Did not know what to expect and was pleasantly surprised.
Added 2/8/2010
Upon my son's recommendation I watched Lord of War. I had never heard of the movie so I was a little skeptical. I found the movie extremely well done and enjoyed it. As disturbing as the portrayal of the arms business was, I was even more captivated by the fact that what was in the movie seemed that it could be very reflective of real life. I would recommend the movie.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Lack of depth
Added 1/19/2010
The acting is good, sometimes excellent. Both Nicholas Cage and Jared Leto do a good job. Even Cage's dark witty cynicism is sometimes brilliant. The problem about this film is that it is obvioulsy one-sided or one-dimensional. The plot is poor, as it doesn't show reality from a wide perspective. There are some plain statements that one has to consider before making a film about war in general and about wars waged in the XX century in particular:
a) Arms are sold because someone buys them. Obvious but true. Therefore, those who buy weapons are as guilty as those who provide them. Just like drugs. And, like drugs or any other good, arms are ruled by the laws of market, a simple question of supply and demand.
b) The film centers on Western Africa conflicts, in particular Sierra Leona and Liberia (curious that the most brutal genocide in Africa, that of Rwanda, doesn't have a single scene), pretending to make us believe that the source of all evil is arm dealing. Well, let's point out again what is also obvious, that these African wars, like the Yugoslavian-Balkan wars, like the Osetia-Abjasia-Georgia war, like the Armenia-Azerbajan war, have an ETHNIC root, mainly caused by an ethnic (tribal in Africa) disruption that destroyed the territorial balance imposed by colonial powers or totalitarian regimes like the Soviet Union. Therefore, massive arm dealing is a symptom, not a cause, of the state of countries on the verge of war or already plunged into war or civil conflict. Thus, arms are always an element of wars, tactically essential indeed, but never the cause of them nor the reason for them.
Having said this, I don't think it's very honest to awaken consciences or be lectured on false premises.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Lord of War
Added 1/4/2010
Yuri Orlov is a globetrotting arms dealer. Through some of the deadliest war zones, Yuri struggles to stay one step ahead of a relentless Interpol agent, his business rivals, even some of his customers who include many of the world's most notorious dictators. Finally, Yuri must also face his own conscience. This movie is not much of an anti-war or anti-bush or anti-guns movie. It was much deeper than that. It was about doing things that we aren't necessarily proud of for personal gain; this is something that we all face. Also, at the end the movie mentions that the top 5 nations that export weapons are the United States, France, Britain, China, and Russia. It then says that these are the only permanent members of the U.N. Security Council. That is an interesting fact. I urge you to see this because it is not a movie you watch, it is yourself that you watch.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Pretty Realistic - Except at the End
Added 12/6/2009
Since I gave the movie four stars, it's obvious that I liked it a lot. Nicolas Cage portrayed an admittedly cynical and amoral gun runner (Yuri). The movie could, arguably, be thought of as a capitalist success story in the Horatio Alger tradition. The movie was full of scenes of gritty realism. The street scenes in various third world countries and the contrast to the lifestyles of the local ruling despots merit particular mention. There was unusual cinematography, as well - particularly the "life of a bullet" sequence at the beginning of the movie, that ends with the bullet entering a chlid's brain.
However, I found Yuri's wife Ava's betrayal of him to be unrealistic in the extreme. After all, she had been a dutiful "trophy wife" who had been living off of Yuri's so-called "ill-gotten gains" for years. Why would she, all of a sudden, out of the blue, develop a "conscience"? It made me wonder, was she having an affair with the cop who was investigating her husband, or what? Or maybe the authorities were going to charge her as an accessory or even a co-conspirator, and she "flipped" to save her own skin. Hey, it's happened enough with the mob in real life; why not here, as well?
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
A LOST SOUL SELLS BIG GUNS
Added 9/9/2009
Andrew Niccol directs Nic Cage as weapons of mass destruction salesman Yuri Orlov who sells ordinance like the medieval church sold indulgences; spare us your morality, please, for church and Yuri, it's only about money.
Very dark humor pervades this shocking story of the personal and professional life of a Ukranian man who is in the business of supplying weapons to any country or rebel that can afford them. For a while his beautiful wife (Bridget Moynahan) is clueless and his drug-addled little brother is a poor choice as a partner. Amoral and frightening, this glimpse of the black-market gun trade is only bearable by the slight peek of Yuri as a human being and not the monster he has almost completely become. This is one of Cage's better roles. Cage seems to understands how the relentless drive for success can kill the last vestiges of a lost humanity.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Did not know what to expect and was pleasantly surprised.
Added 2/8/2010
Upon my son's recommendation I watched Lord of War. I had never heard of the movie so I was a little skeptical. I found the movie extremely well done and enjoyed it. As disturbing as the portrayal of the arms business was, I was even more captivated by the fact that what was in the movie seemed that it could be very reflective of real life. I would recommend the movie.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Lack of depth
Added 1/19/2010
The acting is good, sometimes excellent. Both Nicholas Cage and Jared Leto do a good job. Even Cage's dark witty cynicism is sometimes brilliant. The problem about this film is that it is obvioulsy one-sided or one-dimensional. The plot is poor, as it doesn't show reality from a wide perspective. There are some plain statements that one has to consider before making a film about war in general and about wars waged in the XX century in particular:
a) Arms are sold because someone buys them. Obvious but true. Therefore, those who buy weapons are as guilty as those who provide them. Just like drugs. And, like drugs or any other good, arms are ruled by the laws of market, a simple question of supply and demand.
b) The film centers on Western Africa conflicts, in particular Sierra Leona and Liberia (curious that the most brutal genocide in Africa, that of Rwanda, doesn't have a single scene), pretending to make us believe that the source of all evil is arm dealing. Well, let's point out again what is also obvious, that these African wars, like the Yugoslavian-Balkan wars, like the Osetia-Abjasia-Georgia war, like the Armenia-Azerbajan war, have an ETHNIC root, mainly caused by an ethnic (tribal in Africa) disruption that destroyed the territorial balance imposed by colonial powers or totalitarian regimes like the Soviet Union. Therefore, massive arm dealing is a symptom, not a cause, of the state of countries on the verge of war or already plunged into war or civil conflict. Thus, arms are always an element of wars, tactically essential indeed, but never the cause of them nor the reason for them.
Having said this, I don't think it's very honest to awaken consciences or be lectured on false premises.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Lord of War
Added 1/4/2010
Yuri Orlov is a globetrotting arms dealer. Through some of the deadliest war zones, Yuri struggles to stay one step ahead of a relentless Interpol agent, his business rivals, even some of his customers who include many of the world's most notorious dictators. Finally, Yuri must also face his own conscience. This movie is not much of an anti-war or anti-bush or anti-guns movie. It was much deeper than that. It was about doing things that we aren't necessarily proud of for personal gain; this is something that we all face. Also, at the end the movie mentions that the top 5 nations that export weapons are the United States, France, Britain, China, and Russia. It then says that these are the only permanent members of the U.N. Security Council. That is an interesting fact. I urge you to see this because it is not a movie you watch, it is yourself that you watch.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
