User reviews

In the aftermath of the September, 11th, in China, the American student Linda Sykes (Maggie Gyllenhaal) is interrogated by the military Liu Tsung- Yuan (Ken Leung). In New York, the Arab student Sharif Bin Said (Bruno Lastra) is interrogated by the FBI agent Karen Moore (Glenn Close). The psychological methods of interrogation are the same, amicable in the beginning and brutal in the end; but there is no evidence that the students are terrorists. Must security and safety of the State come at the price of freedom?

"Strip Search" is a film directed by Sidney Lumet with the same dialogs and situations in two totally different countries, with two students that might be connected to terrorist networks being interrogated at the same time. The movie shows that torture does not depend of the country and the importance of civil liberties to the individuals. I lived a great part of my life in a dictatorship and I know the importance of freedom and democracy. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Inspeção Geral" ("General Inspection")

The format, writing and direction of this docudrama could be improved, but the premise is too important to ignore. Two people, in opposite parts of the world, seem cavalier about their rights and freedoms, until they are violated, then dumbfounded about what authorities do to them. 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 be more secure and safe? And... If our rights and freedoms are lost, how safe and secure would we be? You may find this film boring. It lacks gratuitous violence, obscenity and other things, one might proclaim, makes for entertainment, but the valuable message it portrays, makes it a, "Must See!". If this show peeks your interest, try a, "Star Trek", (The Next Generation), Episode called, "Drumhead", in which mankind has ventured hundreds of years, into the future, into space and evolution, yet still succumbs to fear, created by the potential for terrorism...

Just saw this movie last night, and I was quite impressed. At my first opportunity, I did a Google search on it and found this page. Reading through the comments, I wonder how many of those who dismissed the movie and its premise as unadulterated propaganda (albeit prior to the Abu Ghraib scandal coverage) might reconsider given recent revelations of American behavior in violation of the Geneva Convention. Several such comments reflect a belief that the nudity in the film was there purely for titillation. However, in the aftermath of the prison misconduct in Iraq, its pretty clear that this stuff happens. The nudity in the movie hasn't a damned thing to do with desire. Rather the nudity illustrates the degree to which the state can and does dehumanize and terrorize (allusion intended) the individual, confident in its rationale that circumstances warrant such measures. Let me tell you, I find Maggie Gyllenhall crazy, raving hot, but all I felt while watching this movie was revulsion and a keen awareness of my own vulnerability were I in the maw of The State/System.

"48 hours, 7 days, 6 months... as long as it takes...". Chilling, chilling stuff, definitely check it out.

Absolutely stunning performance by Maggie gyllenhaal. To be on scren naked for so long must have taken hours to shoot I assume they would be shot on closed set unles she is absolutely comfortable in her own body.

The facial expression as she was having both cavities searched were amazing and there must have been a degree of reality in the performance Fantastic performance in a mediocre film with a powerful message.

I understand that the Film is available in Europe on DVD with Directors cuts and commentary by Diresct and by Miss Gyllenhaal.

Obviously it was very difficult to duplicate all scene relating to both students but I thought that her ordeal was exaggerated in relation to the male studen

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

Sidney Lumet has made some historical movies: "12 Angry Men," "Serpico," "Dog Day Afternoon," "Network," and "Prince of the City," so it was a no-brainer for me about whether or not I was going to watch "Strip Search."

Out of deference to Sidney Lumet, I don't want to call it a fail, because it wasn't. I didn't like it as much as I wanted, but it's not a fail. I totally understood the point of it and the message behind it even if I didn't like the production.

"Strip Search" openly aims to make you understand that giving up your civil liberties, even in the name of fighting terrorism, can lead to a repressive government. There are two main characters, an American woman in China (Maggie Gyllenhaal) and an Arab man in the U.S (Bruno Lastra). The two have been grabbed by law enforcement officers of the respective countries and the two go through an identical interrogation process. There's no denying the fact the writer, Tom Fontana, chose one of the world's freest countries and one of the world's most repressive countries for comparison for a reason. In the name of fighting terror, America and China end up looking alike.

