Review: Lord of War

In the 19th century, European man set out to conquer and colonize one of the last great frontiers on Earth: the mighty, untamed continent of Africa. "Civilized" technology, western warfare and white diseases had combined into a juggernaut force, making a prosperous home for Colonists everywhere they had set their feet.

The continent of Africa was different, however. European ways of conquest succeeded, yet efforts to colonize failed. Crops were impossible to grow in the dry soil, and where the soil was healthy, the immune system of the continent, in the form of the Mosquito, thrived. Yellow fever, Cholera, and the greatest killer of them all, Malaria, ravaged the white settlers and stunted the development of the last great branch of the European empire. Stubbornly, colonists hung around as long as they could still hope to turn a profit.

As the 19th century passed into the 20th, the colonies faded one by one, and sovereignty was returned to the Africans. However, they were left impoverished, divided, bitter towards each other due to restrictions imposed by their former occupiers (see Rwanda), and locked in feudal power struggles.

We soon learned that you don't have to rule a continent in order to make enormous profit from it.

This is the message conveyed by this excellent film, Lord of War, starring Nicolas cage as top international gun-runner Yuri Orlov. Working his way up from the bottom, he builds a fortune delivering the means to an end for a world bent on destroying itself.

With humor as biting and dry as the wind swept desert, coupled with a profound sense of desperation for the future of humanity at large, the film delivers with poignancy a message that is gaining strength thanks to numerous great efforts in Hollywood (see also: The Constant Gardener) regarding the numerous ways the world is fucking over Africa for it's own interests.

While treated largely as a comedy by it's marketing (which it is, though it is a black one), I was moved throughout the film and impressed by Cage's handling of the material without going too over the top.

It's message is delivered consistently, yet somehow the viewer is not condescended upon, or beat over the head with the heavy subject matter. Remove all the horrible truth from this movie, and say for a moment that this stuff doesn't actully go on in the real world, and you still have a great movie.

For me, most interesting part of the film comes during the closing of a deal with his brother Vitaly (played by Jared Leto, who challenges YOU to play a better drug addicted Russian from Brighton Beach) by his side. Vitaly has seen some of the horrors of war first hand, horrors that Yuri seems to have had little difficulty shrugging off and dismissing as not his problem. Recovering from drug addiction fueled by the trauma of his memories, Vitaly is in no state to act as the coldhearted businessman his brother needs him to be. Yuri must realize this himself, yet he watches Vitaly, who is the so-called fuckup of the family, going nowhere back in Brooklyn, so he pressures him to take part in this one deal.

The results are tragic. As Yuri is closing the deal for the sale of 2 truckloads of arms, Vitaly is overcome by his conscience. He overpowers a soldier, grabs a hand grenade and pulling the pin, he blows up one of the two trucks. He is immediately gunned down by the other soldiers.

Yuri maintains composure and sits back down at the table with his customer, but now is left with a dilemma. Without a word his customer removes half of his payment from the table. We are left to wonder if Yuri closed the remainder of the deal or not.

At another point, Yuri returns to his Monrovian apartment to find his chief rival arms dealer, tied and gagged and surrounded by the President of Liberia and his henchmen. The sadistic President urges Yuri to shoot the man in the head, yet Yuri is unable. The President grabs Yuri's arm, holding his finger to the trigger, telling him: "Say the word and I'll release him." Yuri, unable to pull the trigger himself, is equally unwilling to let his rival free by saying those words. The Liberian presses Yuri's finger as Yuri turns his head away, and the arms dealer is shot in the head.

The implication of this is clear. Yuri has contributed to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, yet absolves himself because since he has never pulled the trigger, he therefore is not a killer. Now, given the choice to let his enemy go free, his is unwilling, yet he cannot pull the trigger himself and bear the burden of guilt. His entire life is built on this coping mechanism. Without it, he, like his brother Vitaly, would be utterly unable to function. Now it has been challenged at the deepest level.

In the end, Yuri escapes the clutches of the "law", who's name is Valentine (played well by Ethan Hawke), who in his world is as impotent as a gun without a bullet, though he is left by his wife and son, and disowned by his family because of his little brother's death.

The consequence for him has been the discovery of a conscience and the burden of guilt for his actions, yet in the end he continues on with his lucrative career. Why? Because he's good at it. He needs no other reason. After all he has seen and done and lost, Yuri Orlov emerges as a man who went to war with his conscience, and won.

Rating: 8 out of 10

Review: Kingdom of Heaven

I have to admit I enjoyed this one a whole lot, and I was not expecting to.

I heard a lot of mixed opinions, and was myself weary of sitting through yet another lukewarm "historical" epic monster of a movie with little substance to it beyond the 10,000 CGI rendered soldiers marching into battle.

I'm also not a big fan of Orlando Bloom, and I had serious doubts that he could carry the hefty 145 minute length of this film. He managed surprisingly well, however, though he was not the film's greatest strength.

That strength lied in the masterful direction of Ridley Scott, who is probably the main reason I even gave this movie a chance. The plot is patiently developed, and we are given a firm understanding of the careful relationship between Muslims and Christians in the holy city of Jerusalem, the machinations of Theocracy and the bricks that pave the path to war.

I was unable to pay as much attention as was needed in order to keep up with some of the finer plot points. This is not due to lack of interest, but due to the fact that my 19 month old son was either tugging on my arms or dancing a jig in front of the t.v. for some large stretches of time. If you don't pay attention, you do miss stuff.

Then there was the action.

The battle scenes, while not as frequent as some might hope, were striking in their realism and breathtaking in their scope. From the slaying of the priest by Bloom (which is maybe one of the greatest on-screen deaths ever) in the very beginning, to the seige of Jerusalem at the climax of the film, which puts The Return of the King to shame, few movies have ever done real violence better.

All this was compimented by a supporting cast that easily outshined the competant Bloom. Among them, Ghassan Massoud as Saladin, the commander of the Muslim armies was the clear standout. Piercing like a hawk, he oozed charisma and made every scene not just interesting, but riveting. One of my main beefs with this movie his lack of developement as a character. The film could've withstood 10 minutes less of Bloom and 10 more minutes of him.

Jeremy Irons deserves praise as well for his wise and weary commander Tiberias, one of the few men of reason in Jerusalem. Even Hamish from Braveheart was good, but just once I'd like to watch an historical war epic that doesn't have him in it. Eva Green (Sibylla) from The Dreamers was decent, although we did not get to see a close up of her vagina this time. Liam Neeson was just rehashing Quai-gong or whatever his name was in Star Wars.

In conclusion, this one is definitely worth watching, though I would not say it's vital. It does slow down in the middle, but if the plot doesn't hold your interest, at least stick around for the awesome battle at the end.

Rating: 7 out of 10