Lions For Lambs

By Nathan Young

Movies with a political bent might turn off the casual moviegoer. After all, most people do not go to the nearest multiplex to learn about foreign policy. Robert Redford’s latest directorial effort ‘Lions For Lambs’ is certainly heady stuff that might grate on the nerves of people looking to be purely entertained. It is also an intelligent, thought provoking piece of filmmaking.

While it makes no effort to hide its liberal agenda, even a true-blue conservative would have a hard time criticizing the quality of the final product. The film is well-done and deserves a ‘thumbs up’.

Matthew Michael Carnahan’s screenplay divides the story into three parts. First, we meet veteran political reporter Janine Roth (Meryl Streep), who is on an assignment to interview up and coming Republican senator Jasper Irving (Tom Cruise). Irving is giving Roth the exclusive scoop on a new military operation in Afghanistan.

That new operation is where story number two begins. Two young soldiers, Ernest Rodriguez (Michael Pena) and Arian Finch (Derek Luke), are shot down and stranded in enemy Afghan territory. They are sitting ducks for the opposition as neither man can move particularly well after a long fall from a plane.

The final storyline involves a college professor, Stephen Malley (Redford), and one of his slacking students. Malley is trying to motivate the student, Todd Hayes (Andrew Garfield), to greater things. He uses the story of Rodriguez and Finch, two of his former pupils, to try and light a fire under Hayes.

The interconnectedness of the stories works well. Each story is unique, but relates seamlessly to the others. The back story of Rodriguez and Finch is a nice touch in Malley's attempt to break through to Hayes. Redford the director keeps the story moving and brings the best out of his actors.

The cast in this film is superb. Streep and Cruise steal the show, brilliantly playing off of one another's performance. In the hands of Streep, Roth is skeptical of Irving's claims and is not afraid to say so. This role is not as meaty as some Streep has had in the past couple of years (in films such as 'The Manchurian Candidate' and 'The Devil Wears Prada'), but she makes the most of it nonetheless.

Cruise's ability as an actor has been overshadowed recently by his personal life, but he reminds viewers that he is capable of commanding attention for things other than Katie Holmes and Scientology. Irving is a smooth-talking politician with (despite his denials) aspirations of a presidential run. Cruise brings charm and conviction to Irving, but doesn't let him get soft when he is challenged by Roth.

Pena and Luke are solid supporting actors who do their jobs admirably. They certainly have the most physically challenging roles in the film, but also do a realistic job of portraying the sense of fear and isolation their characters feel. Redford is of course a pro as an actor, and he is reliably good here. Garfield is the newcomer of the cast, but holds his own against Redford in the role of the arrogant and stubborn Hayes.

This film is not for everyone. If political commentary on the war on terror does not sound appealing to you, look elsewhere. However, if you're looking for an interesting and well acted film that makes you think, I recommend it highly.