Before the two ex-patriates are taken we see a class going on in which the teacher asks: "If the U.S. government said they could eliminate terrorism forever, would you give up your civil liberties for a day?" All of the class answered yes. "A week?" Again, they all said yes. "A month? A year? Forever?" And with each extension of time the yesses were fewer and fewer until there were no more. It's a powerful question that requires more and more thought, but the point was made: there's definitely a point in which civil liberties outweigh "safety."

The tone of the movie was a bit muted which took away from any intensity. There was no musical score and the two "suspects" were, for the most part, acquiescent. Though they asked questions and showed a little defiance, there was no real resistance from either of them as you'd expect from an innocent person who's been falsely accused. The capitulating was probably because they were visitors trying to avoid the wrath of a foreign government, although I think even a Chinese citizen would be just as compliant. What you end of having with "Strip Search" is a movie with a poignant message and an anemic delivery.

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

A film that asks, in the wake of 9/11 and the US focus on terrorism, the question "How much personal freedom would you be prepared to lose in order to be safer?". It then explores two similar scenarios, one in China and one in the US.

The central question of this movie, would you trade personal freedom for more safety from terrorism?, is a very interesting one. The question is asked at the outset, so I was immediately drawn into the discussion, thinking it would go somewhere profound.

Initially the film does appear to go down a path where this question will produce some interesting answers. We see that basically, in the wake of 9/11, suspected terrorists in the US are treated no better than a suspected criminal in a fascist totalitarian regime.

However, that's it. What follows is two interrogation scenes played out in the US and overseas that continues to emphasis this, but not provide any real solutions or answers. It all becomes very predictable, very quickly.

Ultimately, quite disappointing.

Shocking! Every American needs to see this movie. A previous comment titled "Duh", at first glance, makes us all seem as though we are somehow keenly aware that civil rights are being denied...in America. But until I saw this movie, I couldn't parallel being arrested, tortured, and denied access to any outside help in China, to the same thing happening here. Somehow, the idea of these things taking place here didn't seem so terribly awful, and fearful, until I put myself in both of the actors roles as victim.

Strip Search is one of the best, thought provoking movies I have ever seen. The acting was absolutely superb; making it easy to be drawn into every scene, and Maggie Gyllenhaal's performance was no less than stellar to that end. For short, I was IMPRESSED!

I just watched this film (on European television), but didn't see from the 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 I think is an example of what is wrong with the film. They have a story with a very interesting political premise, but they gave it some crap title more appropriate for a straight-to-video Shannon Tweed flick.

Well, it IS an interesting premise, that the U.S. domestic response to 9/11 has brought the country closer in some respects to the police states it still publicly condemns. It is a premise with which I strongly agree. And the plot vehicle of playing the same dialogue in a U.S. and a Chinese prison was a very good idea. But it is all really poorly done.

The biggest problem is the dialogue itself, which is clichéd. It really could have used a few rewrites. Surprising that it came from Tom Fontana, 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 Leung I thought was particularly bad. And in movies, the ultimate blame for poor performances has to be laid at the feet of the director, in this case the legendary Sidney Lumet. (But let's face it, Lumet hasn't made a truly great film since 1976's "Network" (1976), and not even a good film since 1988's "Running On Empty.") With the exception of the acting of Close and Gyllenhaal, the whole film feels like a hack job. The political message is hammered home with all the subtlety of a German jazz band, complete with inter-cut speeches about freedom and democracy from 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 poorly done and overwrought that it just won't change anyone's mind.

I saw a piece of this film last week, yet it appears nowhere on HBO's website now, except a mention in HBO on demand. The part I saw was shocking, and thought provoking.

I researched it on IMDB and that is where I found most of my information. I also saw reports from others here that HBO had canceled showings. I think I saw "Strip Search" mid-morning on May 1st. It seemed on at an odd time considering the subject matter and nudity. I was hoping to see it again in it's entirety.

However, in light of recent news events, I feel it is an important film. CBS withheld it's coverage of Iraqi prisoner mistreatment, by their own admission, until the story broke through international news agencies.

The little bit I saw convinced me that once again HBO had the courage to make a movie about a controversial subject, to do it with artistic integrity, without being afraid to "shock the monkey" and to hire a first rate cast of actors who are also willing to be risk takers.

