Video: “Lions for Lambs” trailer
posted at 4:15 pm on August 6, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
The plot details are vague but with Cruise radiating villainous demagoguery, Streep hinting at well-meaning cluelessness, and Redford keepin’ it real in denim as an academic philosopher king, I’m going to go out on a limb and guess we’re in for ye olde “war on terror as Republican ruse to keep the sheeple complacent with the media’s help” lecture. Click the image to watch; choose 480p if you’ve got Quicktime installed.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Yeah, it looks like another “America is the root of all evil/Republicans are evil” piece.
PBoilermaker on August 6, 2007 at 4:21 PM
Ah, a film I can wait till it arrives on regular television.
Till then, bring on Simpson reruns.
Kini on August 6, 2007 at 4:26 PM
I refuse to watch any film that insults my intelligence — even just for laughs.
Blake on August 6, 2007 at 4:29 PM
It’s gonna slice like a hammer.
Stephen M on August 6, 2007 at 4:31 PM
This is almost certainly liberal anti-war crap. Here’s the plot outline from IMDB:
I’ll stick with Robot Chicken.
Thomas the Wraith on August 6, 2007 at 4:34 PM
Holy mindless, predictable, wholly unoriginal propaganda.
What amazes me is that no liberals ever seem to notice that they’re being spoon-fed the exact same message constantly. You’d think, wouldn’t you, that the constant repetition would tip some of them off that maybe – just maybe – somebody is trying to pull the wool over their eyes.
They irony is breathtaking. They buy their $10.00 movie ticket and their $5.50 popcorn and their $4.75 giant-sized Dr. Pepper, sit in a dark room being told exactly what they already think, in exactly the same way they’ve been told a hundred times before by the very same people …
… then they go outside and put a “question authority” bumper sticker on their car.
One of these days, some liberal is actually going to follow that motto – and start questioning the people who treat them like brainless idiots.
Conservatives shouldn’t be insulted by this. Liberals should. It is truly an insult to their intelligence.
Professor Blather on August 6, 2007 at 4:35 PM
it doesn’t look very good to me
ThackerAgency on August 6, 2007 at 4:39 PM
And the Reporter sleeps with/has slept with the Senator or Professor, or both?
Brat on August 6, 2007 at 4:39 PM
Yeah, I saw that before Bourne on Friday. But by then I had been too distracted by this one, maybe the most ridiculous trailer ever. The whole audience was laughing out loud throughout (at it, not with it).
AdrianG on August 6, 2007 at 4:39 PM
Evil will always win; because good is stupid.
lorien1973 on August 6, 2007 at 4:40 PM
Redford… yeah… isn’t he the one who, in Sneakers placed a scene where a homeless guy was asking for money because his home was gone and Reford pointed to a wall of Bush I posters and said “talk to him”.
Remember that homeless crisis in ‘92?
Remember how it *disappeared* right after Clinton won? With no action whatsoever from Clinton?
Except that the homeless situation DID get worse under Clinton’s watch with nary a peep from the press.
“They depend on your apathy to do nothing”
Boy, he’s got that right.
Skywise on August 6, 2007 at 4:44 PM
Yeah, I must have missed all the reports about how we are kicking ass all over the place. Yup, that’s all the media reports, American victory after victory after victory.
What world do these left wing fellow travelers live in?
Drew on August 6, 2007 at 4:44 PM
Will NOT watch even the trailer. That lineup says “CRAZY LIBERAL BORING CRAP” to me.
Cruise is an alien-worshipping hack. Redford is a useless preachy enviroweenie. And Streep…well, she’s desperate for a big role in her gaining irrelevency.
Now…let me tell you how I REALLY feel. ;)
tickleddragon on August 6, 2007 at 4:45 PM
Meryl Streep in smart-girl glasses breathlessly trying to figure out why the War on Terror isn’t over yet, since World War II took only X number of years.
Imbecilic. Obnoxious. Morally repulsive.
These are our moral betters, our open-hearted geniuses, they who see the nuance and the gray areas in life, yet not one of them can appreciate the difference between fighting a war against a conventional army versus fighting a war against a bunch of homicidal, suicidal religious fanatics who hide amongst women and children.
