zBoneman.com -- Home Movie Reviews

Lord of War (2005)

Lord of War
"Mishka - I like what you've done to your place."

Starring:

Nicolas Cage
Jared Leto
Ethan Hawke
Bridget Moynahan

Released By:

Lions Gate Films

Released In:

2005

Rated:

R

Reviewed By:

Adam Mast

Grade:

A-


Lord of War is a sprawling, effective look into the world of gun running, but make no mistake - this movie has a lot more on it's mind. Surprisingly, this latest effort from the talented Andrew Niccol (Gattaca) has met with mixed reaction from critics and movie goers alike. I say surprising because I'm quite dumbfounded by those who are so quick to proclaim the movie pretentious and empty, particularly given the kind of unoriginal product Hollywood has subjected us to as of late (really, do we need another damn remake or sequel?). Original ideas are scarce these days, and I'm absolutely mind boggled that a respectable trade like Entertainment Weekly would give this picture a D- (and if you read the review, you may find it odd that it isn't a particularly scathing critique - so why the D-?). At the very least, Lord of War has something to say.

In Lord of War, Nicolas Cage is smooth talking gun runner Yuri Orlov. He has no problem brokering gun deals with the scum of the earth, and is quick to point out that there is very little difference between what he does and what tobacco companies do, amusingly suggesting that; "The only real difference is that his product has a safety switch." Simply put, Yuri is a businessman and a shrewd one at that. He has no problem distancing himself from the moral implications of his profession - even when it effects his marriage and his relationship with his drug addicted brother (played by a lively Jared Leto).

Lord of War is flashy to be sure. It's big and glossy and tends to state the obvious, but it's also explosively courageous in it's attempt to address important issues. Andrew Niccol's screenplay is edgy and smart, and the film maker even gets away with something that is taboo in many film making circles; off screen narration. Cage's excessive narration does become intrusive at times, but not enough to take away from the overall impact of the movie.

Niccol's direction is equally assured. You need look no further than a brilliantly conceived sequence at the beginning of the picture in which we trace the origin of a bullet from it's birth to it's ultimate firing on an unsuspecting target. The movie is alive with energy, and even when it is stating the obvious or taking a stance (clearly, the movie suggests that what Yuri does is wrong and he pays the price in more ways than one), the film pulsates with dynamic flair. For me, the experience was sort of a combination of the brutal honesty and insightfulness of Steven Soderbergh's Traffic (substitute guns for drugs) mixed with the darkly comedic touch of Stanley Kubrick's masterful Dr. Strangelove. I know this is heady company, and I hasten to qualify that by stating that Lord of War is not quite in either of those film's league, but it is certainly in the same vein. This picture is also drawing comparisons to Ted Demme's little seen Blow. There are certainly similarities, but I found Lord of War to be much more effective.

Nicolas Cage is absolutely magnetic here. I just couldn't take my eyes off him. His approach is effortless. What can I say? He's just a cool actor, and when he brings his A game, he's hard to resist. Perhaps the most harsh criticism of this picture has been aimed at Mr. Cage. Many point out that his Yuri has no redeeming qualities, and that he is no better than those he's selling guns to. My response to this particular criticism is that this is exactly the point. How on Earth could Niccol and Cage possibly make a hero out of a guy in this line of work. For what it's worth, Cage is able to bring a sympathetic quality to the character, still and all, I don't necessarily have to like a character to find him likable. Case in point, check out Thomas Haden Church's role in Sideways. He was a slimy son of a bitch, but I still liked him. Even though Cage is playing a person that many might deem despicable, he does these things with an undenibaly dazzling zeal. Jared Leto is also terrific as Yuri's lost brother Vitaly. This is a showy but lively performance, and I found him extremely entertaining. Along with the lovely Bridget Moynahan, who does a solid job as Yuri's wife, Leto sort of presents the other side of the gun control issue. Ethan Hawke is also effective as a wide eyed FBI agent desperate to catch Yuri and put him behind bars.

Lord of War walks that fine line between thought-provoking seriousness and grand scale entertainment. I'm all for going to the movies simply to be entertained, but sometimes it's nice to see a flick that forces the audience to think. Crash did that, so did Layer Cake, the soon to be released New York Doll and the recent The Constant Gardener. Add Andrew Niccol's latest to a small handful of elite films that challenges it's viewers in ways that most mainstream films are afraid to. This is a terrific movie.

On a side note, check out the poster for this film at your local theater. It's breathtaking.

:: zBoneman.com Reader Comments ::

Nat Plimpton

Nat Plimpton

Lord of War is a kick-ass barrage of images that comes at you in such a rapid-fire fashion that all you can do is just hang on for dear life. Adam is right in that this is Cages's most gripping turn since Leaving Las Vegas, from his droll narration to his matter of fact way he goes about his business - it's just awesome. As an expose, I also think it soars. All the pussy critics can go screw themselves. Lord of War is movie making the way it ought to be.

Trace Armstrong

Trace Armstrong

Talk about effective writing, this movie takes a look at an ugly an hopeless world and have you laughing at violent gunplay and rooting for a totally amoral death-monger

Andrew Latchman

Andrew Latchman

After seeing Lord of War and reading your review I went out and crouched at the supermarket long enough to read Entertainment Weekly's week review of it. It really mad me pissed off. It's almost like there's some sort of PC agenda behind that review. They certainly didn't offer much of a reason for their (gasp) D- review. They should be ashamed for whatever reason they mis-called this one. There's no question in my mind that this film is in the top five of the year and to see it hammered like that without so much as a decent explanation was disheartening. I could see some liberal outfit coming down on it because they may have seen it as a romanticisation of arms dealing, but EW should have been much more objective. I hope they get a ton of pissed of mail. Because they blew this one.

Add your own comment here and see it posted immediately!