With writing by Tom Fontana, direction by Sidney Lumet, and a cast including Maggie Gyllenhaal, Ellen Barkin, Glenn Close, Patti Lupone, Josh Mostel, Estelle Parsons and Oliver Platt... this is not a venture that was undertaken lightly.

I am shocked that it is nowhere to be seen.

How are the artists involved in this project responding to what seems to be censorship at its worst?

Why has this happened? I've come to expect more of HBO. I hope that this is not a sign that HBO is caving under the political powers that be.

Let the audience decide. Not the voices of the few and first and loudest. Most of my friends never even heard about this movie. When I took them to the HBO website, they were as shocked as I am to find it mysteriously missing.

Janice L. Gass

"Strip Search" attempts to show that the freedoms we take for granted can be taken away in the name of national security, and our government can turn into a police state the way N. Korea and China are.

It uses two identical incidents with the same dialogue to drive this point home. But there are problems with the premise. First, what if the roles were reversed? I believe it is natural for us to have more compassion for a woman under interrogation, than a man. What if it were an American man being questioned in a Chinese prison, and a Muslim woman being questioned in America? Or better yet, make both of the suspects men so that the stories are indeed parallel. I believe the impact would not be as strong, which highlights how weak the story really is.

Another minor beef is, for me the Chinese interrogator acts too Western in his manner and delivery.

Good acting all around, especially from Maggie Gyllenhall.

5 out of 10

This was quite possibly the BEST hour of television that I have ever seen. I give major kudos to HBO for not backing down on a sensitive topic and producing a fantastic show. I admit that some of the nudity was gratuitous, but I know that using it was trying to make the situations as realistic as possible. I'm a law school student, and I was horrified that people, in our country or in others, do not protest that they have some basic human and civil rights in interrogation settings. I don't usually watch HBO because I don't like the programming, but I am glad I tuned in to watch. Again, this was a great show that everyone should watch. Make more shows like this! Don't be afraid to touch on sensitive topics.

This movie is pure propaganda. The film makers pull out all the stops to elicit a carefully directed emotional response from the audience, but IMHO it fails because their efforts are so blatantly obvious. I find an interesting parallel between the interrogators portrayed in this movie and the movie itself - both end up doing the same thing. The interrogators relentlessly drive their captives in order to get what they want out of them, and the movie does the same thing it's viewers.

Now, instead of contrasting the interrogation of an Arab and an American, if the film makers would have woven together the stories of an innocent person being questioned and a terrorist making his way through multiple levels of bureaucracy - that would have been interesting. But then, that may have resulted in some of the viewers coming to different conclusions than the film makers, something that they're obviously uncomfortable with.

In the post 9/11 world, fear has been indoctrinated into most aspects of our lives. Governments worldwide manipulated and capitalized on this for their own gain - financially, politically and strategically. The Bush-driven Patriot Act has seen many people (guilty and otherwise no doubt) detained, tortured and dehumanized. Since a large percentage of the population are unaware that political agendas of media owners exist, they passively believe what they see on their nightly TV news or read in their daily newspapers. They are taught to fear the unknown, to trust their leaders implicitly (because they use nice words in speeches like 'freedom' and 'family') and not to question motives.

'Strip Search' is a deliberate attempt to throw the light of reality into this collective 'un'consciousness.

The storyline involves parallel stories of two people being detained in custody: an American woman in China, and a Middle Eastern man in the US. By using almost exactly the same dialogue, we are shown how to think outside the usual spectrum, and to feel compassion for both people. Without the twin story of the American woman, people would undoubtedly walk away from this feel feeling a lot differently.

The acting is astonishing. One feels that this film meant more than just another job to the actors involved. I admire them immensely for their efforts.

Hopefully this film will change a few minds, and that as a result - the world might become just that little bit better.

If you're not sure what the words "purient" and "gratuitous" mean, there's no need to look them up. Just watch this embarrassing film.

True, there is a vague hint of an important theme here, but it is clumsily handled, 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 was showing a woman forced to undress, and this shows in the painfully simple screenplay.

On a more positive note, it is interesting to see parallel scenes with the woman, 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 wrong it 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 see it with others present, as I would have been quite embarrassed.

