Sundance's Masterpiece or liberal tub-thumping?

Lions for Lambs - 4.5/5

Robert Redford hasn't directed a film since 2000's disappointing golf fable The Legend of Bagger Vance. That he chose to return with a film around American policy in the war on terror might feel some with a sense of dread of the overly-worthy tub-thumping. The subject matter and Redford's well-known liberal leanings might spell box office poison stateside and that would be a real shame, because what we have here is an intelligent, thought-provoking and brilliantly shot and acted piece of film-making. It's also possibly Redford's best movie as director to date.

The title comes from a quote by a German commander in the First World War on the British Army that never had he seen such lions led by such lambs. The plot follows three strands - in Washington an ambitious senator (Tom Cruise) unveils a new military strategy to a morally compromised reporter (Meryl Streep). At a university elsewhere in the country a politocs professor (Redford) tries to inspire a brilliant but apathetic student (newcomer Andrew Garfield). Linking these two threads two of the professors former students, implementing the senators new stategy find themselves pinned down on a mountain in Afghanistan.

Whilst it may not be completely balanced it is far from a piece of liberal propaganda. Instead the script by Michael Carnahan (who also scripted the far less impressive The Kingdom) is intelligent and thought-provoking, making a good attempt to engage with the complexity of situations and ask questions rather than provide easy answers. The targets are not just the politicians, but also the complicity of the media in cheerleading for war in Iraq and, most interestingly, the apathy of the majority that allows things to just happen. The running time is kept lean and the action happening almost in real time, with dialogue in the different strands informing each other. The action is mainly static - two sit down conversations and two soldiers who can't move. It is to Redford's credit that the whole is leant such an enthralling sense of energy.

In the interview, Cruise's unnerving charm is put to great effect in what is one of his best performances ever. He offers us an ambitious politician who slides away from the questions he doesn't want to answer almost without you noticing. He is a chilling man who can refer to the attrocities at Abu Grahib as "Bad PR" and use all the right rhethoric but seems bound to repeat the mistakes of the past he won't learn from. Opposite him, Streep gives one of her most nuanced performances for many years as the morally compromised reporter who doesn't quite buy what she's being sold.

Redford's professor is, one suspects, a character very close to his own heart - trying to inspire people to take a stand, but despairing at the apathy around him. This section offers more of a consideration of ideals in abstract, but also the need for engagement of some kind with the issues that surround us. The surprise here is newcomer Garfield (most recognisable here for appearances in the last series of Dr Who) who more than matches Redford blow for blow through their discussion. The question that is asked here is is it better to try and fail than fail to try when you end up in the same place anyway?

The Afghan section is potentially the weak-point of the film, but rising stars Derek Luke (Antwone Fisher, Catch the Fire) and Michael Pena (World Trade Centre, Shooter) prove more than up to the task, lending their characters enough charisma for it to work. In fact it becomes the moral and emotional core of the film - here is the very human reality which is governed and affected by the talk in the other sections.

If you want to quibble, you might argue that the film buys into the current Hollywood trend that the troops serving in the Middle East are themselves above reproach. The evidence of Abu Grahib would suggest otherwise. Its also true that it makes no attempt to understand or even cover the other side of the conflict. The Taliban fighters remains indistinct blurs in the distance. However such quibbles seem rather churlish - there is only so much one film can tackle and this is more concerned about the political process in America and its effects. Its ultimate message is more one of whatever your views, stand up and do something about it.

It might not quite turn out to be a classic masterpiece, but is certainly the most intelligent film on the conflict to emerge yet. Don't be surprised if there are Oscar nods - especially for Streep and Cruise. Well worth checking out.