Concern over "Lambs"

email this story
read comments (16)
post a comment

I need to put this the right way, which is to say not too definitively or emphatically. But over the last two days I've heard from two second-hand sources (one of them having direct access to someone close to the action) that there's concern -- a moderate term that doesn't mean panic or alarm -- about the emerging shape of Robert Redford's Lions for Lambs (MGM/United Artists, 11.9).

It's not so much advance-word terms like "dull" and "pedantic" -- there are always people with agendas who will tell you this or that film isn't working, particularly around this time of year -- as much as a report that "an editing team has been brought in to fix it." One of the editors is long-time veteran Paul Hirsch (Ray, Mission: Impossible, The Empire Strikes Back).

Redford is known to be exacting and methodical (polite terms for "slow") in the cutting room, and he's been working with highly respected editor Joe Hutshing (who won Best Editing Oscars for Born on the Fourth of July and JFK) so there's no reason to think anything might be amiss in the skill and vision departments.

If the "fix-it" editing team info is true (I trust the source), the most likely scenario is that Cruise-Wagner and Redford are at odds over certain aspects of the film and that the UA chiefs have pulled rank. Redford is a tough hombre and doesn't back off (a key ingredient with any strong director), but Lions for Lambs is the first picture out of the gate from United Artists and there's a lot riding on it, especially with the heat on Cruise (who plays a right-wing Senator in Lambs) having dimin- ished over the last couple of years.

This doesn't mean, of course, that things won't pan out in the end. Disagreements about final refinements to a film are part of the natural creative fiction, and there's no question that Cruise, Wagner and Redford are smart, shrewd players who know from quality.

I've never read Matthew Michael Carnahan's script -- an apparently Babel-like piece about a California professor (Redford) and his influence over two students (Derek Luke, Michael Pena) and how their fates (as well as a third Redford student, played by Andrew Garfield) are affected in some way by a "bombshell story" given by a high-powered Senator (Cruise) to a seasoned Washington, D.C., journalist (Meryl Streep) -- but it's hard to imagine it not being an above-average work, given the pedigree of the players.

Lions for Lambs is going to play the AFI Film Festival on 11.1.

Stability over brilliance<< previous | next >>Villaca returns!

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on September 2, 2007 at 8:28 AM

comment #1

actionman says ...

i have a feeling this movie is going to be terrific. not sure what exactly...i haven't read the script, though after seeing The Kingdom, another film written by Matthew Michael Carnahan, I am certainly anxious to see more of his work. Redford can be a great director when he wants too, and as you say, there is a lot of pedigree.

Posted by actionman at September 2, 2007 10:09 AM

comment #2

T. Holly says ...

But you can't cut around the sets, the wardrobe and the hair. Where's that trailer?

Posted by T. Holly at September 2, 2007 10:17 AM

comment #3

AH says ...

My understanding was that the budget for this thing was fairly low (mid-30's). If that's correct, then the issue can't be about the financial return. Also, doesn't Redford have final cut?

Posted by AH at September 2, 2007 10:27 AM

comment #4

alynch says ...

I seriously can't stand that poster with Redford's digitally smoothed over face.

Posted by alynch at September 2, 2007 10:30 AM

comment #5

T. Holly says ...

Final cut just means you can never be shown the door, it doesn't preclude everything written in Wells' post.

Posted by T. Holly at September 2, 2007 10:42 AM

comment #6

malibugigolo says ...

Remember kiddos: Every oak tree was once an acorn.

Posted by malibugigolo at September 2, 2007 11:01 AM

comment #7

erniesouchak says ...

I admire Redford and have liked some of his directing efforts, but this trailer gave me a bad feeling. This could be another "high-pedigree" catastrophe along the lines of "Breaking & Entering."

Posted by erniesouchak at September 2, 2007 11:16 AM

comment #8

Arran says ...

Is there no trailer in the US yet, T. Holly? I saw one in front of Bourne Ultimatum a couple of weeks ago. I'm in New Zealand. Surely one has been screened in the US by now.

Posted by Arran at September 2, 2007 11:32 AM

comment #9

Zimmergirl says ...

I am disappointed in Redford's refusal to let himself age. Same thing for Warren Beatty, whom I also otherwise admire. Lose the silk screen. At least Beatty hasn't gone the surgery route, like Redford has. There is something so lovely about a real age face. Plastic surgery almost always looks awful.

Posted by Zimmergirl at September 2, 2007 12:00 PM

comment #10

York "Budd" Durden says ...

Plastic surgery...god, did anyone else see Mary Matalin on MTP this morning? She's starting to make Carville look attractive.

As for LFL, I asked Cruise how it was cutting together while I was installing two-way mirrors at his pad in Brentwood, but all he wanted to do was audit me. Which he ain't gonna do.

Posted by York "Budd" Durden at September 2, 2007 12:10 PM

comment #11

BurmaShave says ...

I still have a lot of faith in the man who directed ORDINARY PEOPLE, A RIVER RUNS THROUGH IT and QUIZ SHOW. Has he ever really made a terrible film? THE LEGEND OF BAGGER VANCE is kind of overcooked, but I still think it's signifigantly underrated with some magical moments and a dynamite, albeit "magic negro", performance by Will Smith.

Posted by BurmaShave at September 2, 2007 12:18 PM

comment #12

Chuck Latovich says ...

I'll go see this b/c of Streep, but the dialogue in the trailer has me fearing for the worst: sledgehammer politics a la Stanley Kramer. I hope these lines play better in context; otherwise, they'd sound phoney except on Bill Reilley's show.

Posted by Chuck Latovich at September 2, 2007 4:26 PM

comment #13

Larry says ...

I saw the trailer and pedantic is the word. Looks like a two-hour lecture. Years ago--decades ago--even when Redford got political, he was smart enough to make sure the film worked first. He seems to have lost that somewhere along the way.

Posted by Larry at September 2, 2007 7:26 PM

comment #14