And since when does a movie have to be factual, realistic or based on truth to be noteworthy? I don't care about the implications of this movie so much as the intriguingness of the way in which it is presented to the viewer. It in some way says "we all fear for our own security/safety". Maybe its a little over the top, blunt and not politically correct, but movies are meant to provoke us, to entertain us.. not to feed us facts - unless of course, we are watching a documentary :)

The first thing I thought after seeing this movie was "wow, that would make an awesome screen play for theater". I wasn't really committed to or concerned with factual events, presentation of ideas (political, social or otherwise), or what I would take away from it. I did, however enjoy the intent of the director to provoke the viewer to think for themselves a little. There was not enough information presented to draw factual conclusions regarding the character of either "victim". In fact, I am not certain the word victim is appropriate. Were they? Or are we? I liked that it left me with that thought. I think everyone has an opinion regarding the events of 9/11 and I think this movie draws those opinions out in the viewer and re-validates them a bit. Good or bad.

Very original presentation of a not so original plot.

I thought it was a jaded and predictable film. Predictable in that the two stories using the same script...one in a totalitarian dictatorship and one in the US are not the same.

Would a film with the same script telling two different stories about a woman who murdered a man who killed her child and one about a man who murdered a female doctor who performed abortions and "killed his child" be as well received however well constructed and "thought provoking" the concept and the film might be? I think not.

Since when do we, as Americans, always have to "see the point of view" of those trying to do us harm? It is political correctness taken to the most irrational yet predictable extreme.

Why is it thought provoking to make people question whether terrorists are wrong. Perhaps in the coffee shop crowd, but for me, this was just another example of how off kilter we have become.

When Adolf Hitler solidified his hold on Germany he asked Germans to give up little things so that he could make them stronger. He slowly took more and more freedoms away until there was no freedom at all. As Americans we believe that this could not happen here, we are too democratic. However, many totalitarian governments start slow. In this play, two suspects are being put through a degrading interrogation. One is an American woman being interrogated by a Chinese officer. The other is an Arab being interrogated by an American agent. As the interrogation takes place, the two interrogators become interchangable, saying the same lines. It is a not so subtle way of saying we in the US have become what we had always spoken against. Of course, we can use the argument that we are doing it to protect our way of life. But can't the Chinese use that same excuse? I thought the film was rather blunt, but the message effective. If we are truly the most humane and democratic country in the world, if due process is still alive, then we must show it, not just say it.

I found STRIP SEARCH a thought-provoking and well done piece by some very talented and courageous artists. An example of how TV/Film can be used as a tool to get us to think and look at our world, our times and ourselves. --- BRAVO! and thank you to all involved in this project.

The cast, the direction, the script, the crossover dialogue between the two interrogation all worked for me. And the choice of using nudity? How could they have done it otherwise? It really hit home the humiliation and terror of such practices. A somewhat prophetic piece in light 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 think of one. If he has, I haven't seen it.

Hi, Strip search was a good movie. It was right on point about how your civil rights can be abused by a overzealous government. But I want to point out another aspect of strip searches. I was sentenced to 15 years to life in a maximum security prison for a drug crime. The most inhumane treatment was that of strip searches. I painted a series on this subject which can be viewed at

http://www.15yearstolife.com/contraband.htm

summary of material -

This body of work below was produced in 1995 in response to the dehumanizing

nature of body cavity searches.

INTENT OF THE ARTIST: To give the general public a view of the dehumanizing nature of the prison experience Coming back from a visit with his mother a sadistic guard ordered Papa to bend over and spread his ass cheeks on 3 occasions to look for contraband in his anal canal. No contraband was found after the first visual search. But the guard insisted that Papa continue to bend over. Papa asked the guard what he was looking for. After the third search Papa refused to cooperate asking the guard to call the supervising officer. The guard told him to get dressed and return to his cell.

Papa then went to the law library to write a complaint and researched the issue. Papa discovered 20 pages of directives issued by the Department of Corrections on how guards should search the body cavities of prisoners. Papa was disgusted and decided to paint about this dehumanizing experience. He created automatic paintings and glued parts of the directives to them.

The six pieces of work were then confiscated by the administration when Papa tried to send them to the free world...

Best, Anthony Papa www.15tolife.com author of 15 To Life: How I Painted My Way To Freedom / Feralhouse