Cage's easy charm makes the film work

Rating: 9/10 (17 June 2006)

Since being cast in one of his uncle's lesser-known works in the early 1980s, Nicolas Cage has appeared in a steady stream of titles ranging from the blockbuster to the way-out-there alternative piece. Much like Tom Cruise or Jack Nicholson, when Cage does appear in a film, you pretty much know from the beginning how he is going to play his character. A combination of smooth, quiet, easy-going charm mixed with intense, furious outbursts gives him nuances that are more in the realm of Nicholson than Cruise's bland, unidimensional self-worship. Which, I am not hesitant about saying, is exactly what the role of a successful arms dealer requires. Were this film being made thirty or forty years ago, Nicholson would be in the lead, and apart from the depictions of some very tragic violence, little else would change. As much as Lord Of War takes advantage of its modernity, it is also a piece as timeless story that will be just as relevant when wars are fought with energy-based projectiles as they are now when we're fighting with lead.
The publicity materials claim the film is based on facts, and aside from one moment where the characters get a little too simplistic in their effort to put one over on the authorities, this really is the kind of stuff you could not make up if you tried. I must confess to being just slightly disappointed at the traditional structure, where our hero (if you want to call him that) begins with an idea, rides it to triumph, has a personal crisis, and then goes into a downfall before recovering somewhat. I would have liked to see the wife embrace the husband's business (it certainly pays well), or the villain remain unrepentant to the end because he has no reason to be otherwise. That, after all, is what generally happens in the lovely land of reality. Rather than emphasising the title character's personal conflict about his business to the point where it gets stale, the film explores the real-world effects.
The support cast is in great shape, too. Bridget Moynahan scores major points for her understated performance as the model Yuri goes to absurd lengths to woo. Her slow conversion from an uninformed believer to a horrified and informed critic is handled amazingly well in her limited screen time. Shake Tukhmanyan and Jean-Pierre Nshanian only get a small handful of scenes as the parents of Yuri, but they get one moment in which to deliver the most poignant yet simple dialogue, and they deliver it brilliantly. Ian Holm also gets a brief but compelling turn as one of Yuri's more scrupulous rivals. After he exits stage left, one is left wishing that he had more time to influence the story. The real surprise here, however, is Jared Leto as Vitaly, Yuri's younger brother. Leto has already proved his salt in left-of-centre films such as Fight Club, or taut thrillers like Panic Room, but here he proves that he is a versatile actor capable of playing nearly anything. You can see in this film how Cage benefits from the presence of an actor who may rival and even exceed his own skill.
One other criticism I have of the film is that it does not seem to quite understand the reality that drives the global arms market. Yes, it is terrible that African nations with no money for food (but plenty for guns and tanks, of course) send fourteen year olds to fight battles. And it is terrible that we have men from foreign lands ready to supply them with the weaponry so long as the price is right. But much like the cocaine market, our police services attack in exactly the wrong manner. Supply results from demand, not the other way around, and if the five largest arms suppliers in the world were to stop exporting tomorrow, the nations so ravaged by the supply would knuckle down and build their weapons locally. That is, after all, how the AK-47 featured so prominently in this film came to be one of the most popular assault rifles on the market. Nobody would supply the Russians for fear that the Russians would turn their product upon them, so the Russians began to build the guns themselves. Necessity being the mother of invention and all, so the attempt to moralise does sour the film just a little.
But, like I said, Cage's everyman charm is more than enough to overcome this small flaw. He has good support from Andrew Niccol's direction (no shaky-cam here) and clever screenplay, as well as a haunting score from Antonio Pinto. The strings and acoustic guitar heard towards the end of the story and through the ending credits will remain in one's memory long after the film itself has finished. It is one of the few pieces of film scoring I would hold up as worthy of comparison to some of the bands in my music collection, in fact. Which makes it all the more amazing that no American studio would back this film, as it is truly a piece of modern art that will come to be called a classic ten to twenty years from now. Sadly, because Hollywood chose to treat it as a leper, it barely made any money, and thus less people in the system will be inclined to take this kind of risk. That is a tragedy right on the level of those shown in the film (well, not quite, but you get my meaning).
Because of the deductions I mentioned above, I gave Lord Of War a nine out of ten. If you are a fan of Nicolas Cage, this is one of his best performances. Jared Leto fans will also find much to celebrate here. Those who prefer their cinema as non-mainstream as possible will also find something to like here. It has been overlooked, but Lord Of War may well be the most daring film of 2005.