Lions for Lambs
“Nowhere else have I seen such lions led by such lambs.”
The above quote is from a German general in regards to the British Infantry he fought in the trenches in World War I compared to the pampered commanders who sent them there. The Germans had nothing but respect for the everyday soldiers of the British military and nothing but contempt for those all too willing to send them into the fray, who barely saw real combat. The point of screenwriter Matthew Michael Carnahan (who also triumphed on the geopolitical front earlier this Fall with “The Kingdom”) using this quote in “Lions for Lambs” is a clear indictment of the Bush Administration’s ease in sending our fighting forces into wars with no regard for the slaughter to come in Afghanistan and Iraq. But if you think Carnahan and director/costar Robert Redford are just out for more anti-Bush rhetoric from Leftist Hollywood, perk up your ears- they’re hunting bigger game.
The film follows three different storylines, all interconnected. First is our introduction to Janine Roth (Meryl Streep), a Washington-based reporter on her way to an exclusive interview with fresh-faced GOP Senator Jasper Irving (Tom Cruise), who- grateful for an early push Roth gave him as “The Future of the Republican Party”- is giving her the inside scoop on a new strategy Washington is trying to win the war in Afghanistan. Second is the story of an Army squad, headed by Lt. Col. Falco (“Kingdom” director Peter Berg), sent out as the first wave of the new strategy, and how two of the squad- college buddies Ernest Rodriguez (Michael Pena) and Lt. Arian Finch (Derek Luke)- get separated and are surrounded by Taliban insurgents. The third is a meeting between their California Political Science Professor Stephen Malley (Redford) and student Todd Hayes (Andrew Garfield), who’s frequently absent from class despite having much potential.
Curiously, but perhaps none too surprisingly, I found myself most drawn towards the scenes with Rodriguez and Finch- injured after the attack on their helicopter, unable to move far- as the suspense of impending doom for the friends (whom we see in flashback presenting a project in Malley’s class) tightens and ammo runs out, and all their commanding officer can do is watch on infrared video as rescue tries to get there in time. Pena and Luke make their bond undeniable and passion for their duty absolute; these passages of the film are arguably the best in showing the true heroism of our fighting forces we’ve seen in any movie since Ridley Scott’s “Black Hawk Down”…
…but Rodriguez and Finch are just a part of the story. Malley uses them as an example to Hayes not because they were the best students- they got a B+ on the project- but because they stood out for their convictions, and their desire to back them up with action, a quality he’s seen disappear from Todd through the semester. Meanwhile, Irving does the same dance around real answers to the legitimate questions thrown out by Roth we’re used to seeing from our actual politicians who preach “Stay the course” without having a clear sense of where to go after everything has run its’ course. Roth is understandably frustrated, more so when she gets back to the office and told to run with a story that will instill confidence in the American people while also abandoning the idea of a firebrand press unafraid to go against the status quo in the ratings.
True, the film is as anti-Bush and anti-Iraq as any film that’s broached the subject, but the real target of Redford’s film is apathy, that most fatal of human flaws in the face of the choices that matter most. Roth wants to rage against the GOP machine after figuring out Irving’s game, but her boss is too afraid of getting his hands dirty to go after what is too obviously a PR move to hedge support for the war. Malley wants to see the reckless spirit he once saw in Hayes during an in-class debate used to maximize his potential as a voice of change in the currently chilly political climate, the same spirit that drove Rodriguez and Finch into the line of fire and enlistment, even when Malley- a Vietnam vet- tried to convince them otherwise. The basic message of the film is simple- change will come when action prevails over apathy- a theme the film shares with two of the most compelling muckraking movies in recent memory (which came to mind while watching “Lions for Lambs”- Oliver Stone’s “JFK” and George Clooney’s “Good Night, and Good Luck.” In the end, both painted a rosier picture than this film does (and that should depress you very much), although the last shot did convey some hope in me for the future.
Overall, “Lions for Lambs” is a film where the whole is greater than the sum of its’ parts, which is not to say that it’s a great film (although it’s one I’ll likely remember for a long time to come). None of the performances scream Oscar, although all are at the highest level of professionalism in the craft. The film was compelling without being completely engrossing, and engaging without being truly emotional. The film is every bit as urgent and important as “The Kingdom” without any of that film’s visceral and lively nature (except in the effective and intriguing score by Mark Isham). One can feel Redford’s passion come alive in the story without feeling compelled to act. In the end, Redford’s film (which isn’t quite on the level of earlier successes behind the camera in “Quiz Show,” “A River Runs Through It,” and “The Horse Whisperer”) seems a lot like the character he plays- a professor who’s ability to inspire has been lost by the lack of passion around him.
