Sunday, September 18, 2005

LORD OF WAR

LORD OF WAR is not an action movie. Its trailers play up the "Mr. and Mrs. Smith" aspect that Nicolas Cage jets around the world by day selling guns and being involved in dangerous world affairs, while his wife thinks he runs a respectable business. That's a pretty dramatic misrepresentation of the movie.

In reality it's a biographical drama, the story of one man's life and how he rationalizes or ignores the moral implications of becoming the world's best illegal arms dealer. It's a good performance by Cage with a witty, intelligent script that gives a two-decade crash course in international warfare and smuggling.

We meet Cage's character Yuri Orlov in New York's Little Odessa in the 1980's when he's a young man getting started in the business of selling guns. The film glosses over a lot of the specifics of how he learns about the business, how he gets involved in it, and what he specifically does to rise in the ranks. It deals with his rivalry with successful arms dealer Ian Holm, and shows the lengths he's willing to go to meet and romance the beautiful girl from his neighborhood who's now a world-famous model.

Cage does indeed jet around the world, but as long as he can help it, he steadfastly avoids being involved in the conflicts he facilitates. He's not a violent man himself, and when violence does intrude on his personal life, it's a pretty gruesome affair, both physically and emotionally. Jared Leto plays Cage's brother who starts off in the business with him but who knows that deep down, selling weapons of death to people kills you inside, even if you don't believe it yourself.

It's not a fun, whimsical thriller like it may seem from the trailers, but I found LORD OF WAR to be a smart, thoughful movie that was well-directed and well-acted.

Jeff

3 Comments:

Anonymous said...

for some reason well-acted and nicholas cage don't seem to go together =P


the princess and the warrior came in today btw
=D

and next wednesday i have a 3-page paper due on citizen kane
i have to explain 3 cinematic techniques and how they're incorporated into the story and what impact they offer to the story itself and pick, in my opinion, the most powerful scene

-dr00

7:57 AM  
Jeff said...

I think Cage is a good actor with a likeable style. I've enjoyed him in "Raising Arizona", "Leaving Las Vegas", "Face/Off", "Snake Eyes", "Lord of War"... oh and "Valley Girl" of course :)

11:03 PM  
Anonymous said...

it's not that he's a horrible actor
it's that he's pretty two-dimensional... he has a nice, calm, soothing voice or a OMGz FREAK OUT AND KILL EVERYONE! voice and that seems to be about it

but anyways...
i'm going to choose the montage of kane's first marriage and incorporate the swish pans and how they tell the story

i'm thinking the dissolves for the first bit of the film (perhaps... if i can manage to fill half a page with this)

my third would be when jerry thompson goes to the records hall and reads about kane's childhood
that whole piece is just amazing, and starts the actual story they're looking for within the film

and my most powerful scene...
at zanadu after his death, the overshots of the reporters running around like ants in a huge pile of kane's life trying to find one piece of one significant puzzle (and the woman carrying the puzzle) for this one man's life
so many people spend so much time for the entire movie and don't come close at all to finding the answer

4:43 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home