In M. Night Shyamalan's first (and best) feature, seeing dead people was all the rage.
A century has done little to dampen D.W. Griffith's colossal Silent Era take on human history.
Vittorio De Sica took a subtle approach in underscoring the horrors of Italian anti-Semitism.
Marco Bellochio's tough 1965 debut presaged a wave of social change.
Pasolini's debut feature demonstrated a willingness to play by (and change) neorealist rules.
When severed hands do the walking, you'd better hope the movie holds up.
It's déjà vu all over again, and again, in a horror-thriller Melissa George takes to heart.
A Hitchcockesque effort from South Korean Park Chan-wook is half-baked.
Turning the outsourcing paradigm upside down makes for subversive science fiction.
Moving "The Mayor of Casterbridge" to the Sierra Nevadas can leave you with snow and ice.
Directed by: Robert Redford
Starring: Robert Redford, Meryl Streep, Tom Cruise, Michael Peña
Lions for Lambs
It's understandable to make want to make an idealistic political "thriller" about the twin-pulls of duty to country and Iraq-tempered skepticism. But only a strong and coherent story, "Syriana"-style, can save such an undertaking from becoming that least appetizing of animals — the liberal Hollywood sermon. There's no saving director Robert Redford's cut-and-paste job about idealism gone awry. Start to finish, it's plagued with bad planning and hackneyed pitfalls — a bit like some war efforts.
He loosely ties together a California political science professor (Redford), a gung-ho U.S. senator with a new plan to "win" in Afghanistan (Tom Cruise), a skeptical reporter interviewing the senator (wasted Meryl Streep), and two of the professor's students who feel duty-bound to enlist and, of course, find themselves in hell-hole Afghanistan. The title, "lions for lambs," shortens (and waters down) a Battle of the Somme observation by a German officer about the folly of British soldiers being led to trench-warfare slaughter by unyielding generals, "Nowhere have I seen such Lions led by such Lambs." In essence, the lions are hopeful American boys and the lamb/donkeys the self-righteous leaders ill-equipped to manage them either militarily or politically.
The fractured, unthrilling narration skips back and forth between smooth senator, war scenes and anguished (Vietnam vet) professor. But the failure to decide just who and what are important at any given time dishonors the underlying message of hypocrisy abundant, good young men wasted and American idealism betrayed. It's an abnormally annoying outcome in the hands of Redford, whose worst films are usually more accomplished.Reviewed by: Marcia Yarrow