I think she's on firmer ground when dealing with Soderbergh and downright insightful in this passage:
Soderbergh wonders why he’s at an impasse. It may not be such a mystery. A few years ago he directed a film about Che Guevara that managed, over the course of its four and a half hours, not to say anything significant about a life and career that raises a great many historical and ideological questions. The world of cinema has rarely seen such an exercise in non-committal and evasive filmmaking.
At any rate, in Che, Soderbergh showed the murderous villainy of the CIA and the military. Now, a few years later, in Haywire, US intelligence operatives and assassins are semi-heroes! What is a “serious” spectator to make of that? The director’s quandary may have something to do with a cluelessness about the critical events and processes of our time.
His legitimate dissatisfaction with both his Hollywood and independent-cinema sides has been developing for years. After launching a career as an anti-establishment figure, Soderbergh has reached a crossroads, above all, because he has played fast and loose over a long period with big questions of art and social life.
In my opinion, his only great film is his first, Sex, Lies & Videotape. Erin Brokivich works but it's not great unless you're grading in comparison to those lousy Ocean films.
This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"