more thanjust another job to the actors involved. I admire them immensely fortheir efforts.Hopefully this film will change a few minds, and that as a result - theworld might become just that little bit better.

a4261_2000 2012-05-21 15:46:34

Subtle as a jackhammer, transparent as plate glass

This movie is pure propaganda. The film makers pull out all the stops toelicit a carefully directed emotional response from the audience, but IMHOit fails because their efforts are so blatantly obvious. I find aninteresting parallel between the interrogators portrayed in this movie andthe movie itself - both end up doing the same thing. The interrogatorsrelentlessly drive their captives in order to get what they want out ofthem, and the movie does the same thing it's viewers.Now, instead of contrasting the interrogation of an Arab and an American,ifthe film makers would have woven together the stories of an innocentpersonbeing questioned and a terrorist making his way through multiple levels ofbureaucracy - that would have been interesting. But then, that may haveresulted in some of the viewers coming to different conclusions than thefilm makers, something that they're obviously uncomfortablewith.

Mark Bowen 2012-05-20 09:03:50

Good idea, poorly executed

I just watched this film (on European television), but didn't see fromthe very beginning what it was called. So I looked it up here on IMDb."Strip Search" is a terrible title. What were they thinking? That Ithink is an example of what is wrong with the film. They have a storywith a very interesting political premise, but they gave it some craptitle more appropriate for a straight-to-video Shannon Tweed flick.Well, it IS an interesting premise, that the U.S. domestic response to9/11 has brought the country closer in some respects to the policestates it still publicly condemns. It is a premise with which Istrongly agree. And the plot vehicle of playing the same dialogue in aU.S. and a Chinese prison was a very good idea. But it is all reallypoorly done.The biggest problem is the dialogue itself, which is clichéd. It reallycould have used a few rewrites. Surprising that it came from TomFontana, of the great "Homicide: Life On the Streets" TV series.The other problem is that except for Glenn Close and Maggie Gyllenhaal,the other actors are unable to rise above the hack dialogue. Ken LeungI thought was particularly bad. And in movies, the ultimate blame forpoor performances has to be laid at the feet of the director, in thiscase the legendary Sidney Lumet. (But let's face it, Lumet hasn't madea truly great film since 1976's "Network" (1976), and not even a goodfilm since 1988's "Running On Empty.") With the exception of the actingof Close and Gyllenhaal, the whole film feels like a hack job. Thepolitical message is hammered home with all the subtlety of a Germanjazz band, complete with inter-cut speeches about freedom and democracyfrom U.S. presidents, and a fadeout with statistics about U.S.detainees. Sheesh.Too bad, this could have been a thought-provoking film. It's so poorlydone and overwrought that it just won't change anyone's mind.

elevator_opratr 2012-05-19 18:09:42

Weird

First of all, 58 minutes? What kind of movie is that? The specs say 120minutes, but that must be a typo. Secondly, this movie makes its point,butin a weird way. I realize the necessity of flipping back and forth betweenthe two interrogations, but was it necessary for the scripts between thetwoscenes to be practically identical? (But I guess if one was taken out,thenwe'd be left with a 29 minute movie ... LOL). Anyhow, I just feel thiswholestory could have made its point in a much more practical fashion. And wasitnecessary to have half of the movie filmed with the actor and actresstotally nude? I realize the point of showing the strip search, but havethemcover up when its done. I almost got the impression the movie was more ofanude showcase than anything. But I got the message, and for that, it'sstillworth 6 outta 10.

2012-05-18 13:27:01

Comments on Strip Searches

Hi, Strip search was a good movie. It was right on point about how yourcivil rights can be abused by a overzealous government. But I want topoint out another aspect of strip searches. I was sentenced to 15 yearsto life in a maximum security prison for a drug crime. The mostinhumane treatment was that of strip searches. I painted a series onthis subject which can be viewed athttp://www.15yearstolife.com/contraband.htmsummary of material -This body of work below was produced in 1995 in response to thedehumanizingnature of body cavity searches.INTENT OF THE ARTIST: To give the general public a view of thedehumanizing nature of the prison experience Coming back from a visitwith his mother a sadistic guard ordered Papa to bend over and spreadhis ass cheeks on 3 occasions to look for contraband in his anal canal.No contraband was found after the first visual search. But the guardinsisted that Papa continue to bend over. Papa asked the guard what hewas looking for. After the third search Papa refused to cooperateasking the guard to call the supervising officer. The guard told him toget dressed and return to his cell. Papa then went to the law library to write a complaint and researchedthe issue. Papa discovered 20 pages of directives issued by theDepartment of Corrections on how guards should search the body cavitiesof prisoners. Papa was disgusted and decided to paint about thisdehumanizing experience. He created automatic paintings and glued partsof the directives to them.The six pieces of work were then confiscated by the administration whenPapa tried to send them to the free world... Best, Anthony Papa www.15tolife.com author of 15 To Life: How I PaintedMy Way To Freedom / Feralhouse

