I liked the overall message and theme of the movie. I am passionate about the topic of freedom vs. security. However, being the feminist that I am, I was turned off by many things. It irks me when more than half the movie they show Maggie Gyllenhaal nude, and only a brief glimpse of the other victim, a male. The reason is that two individuals, an American woman in some Asian country and a foreign male in America, are being held on aiding a terrorist. Glenn Close is interrogating the male, and some Asian male interrogating Maggie Gyllenhaal. Around 25 minutes in, (It is a 55 minute film) the victims are told to take off their clothes. As it always is with Hollywood films, Maggie Gyllenhaal is shown off a lot more imo.Also, during one scene that would horrify any female undergoing it, the officer makes her stand against a wall with her legs spread and palms flat against the wall. He feels up her breasts, and then he says some line like how he is "going to do it every day until it is like breathing. 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, it was enough to make any girl squirm at the thought of some strange man doing that to you.Then it cuts to the scene were Glenn Close is interrogating the male victim. She looks over his neck, shoulders, back, and arms with a flashlight, 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 and unrealistic. She would be feeling him up too and, of course, the movie does not show this. Who looks over someone with a flashlight? That is not all that terrifying, and I guess that is why he did not confess at the end, but Maggie Gyllenhaal did. Either way, personally I am tired of so much female nudity and the taboo about showing anything but a male behind in movies. They say it adds realism and a connection but I find it detracts from taking a film seriously. Imo, a good story that can entertain and keep the audience's attention without nudity is always a better-made film then one that must rely on it. Plus, there are better movies that take a look at the balance between security and individual liberties.

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.

This film begins in a classroom with a professor asking his students if it was acceptable to give up your rights for 1 day if the government could guarantee that it could get rid of terrorism. He then proceeds to ask the same question, but extending the time period from 1 day to 10 years.The director then examines two identical situations differing only in their location. The first scenario is of an American woman being hooded, and then abducted by Chinese security forces and then taken to an unknown location where she is asked some uncomfortable questions. The second scenario is of the same thing happening to an Arab man (they never really say which country he's from) being hooded and abducted and taken to an FBI building where he's questioned.This film is effective in asking the viewer whether the US wishes to fight any war in a manner similar to how Communist China (with no supposed civil freedoms) fights a War on Terror. Additionally, the viewer is asked whether civil liberties which have taken many decades of struggle to obtain and keep are so worthless that they can be discarded for any period of time. One of the most ironic parts of the movie is that the quote by Thomash Jefferson "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." is used by the Arab suspect in his political science thesis and then the FBI agent questioning him asks whether the use of this statement is a call to violent dissent.The problem with this film is that both scenarios use precisely the same dialog and this while initially effective gets pretty boring at the end. Also in pre-Abu Ghraib world people could be happy at the realism of the level of abuse that both parties experience, but we now know that a lot worse can and does happen.I can understand why this film isn't shown more in the US, no-one wants our country compared to Communist China, and certainly not at this time. Whether this is a valid point for not showing the film is debatable.

This piece of garbage is terrible, I mean horrible. This is one of the worst pieces of trash ever. I cant believe such good actors felt they needed to be in this, the paycheck couldnt be worth it, its a made for tv movie for gods sake.Its about some interrogations of 2 students. The writing here is painfull to listen to. There is no reason for this to exist. It tries to make a point and fails misserably. It crashes and burns like only so few can. I just finished watching it and frankly I'm kinda ticked off at the hour of my life I lost.If Strip Search happens to be on when your flipping the channels. Search for something better.