Lions for Lambs

PASSING THOUGHTS
This is a unique political movie in that there’s no slant or favored perspective, and the focus is not on “them” but on “me”. It doesn’t point fingers at the media, the political parties or the military, but rather it uses them as a way to gradually point the finger at we the people. The dialogue is engaging and well thought-out, and the performances are stellar across the board. Tom Cruise does come off a little like a polished Jerry MaGuire, but apart from that the acting is superb.

It is a film that could easily provoke thought and discussion about world events, but it does so by laying out various arguments and raising questions that go unanswered in the script. This can make for a frustrated viewing if you are an active thinker and want to pursue a train of thought to a satisfactory conclusion. It would be impossible to address every tangent and comment made in the film, but the desire to see that happen is still there. In order to appreciate the movie for what it is and follow the flow of the three stories, it becomes necessary to turn off your own perspectives and embrace the ones presented by the characters on screen. Fortunately that process is made easier by a smart bit of writing that doesn’t tell you the right way to think.

There is one moment that showed some subtle favoritism when Janine Roth examines the pictures on Senator Irving’s wall. The images associate Irving with GW Bush, the Republican Party, and being a “young gun”. Roth’s political views are never really spelled out, nor are those of Professor Malley and Todd Hayes. Aligning one person’s perspective with images that illicit a knee-jerk reaction from many people doesn’t come off as impartial. Anyone with a closed mind about Republicans or Bush is not going to have an open mind about the perspectives of a man who appears to represent those entities.

In addition, there are several premises that are taken as truth that may be hard to swallow for some folks. Since the movie takes pains to avoid stirring up political strife, I will not thwart that by injecting my own views into this review. Let’s just say that this film is not perfectly impartial, but it’s probably about as fair as humans could make it.

Quality and equality aside, this movie is primarily driven by dialogue and doesn’t have much of an edge. Perhaps I’m too apathetic towards movies about apathy, but I didn’t feel much of an impact when the credits started rolling. There is a call to action, but what exactly that action should be isn’t clear. Idealism and cynicism are both advanced, but neither one points to a solution. This is plus with regards to keeping an open mind, but it doesn’t provide any kind of consequence or conclusion. The men who die represent the only real change the movie presents, but the deaths don’t advance any thoughts past what is established at the outset of the film.

“Lions for Lambs” is a very good piece of filmmaking and a great instigation for discussion, but the effects of it are primarily felt in the mind, not the heart. Somehow there is an intellectual detachment that by all accounts shouldn’t exist. Perhaps it lies in the fact that the movie is essentially about philosophy, and while philosophy can be entertaining, it is very rarely engaging.

BASICS

Your Cup O’ Tea:
If you enjoy a well-matched battle of wits and words, you are politically savvy, or you like to ponder and digest broad schools of thought.

Steer Clear:
If you’re looking for a movie that will bash a political party or world view, or if you want a fast-paced action flick. While there is action amidst the discussion, it comprises less than a third of the running time.

Nothing New Under the Sun:
The pacing and action/dialogue ratio is very similar to that of “Spy Games” and the dialogue pops like a political “Ocean’s Eleven”.

Buy or Rent:
RENT. While there is a director’s commentary that may prompt a second viewing, the core of the story is something you probably won’t be returning to. The antagonist is a thought process, not a flesh-and-blood villain, and the script is written to make an impact, not draw you back for more.

FEATURES

-Language Selection

-Scene Selection

-Commentary with Robert Redford

-The Making of “Lions for Lambs”:
Approx 21 minutes. It looks at the typical topics covered in a featurette: story, casting, building the crew, and creating the music. Most of the discussion is why people and decisions worked for the movie instead of how they came to be a part of it. There is a good bit of discussion regarding the messages and perspectives behind the film.
DUH! FACTOR: 6 out of 10

-Script to Screen:
Approx 8 minutes. More discussion on the themes of the movie and what inspired the writer to craft the script. Praises and adulations all ‘round.
DUH! FACTOR: 8 out of 10

-UA Legacy:
Approx 7 minutes. A montage of the UA films made and what awards they received for them.

-Teaser Trailer

-Theatrical Trailer

-Trailers (5)

Woulda Been Nice: If the action was more involving and less symbolic. The soldiers came off as representing what the discussion was all about and not so much on people fighting for survival.