“LIONS FOR LAMBS” (2007) Review
I honestly had no intention of seeing the 2007 political drama directed by Robert Redford, “LIONS FOR LAMBS” when it first hit the theaters, nearly nine years ago. I had simply no interest in it. But as with another movie, I had to be talked into seeing it. And to my utter surprise, it turned out to be a lot better than I had expected.
The movie is basically about the current war in Afghanistan and it affected two California-born Army soliders (Derek Luke and Michael Peña), their college professor (Robert Redford) and his current disaffected student (Andrew Garfield); a Washington-based TV journalist (Meryl Streep) and a U.S. senator (Tom Cruise). The story is basically divided into three segments featuring the following:
a) Former California college students-turned Army soldiers Arian and Ernest decide to do something with their lives and enlist in the Army, instead of continue into graduate school. Their actions lead them to take part in a new military operation in Afghanistan, in which the Army will occupy certain strategic points in the mountains in small units. Their helicopter is shot at and the two fall out before the helicopter can crash. Arian and Ernest end up being stranded in the Himilayas, surrounded by the Taliban.
b) In Washington D.C. a charismatic Republican Presidential hopeful, Senator Jasper Irving, has invited TV journalist Janine Roth to announce the new Army strategy in Afghanistan that Arian and Ernest are participating in. He hopes that Roth’s report will convince the public that this tactic is a good thing, but Roth has her doubts and does not want to become an instrument of propaganda. Her boss feels differently.
c) Arian and Ernest’s former college professor, Dr. Stephen Malley, attempts to reach a privileged but disaffected student named Todd Hayes, who is the very opposite of Arian and Ernest. He is bright, but not a hard worker. Todd claims that this is due to the time he spends with his girlfriend, and as president of his fraternity.
As I had stated before, “LIONS FOR LAMBS” turned out to be a lot better than I had envisioned. Quite frankly, I had expected to be bored. I had learned that many critics were not enamored of the movie and viewed it nothing more than a filmed play. Although there is plenty of conversations and dialogue in the story, Redford’s shift to Arian and Ernest’s adventures managed to keep the movie from stagnating. And to be honest, I found the dialogue itself to be very interesting. Redford, along with screenwriter Matthew Michael Carnahan, not only focused on the Bush Administration’s missteps in both Afghanistan and Iraq; but also on the American public and the media’s support of the initial invasions and the public’s reluctance to face the realities of the country’s political state.
The performances were, of course, outstanding. Well, almost outstanding. I must admit that I found Meryl Streep’s portrayal of Roth a little mannered at times – especially toward the end. But the other performances were excellent – specifically Cruise, whose Senator Irving seemed Michael Peña for their poignant portrayals of the two former college students-turned-Army soldiers.
I do not know if many would have the patience or the depth to appreciate, let alone understand this movie. Hopefully, there are many out there who will be able to. I find it disappointing that the most of the critics were incapable of “LIONS FOR LAMBS”. Their views of the movie have only reinforced my belief that is better for a person to form his or her own opinion than allow someone else to form one for him/her.