Lions For Lambs | The Critique

You have Tom Cruise and Meryl Streep – best of both the worlds – and add Robert Redford to the preposition. While all grey cells are dancing with happiness, your eyes are shocked to read bad or to put it mildly, un-favorable reviews and unbelievable Box Office collections for a Tom Cruise film. Some of it definitely reflect reality. There are reasons to hate this film. There are reasons to say – don’t watch this film. There are reason to say – it’s a lamb leading a pack of lions.

Tom Cruise plays a Senator pushing forward a bill to change war strategy in Afghanistan to counter nexus of Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan’s fundamentalist powers. He wants a journalist – played by Streep – to created favorable public opinion. Streep has her own reservations as from the outset it looks more like a propaganda. On the other hand a professor – Redford playing the character brilliantly – wants a promising student of his to come out of the disillusion phase of his life. He tells the story of two of his students who are currently fighting in Afghanistan. These two story develop the content however fail to evoke strong emotions. They are backed with performances but fail to impress. There is a third story which is not neatly etched but explains the hypocrisy of elite political sections and failure of idealistic educators. The two students who joined defense fight it out the hard way in frozen peaks of Afghanistan.

A good idea is muddled and impact is ruined. The film fails to conclude properly and leaves audience in a confused state. A film which should have either made audience cringe or inspire them, failed on both the counts. Performances, nevertheless, are good. Cruise surprises with the subtle moments. Streep and Redford – experience helps them walk into their roles. Andrew Garfield is ordinary.

Redford is an accomplished filmmaker. This film might have disappointed many but the intent deserves an applause.

Written By: Sujoy Ghosh