Robert Redford's Lions for Lambs is a message movie that skirts, but avoids, preaching about the mistakes made in the "war on terror"--the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The script is solid even if the characters veer toward stereotypes--but the film avoids easy moral choices and really just asks the viewer to make an informed choice. I like Redford's character and his interaction with the two students who become the Rangers. The student he meets with is solid as a foil for Redford's challenges. Cruise is the paragon of the neocon war hawks--intense, veering from fact to half-truth to over-zealous, "a real patriot would trust me" attitude. I thought Streep's reporter was too befuddled by Cruise's braggadocio. Maybe as a symbol of the press's ever-credulous acceptance of propaganda about why we should be fighting in Afghanistan or on how to "win" there. Over-all Lions for Lambs is well worth a look.
Reviews
2 Reviews
The Last Command
(1955)
Even worse than John Wayne
14 March 2009
Warning: Spoilers
It doesn't seem possible that an Alamo movie could be worse than John Wayne's great bomb, but this movie is. Sterling Hayden may be the only believable actor and just barely. The supposed 'friendship' between Bowie and Santa Anna?! But one of a host of trite disasters. Only good for a late night laugh and just barely. The physical lay out of the Alamo is not realistic, but the death of the "Big Three" is better than Wayne's version--although similar. It's too bad because the story of the Alamo deserved a better treatment. This script shows that it was hacked out when Wayne turned down the movie. Too bad Republic pictures didn't fold before this turkey flew or flopped!
Tell Your Friends