Product Details

• Actors: Tom Cruise, Meryl Streep, Robert Redford, Michael Peña, Andrew Garfield
• Directors: Robert Redford
• Format: AC-3, Color, Dolby, DTS Surround Sound, Dubbed, DVD, Subtitled, Widescreen, NTSC
• Language: English
• Subtitles: English, Spanish
• Region: Region 1 (U.S. and Canada only. Read more about DVD formats.)
  
• Aspect Ratio: 2.40:1
• Number of discs: 1
• Rating: R (Restricted)
• Studio: United Artists
• DVD Release Date: April 8, 2008
• Run Time: 92 minutes
• Average Customer Review: 3.1 out of 5 stars See all reviews (97 customer reviews)
• ASIN: B0013FCWUW
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #10,118 in Movies & TV (See Bestsellers in Movies & TV)

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com
The considerable authority of Robert Redford pulls some heavyweight talent into Lions for Lambs, a rare Hollywood foray into flat-out political filmmaking. Three dramas, all connected, play out simultaneously during the same hour: On a mountainside in Afghanistan, two U.S. soldiers (Michael Pena and Derek Luke) find themselves stranded during a new military surge; on Capitol Hill, a Republican senator (Tom Cruise) tries to sell the new strategy to a seasoned reporter (Meryl Streep); and in California, a professor (Redford) tries to light the fire of commitment in an increasingly apathetic college student (Andrew Garfield). Director Redford cuts back and forth amongst these arenas, a gambit which thankfully obscures how weak the one non-talkfest (the Afghanistan segment) really is. You can tell Redford and screenwriter Matthew Michael Carnahan put their juice in the debate between Cruise and Streep, which summarizes Right and Left views on the Middle Eastern wars, and does so reasonably lucidly--although there is little here that would surprise anyone who has looked into the subject. The college section suggests Redford's belief that there are lots of people, distracted by tabloid culture and self-centeredness, who haven't looked into the subject. So he lectures us about it, sounding suspiciously like an old geezer remembering the good old days. If this film had been released in 2004, it might at least have bucked majority opinion, but coming out in fall of 2007, it already felt like old news. --Robert Horton

Product Description
Robert Redford, Tom Cruise and Meryl Streep deliver "three knockout performances" (Vue Weekly) in this powerful story about how the decision makers at the top affect American soldiers on the ground half a world away.

An idealistic professor (Redford), a charismatic U.S. Senator (Cruise) and a probing TV journalist (Streep) have opposing viewpoints about the actions of our nation and the attitudes of its citizens. But the human consequences of war become chillingly clear for two of the professor's former students, who find themselves trapped behind enemy lines, fighting for freedom... and their very lives.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

203 of 214 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars It takes time for the punch to be felt..., April 9, 2008

By	Grady Harp (Los Angeles, CA United States) - See all my reviews (TOP 10 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

This review is from: Lions For Lambs (Full Screen Edition) (DVD)

LIONS FOR LAMBS as a movie has the courage to do just what the message of the film attempts to do: encourage the American public to stop being so apathetic about our position in the global community. The dramatization of three points of view about the Middle East conflicts (it not only takes on the Iraq debacle, but adds the Afghanistan and Iran problems as well) could, in lesser hands than Robert Redford's direction of Matthew Michael Carnahan's script, be a preachy bore. But while the 'action' of the film may not grab the viewer, the afterburn of the message will haunt the thinking person.