“What have you been doing the last five years?” she asks in the trailer.
Meryl, you’d never understand.
Kensington on August 6, 2007 at 4:52 PM
Hollywood is stacking the deck for the ‘08 elections. This is only one from the line up. When will the GOP figure out it needs to get in the game?
Numenorean on August 6, 2007 at 4:53 PM
Yeah that was exactly my thought. I was like ‘What papers is he talking about? Is this an alternate reality where the MSM supports the war?’
apollyonbob on August 6, 2007 at 4:54 PM
AHHH THOSE DAMN LIBERALS!!!!
jeez guys its just a movie. so what if its a lame lame LAME attempt at dramatizing what we all live through. it really is just a movie.
and how many of you who called this movie liberal crap enjoyed full metal jacket? that movie, given your standards, seems pretty liberal these days. soldiers killing themselves because of dastardly drill sergeants…kids wondering why they’re stuck in the rice patties…war being hell…sounds pretty unpatriotic dontchathink?
ernesto on August 6, 2007 at 4:54 PM
I’ll hold judgment. Hollywood wants to make money more than they want to push an ideological agenda, so I think that there might be a possibility here that they tried an even-Steven approach to the war.
It’d also explain why UA is being so hush on the plot details. The radio silence prevents both the pro-war or anti-war crowd from prematurely deciding on whether or not they’ll see it.
Of course on the other hand, there’s a batters’ lineup worth of anti-war, military-ruined-my-life flicks coming out. This may just be the highest profile stab at the narrative.
Pro-war or anti-war though, I think this’ll tank. It just looks so damn….boring.
John from OPFOR on August 6, 2007 at 5:07 PM
Yeah, it’s liberal crap.
And no, I don’t think Full Metal Jacket is liberal crap, nor was A Few Good Men.
Y’see, you can make “liberal” points without creating 2D cartoon characters to espouse this election year’s talking points.
What makes this “liberal crap” is the fact that they’re happily selling out their own ideas (individual liberty, freedom of expression, separation of church and state) so they can get themselves elected.
Skywise on August 6, 2007 at 5:10 PM
Not to mention apparently ignorant of the Cold War.
In real life, Streep is an expert on apples.
Don’t know how this flick missed the NYT’s guide to upcoming antiwar propaganda.
Karl on August 6, 2007 at 5:16 PM
I can only imagine, when writing the script, they consulted Daily Kos and the DNC.
TheSitRep on August 6, 2007 at 5:22 PM
I’ll stick with Underdog – that’s a bit more realistic….
jdawg on August 6, 2007 at 5:24 PM
Lest anyone think this flick is going to be nuanced:
Skip directly to the sequel.
Karl on August 6, 2007 at 5:33 PM
FIRST CLUE: Character named “Arian” played by a black actor. Indicates a misguided attempt at profundity.
SECOND CLUE: Watching the trailer, Tom Cruise obviously knows “when it starts”. The helicopter “accident” looks like a squib goes off inside the chopper and bursts out–watch at about 1:26.
I think it’s supposed to be a contrived “inciting incident” for a new war that Tom Cruise’s character thinks we need to fight. We’ll have to rescue those troops from, oh, Iran, I’d bet.
It’s also Hollywood giving us a little proactive 911 trutherism in advance for whatever we fight next.
THIRD CLUE: Atrocious CGI. Even I can spot it. Were those Chinook helicopters or light cycles from TRON? All their special effects budget is going to make Robert Redford look noble and rugged and denimy. Or that they couldn’t attract enough investors in what was obviously going to be a vanity-project flop to film a good helicopter crash.
I may be way wrong about this but I would be willing to lay a little cash on the proposition that this is a craptacular conspiratorial soft-Truther politicized GOP-bashing train wreck.
see-dubya on August 6, 2007 at 5:40 PM
“Were those Chinkook helicopters or light cycles fron TRON?”
Bwahahahaha!
John from OPFOR on August 6, 2007 at 5:42 PM
*yawn*
madne0 on August 6, 2007 at 5:43 PM
Looks like a big budget production, I hope it flops. I won’t be seeing it, the preview was plenty.
Maxx on August 6, 2007 at 6:00 PM
Only Hollywood can save us!
