Home » Art, Film, Reviews

Loopy Politics

Film Review
In The Loop is a satiric take on how the invasion of Iraq happened, in this version a concatenation of questionable intelligence, lies and political thuggery. Whether this fits with your own beliefs or not, however, shouldn’t affect your enjoyment of the film – it’s not so much criticism of a side as it is of the entire intercontinental political structure.

By Michael O'Brien

Image courtesy IFC Entertainment

In the Loop comes to us from Armando Ianucci, whose ingenious BBC show The Thick of It did to politics what the (British) Office did to business. The film is a sort of sequel to or adaptation of the show, as they share not only many of the same characters or character types but also the same profane battles of wits, bleakly cynical view of 21st-century politics, and relentless satire of human folly. And like the show, In the Loop is one of the smartest and funniest works in recent memory.

Chronically hapless Simon Foster (Tom Hollander), minister of a minor department, is trapped by a journalist into saying that “War is unforeseeable” at a time when both the American President and the British Prime Minister, neither of whom appear in the film, want to go to war in an unspecified country in the Middle East. Of course, there’s nothing unspecified about it – the film is a satiric take on how the invasion of Iraq happened, in this version a concatenation of questionable intelligence, lies and political thuggery. Whether this fits with your own beliefs or not, however, shouldn’t affect your enjoyment of the film – it’s not so much criticism of a side as it is of the entire intercontinental political structure.

After the interview blunder, Malcolm Tucker (Peter Capaldi), the Scottish master of spin for the Prime Minister, rages his way to Foster’s office. Unfortunately, Foster is already being courted by the anti-war elements in Washington, and, after a second interview in which he gives a muddled metaphor about climbing “the mountain of conflict,” is soon being solicited by the pro-war side as well. A white-hot Tucker must follow Foster and his aide Toby (Chris Addison) to DC and then the UN, doing his best to make sure Foster, who doesn’t really want war, stays on message – which is that there is no message. If that seems confusing, well, this is politics as the film sees it: a world of hypocrisy produced by a 24-hour news cycle that can ruin careers in an instant, especially when manipulated by Malcolm Tucker.

The relationship between Britain and its former colony is colorfully represented. The Americans are mostly rosy-faced youths who waste their time in childish infighting, while the Brits are exhausted, over-the-hill losers in thrall to their American overlords. On the American dove side are Asst. Secretary of State Karen Clarke (Mimi Kennedy), whose aides are only on her side until they can hitch their wagons to a brighter star, and Lt. General George Miller (The Sopranos‘ James Gandolfini), whose fading machismo can’t completely cover up the fact that he drives a desk and not a tank. The most magnificent portrayal of all comes from veteran character actor (a ridiculous term, by the by – aren’t all actors character actors?) David Rasche, who plays Linton Barwick, the primary American pro-war figure. Rasche is chillingly effective as the one politician who is unflappably calm and clean-mouthed, even to the point of saying “S-star-star-T” instead of cursing. He’s never angry because he doesn’t need to be – his sociopathic tranquility is a threat to everyone he meets, the personification of the banality of evil.

One of my weapons against student profanity as an English teacher has always been the admonition that curse words are the uncreative, easy way out. In the Loop is a strong argument that I’m wrong, as the film’s dialogue is consistently creative, consistently hilarious, and consistently profane. The politicos are brutal to each other – Foster’s mop-headed aide is alternately “Frodo,” “Ron Weasley,” “Fetus-Boy,” and the most insulting nickname of all, “Love Actually.” There are many funnier lines, but they’re nearly all unprintable – which is also why no trailer for the film does it justice. The political world of the film, and I now pray daily that it is an alternate world, is one in which evil is petty, selfish and unbeatable while good is just as petty, barely less selfish, and wholly ineffective. As commentary, it’s terrifying; as entertainment, it’s terrific.

In The Loop is currently playing at the Magnolia Theater in Dallas.

3 Comments »

  1. Very illuminating review, I must say. I initially disliked “In the Loop” deeply, but now I want to watch it over again. As you say, the “24 hour news cycle that can ruin careers in an instant”, has permanently changed the way politicians work, and the ability to adapt to youtube, google, and viral videos is determining who will survive. No wonder President Obama has a teleprompter wherever he goes- insulation against really communicating without artifice. And yes; at the showing I went to, “Love Actually” and “Frodo” got the biggest laughs of all.

  2. I could not disagree MORE with the above review. I found “In the Loop” to be an endless onslaught of profanity that wasn’t funny and did NOT advance the plot one iota. Moreover, a plot with a pivotal point of expletives [that really are NOT funny] is not something anyone wishes to behold.

    There is a reason “Angel R” disliked the movie intensely. It’s thoroughly execrable. I don’t know your English teacher. But go back. Take heed. And exercise more discernment.

    That is the first movie I would have walked out of in years. I hung on — I am a huge fan of British comedy but that movie is “lame” to use the common vernacular. And the appropriation of the “look” of the Obama poster saying, “No you fucking can’t” is not a good idea either. And those little asterisks don’t help.

    And one more thing: Teleprompter or not, there are plenty of instances when President Obama is impromptu. And, unlike his predecessor, it doesn’t issue in a pitiful display of Mis-Speak and embarrassment. Just fyi.

  3. Loved the movie AND your review, Michael. Thank you.

    It is hard to think of another comedy that is more razor-sharp, or more scathingly funny. I put this movie in my Easter basket this year (funny how such a profane movie could end up in an Easter basket–there’s a story in itself!) and I have watched it multiple times in the last couple of weeks.

    I would advise anyone who likes it, but is put off by it initially, to watch it again (that is, if they can handle the language). There is so much going on (and much of it, surprisingly, is quiet) that repeated viewing is really necessary to catch all the details, and to appreciate them. Watch, and then discuss it with others. My husband and I have been doing just that …

    Two thumbs up!

Have your say!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>