Lions for Lambs

Though Lions barely considers the soldiers' choices, it's clear they've been egregiously misinformed, turned into terms in someone else's argument.

Lions for Lambs

Director: Robert Redford
Cast: Tom Cruise, Meryl Streep, Robert Redford, Michael Peña, Derek Luke, Andrew Garfield, Peter Berg
MPAA rating: R
Studio: United Artists
First date: 2007
UK Release Date: 2007-11-09 (General release)
US Release Date: 2007-11-09 (General release)

The news is bad in Lions for Lambs. As the film begins, you hear reports of roadside bombs in Tikrit and U.S. soldiers killed, the decline of "public perception" of the war. Familiar and dire, this brief inventory provides a pithy context for the three storylines that follow. All concern possible responses to the current forever war, and none is designed to seem adequate. The news is bad, the film submits, and so is any potential rejoinder.

Directed by Robert Redford and written by Matthew Michael Carnahan (who wrote The Kingdom), Lions for Lambs is most notoriously the first project coming out of the Tom Cruise iteration of United Artists. It is also a clumsy movie, full of ideas and not very thoughtful. Initially, its politics seem obvious; each plot makes the villain clear enough, even if the solutions remain fuzzy. Jasper Irving (Cruise), a senator with presidential aspirations, offers TV journalist Janine Roth (Meryl Streep) an exclusive interview, during which he lays out a plan for squashing the Taliban at last (something like the surge, only faster and leaner and more secret). At the same time -- as the film's elaborate crosscutting structure insists -- Vietnam veteran and poli-sci professor Stephen Malley (Redford), tenured at “a California university,” meets with a disaffected student, Todd (Andrew Garfield), offering him a straight-up B for the semester if he only engages with the world, in particular, the current U.S. wars.

Also at the same time, these wars continue. The third plot follows Special Forces troops Arian (Derek Luke) and Ernest (Michael Peña), who also happen to be Stephen's former students, as well as pieces in the plan Jasper is describing to Janine. That is, they are the young men of color who are acting out the plot the white folks are talking about.

This race dynamic is, of course, imbricated in the film's bad news as well as history. Race has ever been a means to ordain difference and engender antipathy, to identify sides and set them against one another. Here, however, the deployment of race and difference is simplistic and disturbing, ironically complicating Lions for Lambs' seemingly obvious politics.

Initially, it appears that Arian and Ernie follow orders, as the film offers no explanation of how they've come to their current state, about to mount an assault on the "Tali." Their commander, Lt. Col. Falco (Peter Berg) explains the mission by pointing out on the map but not naming Iran, point being that the eventual aim is to take on that pesky bad-bad nation, following groundwork in the Afghan-Pakistani mountains.

As the mission's fundamental illicitness recalls that of the war Stephen protested when he came home (attacking nations not okayed for attack by Congress), the film seems to condemn it -- at least insofar as the goals are articulated by the odious Senator Irving. But even as Janine parries with him, asking questions and visibly disbelieving the answers, stating outright that reporters, after Iraq, no longer trust their government sources, she also absorbs the guilt he assigns her: she and everyone else in the news business responded to the way "terror colored that [9/11] morning in shades we'd never seen before," as well as opinion polls, and told stories that supported perceived public desires. "We both put our fighting men at risk," charges Jasper. "I've admitted my mistakes, will you?"

He claims that everyone "needs a win," and that this plan, at last, will provide just that. At the same time that Jasper pounds Janine, she punishes herself. When he leaves the office for a moment, she wanders briefly, looking at the photos that place him with other bad-faith actors (Cheney, Bush, Rice), finally coming upon a Time magazine cover story, a story she wrote eight years ago proclaiming Jasper the "future of the Republican party." The camera cuts from the framed story to Streep's miraculous face, which conveys in a subtle instant, layers of emotions: pain, regret, pride, frustration, grief, and anger.

It's a breathtaking image, lasting mere seconds, and it suggests what's lost in the rest of the film's hammering. Stephen's deal with Todd is disheartening, as he offers him the model of Arian and Ernie, scholarship athletes who had none of the advantages built into the smart white boy's background. As Stephen sees it, Todd was once promising and engaged (that is, he "leaned forward during lectures," and even when he didn't do his homework, he was so opinionated in class that he generated "one of the most interesting debates [Stephen] had ever been a part of"). Stephen mourns Todd's cynicism, his realization that the system works just the way you see it working in Jasper's office -- where politicians and journalists come to understandings and the rest of the population, feeling helpless and hopeless, turns on the Home Shopping Network.

The answer, suggests Stephen, is commitment. As an awkward flashback reveals, he was horrified when he learned Ernie and Arian were enlisting. “I did everything I could to stop them,” he tells Todd, “But I revered the reasons they went.” But those reasons sound confused at best, as the students explain they mean to "help" the people in the war zone and return more able to gain access to U.S. power structures, by politics and/or corporate entertainment. It's a stunning revelation, making their reasons seem as invested in mythologies as anything Jasper's pronouncing as he leans over Janine in his camera-ready suit.

Jasper's meanness is clear enough, raced and gendered and classed in completely familiar ways. So too is the soldiers' decency and faith, the lesson they offer up for Stephen and, he hopes, Todd. It's tempting to recall here The Legend of Bagger Vance, also a well-meaning and completely wrong-headed story of hope and uplift embodied by a beautiful black mythological figure, played by beautiful Will Smith. Here, the filtered light and mystifying effects are less beneficent. Arian and Ernie lie crippled in the harsh snowy mountains, after falling from their helicopter during the mission's first stages. Surrounded by enemies (who are tracked by greenish computer grids back at Falco's base camp), they calculate their chances. Though Lions has barely considered how they came by their own choices, it's clear they've been egregiously misinformed, turned into terms in someone else's argument.


So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.