Stand up to dictatorship Hollywood!
Fight the Power Hollywood!
FREE NELSON MANDELA!!!!
(snicker)
Montana on August 6, 2007 at 6:08 PM
All you need to know is that if a film stars Robert Redford, you can be sure it will be anti-American and/or anti-Republican.
I had to learn the hard way with “Sneakers”, getting snookered by an entertaining and fun spy film only to be lectured on the evilness of Republicans at the very last moment. Totally ruined the film.
hadsil on August 6, 2007 at 6:09 PM
I must have serious ADD.
The trailer bored me and that’s because it had explosions.
terryannonline on August 6, 2007 at 6:18 PM
So in Redford’s world he thinks he doing something by making a movie that will in no way influence national policy but may put a few bucks in his pocket. Quite the patriot.
I couldn’t even really enjoy Bourne the other night with their depiction of the C.I.A. I guess they feel all is does is spend vast amounts of time and recourses tracking down and killing unloyal Americans. Plus the fact they had one shot of NY with green grass, one with snow and the last without snow again in a scene that takes place over a couple hours.
lowandslow on August 6, 2007 at 6:35 PM
Relavant for discussion about the moral decay of Liberals and the MSM.
Villainy: An Analysis of Nature of Evil
Egfrow on August 6, 2007 at 6:51 PM
I went to see Bourne Ultimatum this weekend as well, but thankfully did not have to see this trailer. Instead, we saw the trailer for The Kingdom. Looks pretty good.
Michael in MI on August 6, 2007 at 6:57 PM
I don’t even know what this post is about, but after seeing Tom Cruise, I thought I’d drop in this link I ran across last night, which contains a photo of the nut jobs looking like they have no idea how to handle a child, putting the terrified baby in to the water in what seems like a 1980s lifejacket that doesn’t fit:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=473441&in_page_id=1773
Admittedly, some kids do have those moments of fear when going in the water for the first time like that, so that may explain his facial expression… but my bias forces me to assume it’s because they’re horrible parents and are scaring the kid… or that someone just told him what Scientology was all about.
RightWinged on August 6, 2007 at 7:02 PM
Here is the trailer we saw Sat night for The Kingdom. Made me want to see it, big time. Then again, I think I was turned on to it even more by the U2 song, one of my favorites.
Michael in MI on August 6, 2007 at 7:03 PM
Oh thank God for Redford, Crusie and Streep to Enlighten us, (gag and puke)!
And as for the army depicted in this tale they seem to me to be coming off as ill informed and brainwashed zomdies, not as the self-sacrificing heros they are.
It is precisly this crap that keeps me away from the theaters.
Irenaeus on August 6, 2007 at 7:09 PM
Don’t we all wish we were as enlightened as cruise, streep and redford? Why did I watch that after I ate. Anyone got a rolaid? Burp
ChrisIansNana on August 6, 2007 at 7:10 PM
You beat me by 1 minute!!! LOL
ChrisIansNana on August 6, 2007 at 7:12 PM
Looks like a tragicomedy.
Nonfactor on August 6, 2007 at 7:13 PM
YAWN… this thing will open in “select” theaters… why, cause it looks stooooooopid, and aint nobody goin’ to drop 10 bucks to see this… except the Loose Change crowd…
m1a1usmc on August 6, 2007 at 7:32 PM
Does anybody really believe Paramount fired Tom Cruise because he worships Mitaclorians or whatever?
They couldn’t possibly care less about who the Hell Cruise prays to. The studio is in business to MAKE MONEY. They fired Cruise because he wanted to piss away their gigantic investment in his “all American” image, quit making pictures people wanted to watch and start making moronic propaganda crapfests like this one.
logis on August 6, 2007 at 8:21 PM
What a blatant load of crap…
Both
soldiersvictims are minorities. All thethinkers@$$holes are white people. The “bad guy” is a white male. The other white male is only a “good guy” because he is auniversity professorWard Churchill wanna-be. This whole, damned thing is a leftist parable.I think Americans don’t want nearly as much politics in their cinematic productions as Hollywood thinks they do.