2012-05-18 12:26:31

Actually Region 4 disc

This review is from: Strip Search (Inspeção Geral), 2004, Import (DVD) Disc and case are actually marked region 4, but it plays on my computer and a fairly cheap Sony 5 disc DVD player.

dwillderk 2012-05-17 02:34:51

Maggie Gyllenhaal's performance staggering

Absolutely stunning performance by Maggie gyllenhaal. To be on scrennaked for so long must have taken hours to shoot I assume they would beshot on closed set unles she is absolutely comfortable in her own body.The facial expression as she was having both cavities searched wereamazing and there must have been a degree of reality in the performanceFantastic performance in a mediocre film with a powerful message.I understand that the Film is available in Europe on DVD with Directorscuts and commentary by Diresct and by Miss Gyllenhaal.Obviously it was very difficult to duplicate all scene relating to bothstudents but I thought that her ordeal was exaggerated in relation tothe male studen

thefishgopher 2012-05-16 13:29:12

Titles are Pointless

This movie was quite a profound piece of work. It involved a very uniqueprocess of film making in which the same screenplay was used to tell twodifferent stories. This process is supposed to invoke in the viewer thatthe viewer shows sympathy for one character but not for another. When Iwatched it I consciously knew that it was the same words being spoken butthen yet I did not understand why I felt sympathy for one character butnotfor the other speaking the same words. This is a very good movie to watchin the post 9/11 world in which the way America treats the rest of theworld. Quite frankly I believe Americans(I being one of them) do nottreatthe rest of the world with enough respect and we disregard any of theirthoughts. This movie shows the American viewer how a foreigner might seeAmerica. This movie totally blew me away. It is dumbfounding.

djlee 2012-05-09 07:33:57

Thought-provoking presentation

I found STRIP SEARCH a thought-provoking and well done piece by somevery talented and courageous artists. An example of how TV/Film can beused as a tool to get us to think and look at our world, our times andourselves. --- BRAVO! and thank you to all involved in this project.The cast, the direction, the script, the crossover dialogue between thetwo interrogation all worked for me. And the choice of using nudity?How could they have done it otherwise? It really hit home thehumiliation and terror of such practices. A somewhat prophetic piece inlight of recent events and the exposure of America's tactics in Iraq.I highly recommend that people not only see it, but talk about it.Simply put ... excellent.One question -- Has Lumet EVER made a bad film? I certainly can't thinkof one. If he has, I haven't seen it.

mchughjj 2012-05-09 00:37:16

How to oversell a contrived analogy

One can't comment on this work without addressing the political message.The creators attempt to draw a parallel, to understate matters, betweenthephysical and psychological torture a particular tourist receives in Chinaduring a criminal interrogation (itself the focus of more than a couplefilms) with what they've concluded the treatment of terrorist suspectsmightbe in post-9/11 America. Both situations are presented in the mostdegrading light in the hope, it would seem, that viewers would be more aptto accept the events in China as something other than an isolated outrageand then project that outrage generally upon the secretive current eventsinAmerica.In my opinion, by lining up these unfortunate predicaments so exactlywithout addressing the ways the situations must be different weakens theimpact and is far more manipulative than thought-provoking. The wholethingreeks of an agenda (certainly their right) rather than being an expose onthe apparent lack of due process afforded many individuals in the wake ofthe United States grappling with the terrorist threat.I will say though that if the viewer isn't soured by the lack of subtletyand context, the performances are quite good.

cableaddict 2012-05-07 18:22:11

HBO hits a new low

If you're not sure what the words "purient" and "gratuitous" mean, there'sno need to look them up. Just watch this embarrassing film.True, there is a vague hint of an important theme here, but it is clumsilyhandled, with very little depth. The conclusion is wrapped up with displayed text,which is the equivalent of a voice-over. No effort whatsoever.Heck, you know what you're getting into just from the title.This is a made-for-HBO movie, after all. All that mattered to them wasshowing a woman forced to undress, and this shows in the painfully simplescreenplay.On a more positive note, it is interesting to see parallel scenes with thewoman, whom we are obviously meant to empathize with, and the muslim-looking guy. Theoretically, one would feel bad for the woman, and then realize how wrongit is to treat the man the same way.-But even this is clumsily handled, to put it mildly.It's just gratuitous sex and humiliation, HBO-style. I'm glad I didn't seeit with others present, as I would have been quite embarrassed.

