Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Donald Seymour This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Isbel A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Francene Odetta It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

davidvpcol As the title, the pace of the movie gets us into it, and when the climax is going to be reached, nothing happens. I expected more about the character's destiny or some repercussions, but that's it. Great crescendo, with no finale.

cclee-87430 Or soapbox. and much like a soapbox this movie is on wobbly wheels that go great, downhill.

zkonedog The wars in Iraq & Afghanistan were perhaps the most controversial topics in American during the late 2000s for any number of reasons. What "Lions for Lambs" does, under the solid direction of Robert Redford, is examine the War on Terror from a number of different perspectives, keeping the dialogue fair for everyone involved. While the film can get a little over- the-top dramatic at times, ti ends up being a very thought-provoking piece on the nature of politics and war in America.For a basic plot summary, "Lions for Lambs" focuses on three distinct scenarios:1. Senator Jasper Irving (Tom Cruise), very much a hawk in terms of political orientation, being interviewed by journalist Janine Roth (Meryl Streep) over a new battle initiative in Afghanistan. 2. College Professor Stephen Malley (Redford) having an office-hours meeting with student Todd Hayes (Andrew Garfield) about motivation towards the future. 3. Two Marines, Ernest (Michael Pena) and Arian (Derek Luke), who once were members of Malley's class, now on a dangerous mission deep in the Middle East.What I really like about this film is that it is very much a "thinking piece". It will really get the brain churning about all the different issues surrounding things like terrorism, American imperialism, and the nature/role of the press. During my lifetime I've been on both sides of the "war on terror" conversation, and there were moments in this film where I could identify with both sides of the dialogue.I have to give a lot of credit to Redford for having this all come together as well as it did. It would have been so, so easy to make this an "agenda" film, but that is not what happens in the least. From what I recall, I haven't seen a film quite this balanced when dealing with such heavy political and human issues. Each and every character is nuanced and thinks about something in a different way over the course of the movie.So, I truly give high, high marks for "Lions for Lambs", especially if you are the kind of movie- watcher who enjoys a good "thinking piece" about political/war issues.

grantss Merely a soapbox for a Redford rant. Had potential: an examination of how soldiers' lives are sacrificed to further the careers of politicians. Unfortunately, Robert Redford turned it into a soapbox and gave an incredibly biased and preachy diatribe on the matter.The simple 3-setting, 3 viewpoints, was pretty simple and effective, but gets boring after a while. The military scenario was contrived and unrealistic. Great cast - Meryl Streep, Redford himself, Tom Cruise, Peter Berg, Michael Pena, Andrew Garfield - but they're all wasted, due to the script and direction.Ultimately, a very disappointing movie from a great cast and once-great director.