|
Lions For Lambs (Widescreen Edition) Posters
Photos Art
Search for Posters Art Prints, photos and get
results from all the many categories from Amazon including
books, videos, dvds, toys, video games, and more.
|
|
|
Posters Art
Prints Photos collectables |
|
|
|
|
|
|
If for some reason you can't find what the
poster or art print your looking for try using the search boxes
below
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Rating:  -
At first glance, I thought this movie was going to be some high-handed shot from the liberal entertainment community. It was not; which more than explains the very cool reception it has received from film critics and the press. The story is wonderful, the acting is "real life" rather than an exaggeration of real humanity; strike two as far as the critics and press are concerned. The film has been dubbed as "dialogish" which means one of two things; you either don't want to listen to the message OR you're too dimwitted to enjoy a movie with "words" in it. Strike three! The movie is powerful enough to raise your feelings of patriotism and participation in community service. The arguments in political science are thought provoking. Redford and Streep are outstanding, as is Redford's direction. Buy this movie, it will be a time capsule for generations.
Rating:  -
A new approach. A new mandate. A new vision. End result: dead American soldiers and a bankrupt economy. This is a finely done anti-war film that makes the viewer pay attention. Now if the viewers would only pay attention during this upcoming presidential election! Final lesson: The only thing men learn from history is that men never learn from history.
Rating: -
This is the kind of film which is carried by its actors, who are each tonally perfect. Putting aside their possible salaries, it is also one of the cheapest to produce you can imagine (except perhaps for the battle set). Even if it were made more cheaply, it is hard to imagine that its drama would have suffered.
The typical Hollywood line is "If you want to send a message, call Western Union." And this is nothing if not a message film. But that hardly detracts from its mounting excitement, as the three diverse storylines begin to come together. It's not just about a message you see. It's about a lost message. It's like the parable of the mustard seed, which can fall on stony or on fertile ground, or the message for ears if you have them.
And in a way, it's about Redford's own arc of creativity with getting out a message, from Three Days of the Condor to All the President's Men to The Way We Were.Three Days of the CondorAll the President's Men (Two-Disc Special Edition)The Way We Were (Special Edition). This one is about the corrupted message, passed by a messenger (Streep) who has sold out to the tabloid magnates. In the previous works, most notably All the President's Men, you got the feel that it was about knowing the truth and having it set you free. But this is more about incuriosity about the truth, and how much easier it is to ignore it and enjoy your own little playpen.
Professor Malley (Redford) plays a professor at the what could be UCLA, but with the tuition stated, more likely USC. He has a meeting with a non-performing student, a frat boy. There is an immediate rapport between them and you can well believe in the Redford's character having once been at a similar place in his young life, albeit threatened in those days by the Vietnam draft. Malley once had two other students, who are now in Afghanistan. They were more hard-working, coming as they did from LA ghettos where blacks and Hispanics experience far more violence than the white frat boy could imagine. While the frat boy is, for the moment, free to live his own life, the former students are currently the "lions for lambs", the playthings of fate.
That fate is foreshadowed by the ambitions of a senator hoping to run for president, Tom Cruise, who believes that he can provide a way to victory in the place which has never been conquerable from Alexander the Great to the Soviet Union, and which is now contested between warlords, the Taliban and the US and allies. Whatever happens, the former students of Professor Malley, are there and very much in harm's way. Cruise does not break a sweat as he implements the policy of the executive branch, between cell phone calls and his interview with formerly distinguished journalist Meryl Streep (now a person reduced to a narrow crawl space while Spears and Fetterline command the evening news and a bleached blond with a rack holds court). You have the feeling that Streep is in hell (even her thermostat at the studio is set too high for comfort). She rode a wave once of enthusiasm for policies she never took the time to understand. It was easer to sell them than to confront their inventors with questions. Having become a seller, it is impossible now to become a truth-seeker.
In the end, it is about the generation which slumbers, whether lions or lambs. It is about their lulling by all the cunning devices of the media, while their fates will one day, you can imagine, be held in the well-manicured hands of French-cuffed Cruise, their future absolute monarch. He is an expert at military intelligence, he says, having graduated first in his class at West Point. But he has never seen combat.
His future minions have many toys they have not yet taken from the upper shelf (Streep), but at a word, they will be able to do so, if his party leader's latest cock-up can be spun using the heroism of Malley's former students as a recruiting tool.
If there is a Deep Throat in this story, it is Streep, whose crawl space should be stretched to fill the whole screen, expelling the tacky tabloid amusement for what she really knows, and when she knew it. But until the customers quit drugging on the fluff, that cannot happen. Anyway, she's 57, and she has fatrolls rather than a rack. Will the frat boys watch?
Rating:  -
If this story were real...if Meryl Streep's character was a real reporter, and Tom Cruise's character was a real politician, and they had a conversation EXACTLY like the conversation in this movie, MAYBE this film would have a legitimate point. However, it is not real. Meryl Streep is not Janine Roth and Tom Cruise is not Senator Irving. Most importantly, this is not a real conversation. It is a fictitious conversation, where the screenwriter can manipulate the conversation in any way he wants (as it is with all screenplays). The dialogue in this movie is carefully crafted and controlled for political purposes. It is propaganda. Now, both sides of an issue have propaganda. Propaganda is not bad. But this movie supposes to speak for both sides of an issue, when in reality it speaks only for one. The liberal agenda is just as apparent when Irving is speaking as it is when Roth is speaking. I found it narrow-minded and nauseating.
Artistically speaking the movie is fantastic. Three separate storylines, taking place in about one hour, all at the same time. The viewer is equally, and highly, interested in all of them. Masterful work.
Watch this movie for its aesthetic merits. Politically it is worthless.
Rating: -
I thoroughly enjoyed this dialogue-heavy movie. Yes, it didn't present any new ideas (read: new political views or arguments), but it was very interesting nonetheless. I also enjoyed the cast although I am not sure Tom Cruise was perfect for his role... The ending was too abrupt and left too many things unresolved for me. Still, I recommend it highly to people who like to watch and listen to brainy, dialog-heavy policital movies.
|