Lawson Lawson 2012-05-07 09:22:31

Indefinate Detention, Psychological Rendering...Are You Ready?

There is a Woody Allen Movie where an officer of the Law asks Woody forhis driver license and he pulls it out and tears it up in front of thecop saying how he just can't handle authority figures. I've oftenwanted to try that, but I have a child. Preparing my child for travel and situations that this film portrays isevery parents responsibility, IMHO. We have inalienable rights ashumans, some listed in the constitution and as it says others notlisted. In the fair use doctrine of the current copyright law I candownload this movie for the purpose of writing this review as animportant film for parents to see. I decide what Fair use is, not someSOPA board.Yes, I profited from this movie and so should you and Stanley. Justread some of the reviews of others that saw it and decide for yourselfif it isn't a thought provoking movie for some, and drivel to others.That's good enough for me to consider because education is theconsideration of ideas that I don't always agree with. Now imagine it'syour son or daughter. And you ended a sentence with a preposition, OMG.With the signing of NDAA last month, this film has to be distributedmore widely, I want the rights to distribute it because it talks aboutAmerican exceptionalism and the reasons we are against torture and forinalienable rights including due process. As Phillip Zimbardo says,these situations are situational and with just a little pushing youcould become that interrogator or worse, the subject of the"Rendering".If your children are like the children in the opening of the film andagree that giving up a little freedom for some security, they will haveneither. So what do we do about it? I'm looking for that film, anysuggestions? Don't miss this opportunity to replenish the tree ofliberty peacefully before the Mountain crumbles. We are the sovereignkings of our own destiny, the experiment continues with many bumps inthe road, teach your children well. Lawson

tiger_eyes_oo 2012-05-06 15:43:44

A decent movie that looks at two individuals being interrogated but lots of female nudity, some male

I liked the overall message and theme of the movie. I am passionateabout the topic of freedom vs. security. However, being the feministthat I am, I was turned off by many things. It irks me when more thanhalf the movie they show Maggie Gyllenhaal nude, and only a briefglimpse of the other victim, a male. The reason is that two individuals, an American woman in some Asiancountry and a foreign male in America, are being held on aiding aterrorist. Glenn Close is interrogating the male, and some Asian maleinterrogating Maggie Gyllenhaal. Around 25 minutes in, (It is a 55minute film) the victims are told to take off their clothes. As italways is with Hollywood films, Maggie Gyllenhaal is shown off a lotmore imo.Also, during one scene that would horrify any female undergoing it, theofficer makes her stand against a wall with her legs spread and palmsflat against the wall. He feels up her breasts, and then he says someline like how he is "going to do it every day until it is likebreathing. And the best part is, I didn't even have to touch you" Umm,except he definitely does so I do not get that part. Nevertheless, itwas enough to make any girl squirm at the thought of some strange mandoing that to you.Then it cuts to the scene were Glenn Close is interrogating the malevictim. She looks over his neck, shoulders, back, and arms with aflashlight, and says the exact same line. In this case, it makes sense.She did not touch him. I found this scene to be pretty absurd andunrealistic. She would be feeling him up too and, of course, the moviedoes not show this. Who looks over someone with a flashlight? That isnot all that terrifying, and I guess that is why he did not confess atthe end, but Maggie Gyllenhaal did. Either way, personally I am tired of so much female nudity and thetaboo about showing anything but a male behind in movies. They say itadds realism and a connection but I find it detracts from taking a filmseriously. Imo, a good story that can entertain and keep the audience's attentionwithout nudity is always a better-made film then one that must rely onit. Plus, there are better movies that take a look at the balancebetween security and individual liberties.

pgamble-3 2012-05-06 13:23:21

Very Thought provoking movie

HiLoved this movie - very thought provoking - saw it two days ago and itsbeen going around and around in my mind.I loved the fact that both scenarios used the same dialogue and thedailogue in both sceanrios fitted perfectly.One thing I don't understand and maybe someone can clear this up forme. At the end the girl confesses while the man doesn't - also at theend the Chinese interrogator is highly praised by his supervisor whilethe American interrogator goes home - quite unnoticed by anyone. Alsothe look on Glenn Close's face suggests she hated being a part of theprocess. I'm just wondering what this signifies - does it mean thatthese practices are done in the US but reluctantly whilst in china thispractice is not made a secret? Any thoughts on this I'd love to hear asthe end I think is very crucial cause at this point both stories end uptaking very different paths. Also love to hear anyone's comments onwhat they think would happen next to the girl and the guy.Thanks Patrick