This will probably tank, but not before we are subjected to months of marketing. I keep hoping these leftist fools run out of money as they throw it into these bottom-less holes, but they never seem to do so.
urbancenturion on August 6, 2007 at 8:25 PM
Yeah well, the movie poster rocks!
The Ugly American on August 6, 2007 at 10:08 PM
I second that.
Mcguyver on August 6, 2007 at 10:12 PM
Ill stick with 1080P , thanks.
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 6, 2007 at 10:33 PM
Can you imagine Redford’s dilemma every morning for the last forty years. Is it going to be a blue denim shirt, or a blue dinim shirt?
oakpack on August 6, 2007 at 10:35 PM
Allah, thank you i e-mialed you on this early.
Another Liberal hit piece on the War on Terror.
Like I said it’s odd how the Democrats are going to
(war)in this election with Republicans.
Mark my words Republicans have got to wake up,
the Lib’s are going to pull all the stops on this election.
canopfor on August 6, 2007 at 10:39 PM
in exactly the same way they’ve been told a hundred times before by the very same people …… then they go outside and put a “question authority” bumper sticker on their car.
Professor Blather on August 6, 2007 at 4:35 PM
Gosh, that was a great belly laugh. Thanks, Professor! **still giggling**
inviolet on August 6, 2007 at 11:22 PM
…haven’t been since “somethings gotta give”, looks like I haven’t missed anything. move along…
oldernslower on August 6, 2007 at 11:45 PM
It’s gonna slice like a bowl of jello!
Merovign on August 6, 2007 at 11:55 PM
I wonder if al-Qaeda volunteered to help finance this film?
Halley on August 7, 2007 at 4:12 AM
This is the first film Cruise has done that I don’t actually want to see. I’m a big Cruise fan, as an actor not a person. And this film has liberal propaganda written all over it.
Why do we need to examine this war on such a level. Funny thing is in the trailer, Cruise asks the big question. Do you want to win this war on terror? YES or NO.
“War is not won through peace talks or diplomacy. War is won by completely destroying the enemy’s will to continue fighting”
msipes on August 7, 2007 at 11:21 AM
Sorry, ernesto, but if you think that I am being hypocritical about my judgement on movies. Let me fill you in on a little something. A FILM DEGREE holder here. I’m trained in Analytical and Critical Theory and screenwriting from NCSU, (that’s on top of my extracurricular “EIB University/HA Institute/Internet research” degree in Political Science.) I know Hollywood. I know how to read a cast, as well as the screen. And that one, Sport…serves only one purpose – to try to tell me to hate America and believe she is evil. One doesn’t really need the degrees or expertise to see this – but since you implied we’re hypocrits for liking some political movies but not others…
As to FULL METAL JACKET…I had an expert (my dad – a vietnam vet) at the time, to tell me his viewpoint when it came out. He was okay with it. PLATOON, on the other hand, he walked out of. That was enough for me.
tickleddragon on August 7, 2007 at 11:56 AM
I also have a film degree. This film is straightforward propaganda of the most unsubtle variety and won’t make a lot of money. Hollywood, like the NEw York Times, pusts ideology ahead of profit. That’s why Dreamworks went bankrupt and was bought up by Paramount – its “nuanced” comparsion between terrorists and Israelis was a dud at the box office and lost Speilberg millions.
I actually don’t mind good anti-war flicks. The best are all about Vietnam possibly because of the hold that war has on the American imagination. My favourite anti-war films: Apocalypse Now, Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, Casualties of War. Something tells me “Lions for Lambs” isn’t quite up to standard.
aengus on August 7, 2007 at 2:37 PM
Forgot to mention The Deer Hunter.
Also, all these movies were made after the Vietnam war. They were not propaganda efforts to demoralise people as “Lions for Lambs” is. Its also attempting to discourage people from joining the armed forces.
aengus on August 7, 2007 at 2:42 PM
Yeah me too. He was great in Born on the Fourth of July and Minority Report.
aengus on August 7, 2007 at 2:43 PM
I understand what you guys are saying, but I like the way the trailer ends. Tom Cruise’s character asking the journalist if she wants to win the war on terror, yes or no.
That’s actually a pretty pertinent question.
Baphomet on August 7, 2007 at 8:26 PM
Comment pages: