Movie Review: Lions for Lambs

Production Company: MGM
Director: Robert Redford
Cast: Tom Cruise, Meryl Streep, Robert Redford, Michael Peña, Derek Luke, Andrew Garfield, Peter Berg
Rating: R for some war violence and language

By Gregg Tubbs

“Do you want to win the war on terror?” Can you imagine a more provocative tagline than this, posed by a staunchly conservative Senator to a liberal, idealistic reporter in the politically charged new drama Lions for Lambs? On the surface, Lions for Lambs is about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq—confronting them more directly than any mainstream film yet. But it’s focus is as much a war of words and a clash of ideas as a combat between armies. And although it confronts the “war on terror” head-on, its real target is apathy and the oft used saying, “You must stand for something or you may fall for anything.”

Directed by Robert Redford, Lions for Lambs has a no-frills urgency, as if all those involved knew its very topicality could date the film rapidly. And it is certainly topical, sounding at times as if it was pulled directly from the Washington Post editorial section. Its structure is unique, comprised of a pair of heated conversations about our nation’s wars and political landscape that occur simultaneously on opposite coasts. Sandwiched between these conversations is the harrowing tale of two soldiers caught behind enemy lines in Afghanistan. How these three scenarios relate gives Lions for Lambs its real impact and makes it more than topical rhetoric.

In Washington, Janine Roth (Meryl Streep), veteran TV reporter, is getting the scoop of a lifetime in the office of charismatic presidential hopeful, Senator Jasper Irving (Tom Cruise). The Senator is about to give her an exclusive interview to reveal his daring new plan to seize victory in Afghanistan and “win the hearts and minds” of the Afghani people in the process. This is surprising, not only because Irving proposes a previously failed “do more with less” strategy based on surgical strikes by Army Rangers, but also because he has chosen the liberal and very skeptical Roth to write the story. This sets the stage for a probing, heated debate from both sides of the political spectrum. But if you suspect that the film takes sides or tries to tell you what to think, guess again. Its goal is to make you think and draw your own conclusions.

Meanwhile, at a California University, political science professor Dr. Stephen Malley (Redford) attempts to get through to Todd (Andrew Garfield), a gifted, but disaffected student. He makes him a bold offer: He asks him to choose between taking an “easy B” and never attending class again or rejecting apathy and committing to attend class and fulfill his promise to make a difference in this world. It all sounds esoteric, until Malley tells him the story of his last two gifted students, Arian (Derek Luke) and Ernest (Michael Peña), who he also urged to “stand for something.” They took his advice to give back to society rather than taking the easy road to grad school and guaranteed prosperity. But here the film takes another twist. Rather than going into social work or politics (as Malley envisioned), the students joined the Army Rangers and shipped off to Afghanistan! He lauds their commitment, but is distraught over their choice.

The film shuttles between the three story threads in Washington, California, and Arian and Ernest’s increasingly disastrous mission in the mountains of Afghanistan, we begin to see the complex themes at the heart of the film. Liberal and conservative politics, and war or diplomacy are all key issues, but the film also explores less topical, more universal truths such as choices, consequences and commitment. Malley and Irving are opposites—one an academic, influencing young minds in the classroom; the other a powerful Senator, directly controlling the actions of many through his war policy. One promotes the war while the other opposes it, but they both champion the idea of taking a stand and making a commitment. It is only through the story of Arian and Ernest that we see the real-world consequences of the choices made by both Malley and Irving, and to a certain extent, how each has failed Arian and Ernest.

Seeing Lions for Lambs will give you plenty to think about long after the movie ends. You may be left wondering, what do I stand for? Or what have I fallen for? What are the consequences of my political and social choices on brave men and women like Arian and Ernest? Have I really used my gifts to address the world’s ills or have I given in to apathy and settled for “an easy B”? Most importantly, how does Jesus factor into our choices, consequences and commitments?

Study Questions

Lions for Lambs presents us with four distinct, current archetypes: a hawkish conservative, an antiwar liberal, an idealistic intellectual and a disaffected, “slacker” youth. How true to type was each character? Did any one of them surprise you?
Who did you identify with most in the film? Who was the most unlike you?
Why do you think Arian and Ernest made the choice they did? Do you agree or, like Malley, do you admire their commitment while deploring their choice?
The film functioned as a series of debates. Who do you think best stated his or her case? How were you swayed or moved to think differently?
How did Arian and Ernest's real life struggle for survival serve as commentary on the “abstractions” of the debates? Are war and peace moral issues or strictly political?
Where would you place Jesus in these debates? We ascribe the title, "Prince of Peace" (Isa. 9:6), to Jesus. Discuss whether you think this means that Jesus would be on the side of peace.
The Senator believes that the question, “Do you want to win the war on terror?” is the ultimate “yes or no” question of our time. Do you agree? Are things that black and white? Why or why not?
What would Jesus say about commitment? (See Rev. 3:16.) Does Jesus want us to “stand for something”? To what things should we commit and put our faith in? (See 1 Timothy 4:10.)
Malley quotes a remark by a WWI German General: “Never have I seen such lions led by such lambs.” How do you interpret that? Is this a quote you would expect to come from Senator Irving? How does this relate to the title of the film?
Was this an antiwar film or not? How did you feel about the fate of Arian and Ernest? Do you believe you can support the troops, but not the war they fight? (Consider this metaphor: “We all love firemen, but hate fires.”)

Still Have Questions?

If you have any questions
Ask InfoServ

UMC.org Community

Join an online dialogue with United Methodists throughout the world

First Name
Last Name
Email
Zip/ Postal Code		Phone (optional)
Country
Question

Movie Review: Lions for Lambs

Study Questions

Still Have Questions?

UMC.org Community

Contact Us