Welcome to Reel People. It’s a place where, you guessed it, real people like yourselves spout off on new movie releases. It works best if you - yes, we mean you - jump into the forum link below and tell us what you think of the movie, too.

This week, we’re watching Lions for Lambs.

What I Liked: There is a good but brief performance by Tom Cruise as a conservative US senator. I like that Cruise’s character says the government has made mistakes in Iraq, but that they are developing a plan to try to improve the situation and boost morale. Whether the plan works or not, I like the idea of admitting mistakes and trying to move forward despite those past mistakes. There is a nice show of patriotism by two soldiers who were former students of professor Malley (Redford). Meryl Streep does a good job playing the part of a liberal news reporter; she seemed very much like our real media that attacks our government’s war on terror.

What I Disliked: There have been a handful of new films lately that focus on bashing our government for the handling of Iraq. “Lions for Lambs” is no different. For example, Meryl Streep’s character doesn’t care what the government’s new plan is, she just can’t wait to write a negative piece and do her best to make senator (Cruise) look bad. Professor Malley (Redford) also has some really boring scenes with a so-called gifted student and Redford makes a strong point that he is totally against his two former students having joined the military to fight in the war on terror. Instead of constructive criticism, all I hear about is getting our troops out immediately and what a horrible job the president is doing. I feel that regardless of your position on the war, we have troops deployed in hostile territories and we should be supporting these guys and hope that we can get the job done. It’s difficult for me to enjoy a movie that hardly touches on positives or how to move forward from he re, but instead has an overall theme of putting down the efforts we’ve made to improve Iraq and fight terrorism. It’s a lot easier to criticize what has been done than to offer practical solutions for the future. I feel this sort of constant negative press is damaging to our country; it lowers our pride as Americans and shows the rest of the world that we are not united. Aside from the political brainwashing, the film offers endless talking and little action. With such a talented cast, director Robert Redford could have made this film more engrossing no matter what the viewers’ stance on the issues.

Would I Recommend?: No, there is nothing new or original here for this genre.

Score: 4 out of 10

- Nick Conrad

What I Liked: Excellent performances by all the leads - Streep, Cruise and Redford. Cruise, in particular, inhabits his role as a rising young polital star. Well-written script covering complex subject matter in a nuanced manner. No-one is pilloried for their opinion - all the protagonists have personally reasonable and understandable viewpoints.

What I Disliked: I really savored this movie, but it might not qualify as the ideal choice for light entertainment at the end of a hard week.

Would I Recommend?: I would recommend it highly.  The subject matter, which tends to be divisive is approached in an adult manner that represents competing convictions as justifiable and valid - giving dignity to a debate that oftens sinks to a level of personal attacks.

Score: 8 out of 10

- Marian Hill

What I Liked: Thank god for Oscar season. After a summer of movies filled with action but lacking much else, it is nice to finally see a movie that has in it everything a movie is supposed to have. Lions for Lambs doesn’t just touch upon the current issues of the Iraq war; it left hooks them dead on. (And a very “left” hand it is.) The movie is broken up into three different parts, all giving us pieces to the same story. Tom Cruise, as the smiling Republican senator, Meryl Streep as the liberal reporter, Robert Redford as the even more liberal college professor; who all prove why they are paid the big bucks as actors. But the two actors that really capture the heart of the film are Michael Pena and Derek Luke, who play the two soldiers (and former students of Redford’s) currently fighting in the war. These three sides show three sides of America: those living in fear, those trying to make a change by getting others to stop living in fear and the soldiers who are entrenched and therefore don’t have time to waste on fear.
Redford put faces, names and personalities to the soldiers that are fighting in the war a lot of people are trying to stop, solve or just ignore. He gives the reasons why people would enlist to fight a seemingly endless and pointless war. He gives them respect and value.

What I Disliked: A few hours after the movie, after emotions subsided, it was easier to see some of the not so perfect things to the movie. But the imperfections are few and far between, and they do not take away from the movie’s powerful message.

Would I Recommend?: I highly recommend Lions for Lambs. In making this movie, Redford has made a strong statement which is not necessarily focused on being for or against the war. He is trying to get our minds out of the bubble gum cloud of our pop culture society; to stop being so apathetic and to start paying attention to what matters. Lions for Lambs is especially emotionally impactful because it deals with right now, right here. This may be a little too much for many people who use movies to escape their everyday for there is no escaping in this movie. But you do realize how small your problems are in comparison to the world as a whole. And that there are people in the world who are living, caring and doing as many of us sit around while watching it all on tv.

Score: 9 out of 10

- Stephanie Powers