Three scenarios interweave (at times a bit bumpy in the editing, and at times a bit distracting): adamantly pro-war Republican Senator Irving (Tom Cruise) is interviewed by veteran 'thinking' journalist Janine Roth (Meryl Streep) and each defends/attacks the current strategy of the war in Iraq (Irving is taking calls about the latest 'expansion' into Afghanistan); Professor Malley (Robert Redford) tries to resurrect a sense of involvement in a student Todd Hayes (Andrew Garfield) once bright but now sinking into the apathy of living the good life; ex-students of Professor Malley - Arian Finch (Derek Luke) and Ernesto Rodriguez (Michael Peña) - have committed to the idea of acting for change and have ended up being dropped in Afghanistan in the very 'new' war Senator Irving is addressing. By stirring these three approaches to the manner in which the public is currently addressing the war in Iraq in a concurrent conversation, the film involves the viewer in the crossfire of apathy and misinformation that come from failed education, faulty governmental intervention and the media sellout to get ratings. It is not a pretty picture, but then our current state of affairs is not one of which we can be proud.

There are no answers here, just harsh realities and questions as to why we can remain so passive as a nation involved in the lowest state of global respect ever known. The film has flaws, but if the viewer can digest the information illustrated by some very fine acting, perhaps there may be a chance for a wake-up call. Watch it for the message, not expecting a thriller or an action movie. The mind is what is engaged here. Grady Harp, April 08

13 of 16 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Pretty awful...no matter what your politics are, April 27, 2008

By	mrliteral - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)

At first glance, you'd think that Lions for Lambs would be a good movie: after all, it stars Tom Cruise, Robert Redford and Meryl Streep, all reasonably decent actors, and is directed by Redford, who's received acclaim for some of his past directorial efforts. Unfortunately, it is a tedious, preachy film that seems more designed to deliver a message than to entertain; it winds up doing neither well.

There are three distinct storylines going on, all taking place over a period of an hour in different regions of the world. In California, Robert Redford is a political science professor debating an apathetic student about political activism during the former's office hours. There is no plot, just a bunch of back-and-forth arguing. Meanwhile, two of Redford's former students - who actually followed his call to participate, though not in the way he intended - are now Special Forces soldiers trapped on a mountaintop in Afghanistan after a mission went wrong. This is the only storyline that is minimally interesting, probably because it is the only one with any real action in it.

The third storyline involves a Republican senator played by Tom Cruise giving an interview to reporter Meryl Streep. The purpose of their meeting is to unveil the purpose of the Afghanistan mission, which Cruise does not yet know has gone wrong. The interview, however, turns into a debate about the United States's efforts in the Middle East, and it is grating to watch. The attempt to provide a semblance of balance fails: Cruise's pro-war stance is so filled with cliched lines - and he comes off too glib - that he is utterly unbelievable. Streep isn't much better on her side.

From a political standpoint, I actually agree with a lot of what this movie says, but it does it so poorly that it undermines its own cause. I often say I can enjoy a good book or movie even if I disagree with its politics, as long as it's done well; similarly, I can hate a book or movie that I agree with if it's done bad, as this one is. Whether you are for or against the Iraq war, this movie should be avoided.

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars And it had so much potential..., April 27, 2008

By	J. Page (USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This movie had a lot of potential, it had a really good premise and could have been a really good movie but it failed miserably.

The #1 problem with this movie was that the producer/director did not do their homework. By that, I mean ALL the military aspects of this movie were laughable (I literally laughed where inappropriate). I won't point out all the mistakes, I'm not someone who does that. I don't want to spoil anything so just know when you're watching, that two "American" soldiers, especially Army Special Forces would NEVER do what these two do at the end, its insulting for those of us who are over here fighting right now that people will believe that.

The other BIG problem with this movie was the script, not the story or even the screenplay but the dialogue itself. Watching this was like sitting through a liberal Political Science lecture. The movie was almost painful to sit through, and at just over 90 minutes thats really saying something. Tom Cruise and Meryl Streep are two of the best actors alive and in this movie, I could tell they were acting. I didn't believe he was a senator and I didn't believe she was a reporter. Cruise and Streep did their best with the script and the direction they were given, but all in all this movie was just BAD.

If you're looking for a GOOD movie about Afghanistan and why we're still here, watch "Charlie Wilson's War" It blows this movie out of the water.