Lions for Lambs

Lions for Lambs

Irving calls Streep’s character, Janine Roth, into hisoffice on the Hill to give her an exclusive on a new offensive approach inAfghanistan. Their meeting beginsat 10 a.m., and as it progresses, he tells her that the offensive has alreadybegun; in fact, it began at roughly the same time as their meeting. And there’s one of the connectingelements between the stories; the action switches between them as the eventsunfold in real time, over the course of just about an hour and a halftotal. So, we watch Irving doinghis charming, laser beam intensity best to convince Roth of the virtues of theapproach and the need for her to get the story out right away, switchingperiodically to what’s actually going on in that offensive.

What’s going on is what turns out to be a singularlyill-fated attempt to put a detachment of soldiers on a mountaintop inAfghanistan from which they’re to monitor and intercept small detachments ofthe enemy. Irving’s convinced ofthe plan’s genius, even as Roth points out that a similar strategy failedmiserably in Vietnam, making targets of the soldiers. (Irving is, of course, too young to remember Vietnam, andincredulous that Roth would bring it up.) But, that’s just what happens. The attempt goes horribly wrong, and the second story focuses on twosoldiers and what happens to them. I found this the most powerful of the stories by far, partly because ofwhat happens and how it develops, and also because of the acting by MichaelPeña and Derek Luke, playing Ernest Rodriguez and Arian Finch,respectively. (Peter Berg is alsovery strong as their C.O.)

How Rodriguez and Finch came to be in Afghanistan is wherethis second story intersects with the third. Redford’s character is Stephen Malley, a political scienceprofessor at a California university. When we first meet him, he’s trying to recapture a promising student,Todd Hayes (Andrew Garfield), who’s been slacking off in a major way. During their conversation, Malleypresents Rodriguez and Finch to Hayes as an example of the way he couldgo. They were students ofMalley’s, out of urban LA, at the university on athletic scholarships. The pivotal moment in Malley’s discussionwith Hayes comes when we see, in flashback, a class presentation Rodriguez andFinch did, arguing for more engagement in world affairs within the U.S. Their points spark a lively discussionin the class, with several of their classmates basically accusing them of notwalking the walk. At theconclusion of the presentation, they reveal that they’ve enlisted in themilitary, to Malley’s dismay.

This is a really deep story, particularly the elementsinvolving Rodriguez, Finch, Malley and Hayes, and I’m not going to tell more ofit because I won’t do it justice. But where Cruise’s senator comes across as over-the-top, the men in theother stories seem very, very real. Streep’s character is quite believable, too, but she’s hampered by herinvolvement in the least compelling of the stories. The fault isn’t in Cruise’s portrayal; it’s just that thecharacter he’s playing seems almost a caricature of a bright young politicalstar.


The special features include a making-of featurette withinterviews with the major cast members and explanations of the process ofmaking the film. The secondfeaturette goes into more detail on the development of the script; reallyinteresting information, but on my review DVD, the video froze about 1/3 of theway into this featurette, so I can only imagine what the visuals might havelooked like. (There’s also a niceretrospective on the films of United Artists over the years to set up the“new,” Cruise-helmed UA.)

Audio is English Dolby Surround, with English and Spanishsubtitle options. Thecinematography and score are both quite impressive and affecting.

As you sort through Lionsfor Lambs (and, if you do watch it, you’ll find yourself thinking back onit quite a lot), there are messages about politics, about the role of themedia, about higher education and student apathy, and about friendship andsacrifice. Quite a lot to take in,and I think it’s perhaps too much. But the issues raised are vitally important, and I give both Carnahanand Redford kudos for what they’ve done and tried to do.