A frustratingly oversimplified political drama set in real-time, centers on three major stories, and their character’s various levels of involvement in U.S. affairs.  The first stars Tom Cruise as young, ambitious senator Jasper Irving, who grants an exclusive interview to veteran reporter Janine Roth, played expertly by Meryl Streep.  Irving wants to disclose the major details of a new military strategy being implemented that very moment in Afghanistan.  Meanwhile, young soldiers Arian Finch and Ernest Rodriguez, played by Derek Luke and Michael Peña, become stranded on a snowy mountaintop when that very mission goes awry.  The two soldiers were former students of Stephen Malley (Robert Redford), a weather-worn poli-sci professor at a west coast college.  We witness a meeting between Malley and his slacker student Todd Hayes (Andrew Garfield), whom he desperately tries to convince that using his intelligence/privilege to make a difference in society, rather than wasting it in a frat house is worth the effort.  

Politics aside, you want to like Lions for Lambs because the premise is intriguing.  It’s chock full of accomplished actors and solid performances all around.  The real-time development is rare for the big screen, but engaging none-the-less.  The problem is that there are just as many flaws.  Everything you want to like is negated by something you can’t accept, so you’re left feeling like you just solved a complicated equation, and the answer is simply zero.

The characters were cookie cutouts.  The novelty of the real-time sequencing wears off quickly, as it leaves little room for anything important or definitive, plot-wise.  The soldiers’ sequence was pretty varied, but even that felt hurried and contrived. There were too many unanswered questions, yet you are beaten over the head constantly with big, preachy, and insultingly elementary themes.

There is decent direction and engaging acting on Redford’s part, but lifeless dialogue really kills the film’s momentum.  It’s pretty short, which helps to keep it from becoming stale early on, but unfortunately the conclusion is pretty much a cop-out.

Obviously there was little movement in the film, except for the military scenes, and even then it wasn’t much.  If you’re looking for action, Lions for Lambs is not for you.  If you’re the type to read the newspaper yet you still don’t have a grip on what American society/government policies are like, then you might consider this “eye-opening”.  However, if you actually paid attention in current events class, or read a non-fiction book every once in a while, this film is useless as a political statement or educational tool.  On a purely entertainment level, the film as a whole is blasé and doesn’t really merit as much discussion as I’m sure the filmmakers intended it to create.