As those who have seen this movie know, this is a film designed to play on the paranoid minds of people who think that the United States will turn fascist over-night in an effort to fight the war on terror. I am stunned that in our uber-P.C. society there are so many people who actually think that American law enforcement agencies are torturing people to extract information. Sidney Lumet, and everyone who liked this movie, are clearly among them. I didn't want to review this movie based on its bad political message, but since this movie was made solely to make a political statement and not for any entertainment value, I have been forced to criticize it based mainly on its politics.<br /><br />This movie juxtaposes two parallel stories. In one, an American grad student (Maggie Gyllenhaal) studying abroad in China is arrested by the Chinese secret police and brutally interrogated by means of a humiliating strip search (she is suspected of consorting with terrorists). In the other story, a young Arab man in the U.S. has the exact same experience, except it's the FBI doing the interrogating. The dialogue is the same, word-for-word, in both stories. For those who don't understand, Lumet was kind enough to beat you over the head with the point that *GASP* perhaps America is becoming like communist China! One of the biggest failings of "Strip Search" as a movie is the incredible lack of any subtlety whatsoever in the story's execution. As I mentioned, the dialogue in each story is EXACTLY THE SAME. A more intelligent screenwriter could have effectively made his point simply by making the two people's experiences similar. There was no need to have the same dialogue. Are we expected to believe that two people in two separate countries are being interrogated the exact same way, complete with the same dialogue, at the exact same time? Statistically, that's probably less likely to happen than fifty people in fifty different countries all being killed by flying champagne corks at the same time.<br /><br />It's amateurish problems like this which make it obvious that this movie is meant solely as a political allegory, and not for entertainment set in reality. Which brings me back to the lame political message. Does Lumet really think this is how the FBI interrogates people? If something like this was ever done by an FBI agent, that agent would lose his/her job, and probably his/her boss would be fired as well. You don't have to work for the FBI to realize that. My dad is a retired FBI agent, and hearing what really happens at the FBI makes this movie look pretty stupid in comparison. A real FBI agent could have his career destroyed if he uses a racist term. Imagine what would happen if agents routinely engaged in the sort of interrogation that this movie shows!<br /><br />For those who still are not convinced, think about it in a practical way. The FBI is a bureaucracy, and the people at the top of the organization all want to protect their own butts. If it ever became known that the FBI tortured people to obtain information, do you think any of those people would still have jobs? Of course not; heads would roll. That's why the guys at the top have every reason NOT to want the agents to do things like this, and why they would fire any agent who did. On the other end of the spectrum, the agents also don't want to lose their jobs. Movies tend to portray cops and FBI agents as "Dirty Harry" types, people willing to break every rule to catch the bad guy. In real life, it's never worth losing your job over something like this. <br /><br />Anyway, it's generally infuriating to see a bunch of oxygen-wasting Hollywood celebrities pretending like they have any idea what goes on in American law enforcement agencies. And that's what this film is, as well as a pretty obnoxious insult to all American cops and enforcers of the law who risk their lives to protect people like Sidnet Lumet.