Lord of War, written and directed by Andrew Niccol, starring Nicolas Cage, was released in 2005. It is set in the 1980s to 1990s. It revolves around a Ukrainian immigrant named Yuri Orlov, who lives in Little Odessa in New York, where he started selling illegal weaponry to mobs within his city. From there, he and his brother ended up selling and recycling military weapons from the wars and repurposing other weapons to sell. At the end of the film, we see how this dangerous lifestyle was destructive to all the things Yuri loved and led him to find that the only thing he knew was that he was good at selling weapons and that he could exploit human violence, but he didn’t realize his aid in the violence made him violent himself, stating “’ I’m not responsible for any death because I never pull the trigger.” The director, Andrew Niccol, said the character Yuri was based on multiple real-life arms dealers. Niccol said in an interview with IGN that he wanted the film to “be a little subversive and make almost like a ‘how-to’ film… and I thought that would be a more interesting…than a typical story structure.” The props used in the movies were incredibly realistic because most were, in fact, real. The director found it was cheaper to buy real guns than props. The tanks were also genuine and belonged to a Czech arms dealer. This effect built a form of legitimacy and truth into the film; even something as small as making the props real can profoundly affect how the audience perceives a movie. This movie’s budget was US$50 million, and after all expenses, it grossed US$72.6 million at the box office, which was pretty good for the film then, but the reviews were mixed.
The photo clip I chose is the scenes at the very beginning and the end. These scenes perfectly portray the violence in this film because they symbolize all the things that make this film violent. Yuri, the main character, is surrounded by bullets on the ground, representing how the weapons he sold have been used to kill so many. The pan-up from the bullets to Yuri and vice versa at the end shows the opening and closing of the story. The pan movement is used multiple times in this film to symbolize the pieces in Yuri’s story. Yuri is talking and staring right into the camera, illustrating how this story was his and how he is the one who is telling it. Throughout the movie, the camera movements are used to direct the film as if they are memories or a story being told.
At the beginning of the film, he is facing away from the camera’s direction, and at the end, he is facing it further, emphasizing the opening and closing of his story. The opening scene, which was later added after the rest of the movie was filmed, shows the camera following a bullet as if we, the audience, were a bullet itself, personifying the bullet; this bullet ends up being shot into someone’s head, showing the destruction a single bullet can carry and how the whole production line had a part in the final destination of the bullet without even realizing it.
The real-life consequences of this movie are heavily violent because of the way this film is presented, which makes it almost a guide on how to become an arms dealer; this could influence the wrong people into journeying into this industry. Though this could be true, I think the purpose of the film is quite the opposite. This movie depicts what is really happening with gun violence in our world today, so the consequences could be people’s eyes being opened to how dangerous and violent guns and weaponry are.
In conclusion, this movie uses cinematic imagery and camera movements to show violence. The film depicts the effect of violence, in this case, guns, on someone’s life and those around them. Yuri’s brother struggled with the justification of selling guns that would kill people leading him to his crippling drug addiction and then his enviable death. It also affected Yuri’s wife and his child, losing all faith in him as he kept the secret of what he did and who he was from them. Furthermore, Yuri was disowned by the only family he had left, his parents. The only thing Yuri had left by the end of the movie was his ability to sell guns. This movie shows how violence kills more than physically; but it also kills one internally and psychologically. As a quote from within the film by Yuri’s brother sums up perfectly, “Be careful Yuri, those things you sell kill, Inside.”
Bibliography
Gilchrist, T. (2005, September 16). IGN Interviews Andrew Niccol – IGN. IGN; IGN. https://www.ign.com/articles/2005/09/16/ign-interviews-andrew-niccol
Lord of War – Box Office Mojo. (2024). Box Office Mojo. https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt0399295/
Lord of War (2005) – Trivia – IMDb. (2024). IMDb. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399295/trivia/
Ebert, R. (2024). Lord of War movie review & film summary (2005) | Roger Ebert. Rogerebert.com; Roger Ebert. https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/lord-of-war-2005
French, P. (2005, October 15). Lord of War. The Guardian; The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2005/oct/16/features.review3
Hamid, R. (2006). [Review of Lord of War; Syriana, by P. Rousselet, A. Niccol, N. Cage, A. Groesch, C. Roberts, N. Golightly, J. Fox, M. Nozik, G. Kacandes, & S. Gaghan]. Cinéaste, 31(2), 52–55. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41689973
Lord of War” an armed and shallow lecture. (2005, September 15). The Georgia Straight. https://www.straight.com/article/lord-of-war-an-armed-and-shallow-lecture
Pradipta, M. (2019)The Analysis of ID, ego, and superego of Yuri Orlov in Lord of War by Andew Niccol.http://eprints.undip.ac.id/77079/1/13020112130057_Michael_Advendri_Pradipta_Final_Project.pdf
Anjali Singh
The analysis, which is provided in great detail in “Lord of War,” explores how violence is portrayed and how it affects the characters. The student deftly delves into the film’s thematic depth, paying particular attention to how violence penetrates Yuri Orlov’s existence and ultimately causes him to become isolated and morally depraved. They persuasively bolster their claim with references to the film’s production specifics and director Andrew Niccol’s goals. Still, a more refined evaluation of the movie’s possible impact as a manual for becoming an arms dealer is warranted. Although the student admits the potential, they correctly argue against it, pointing out that the movie is a warning about the perils associated with the arms trade. However, a more thorough examination of the intricate connection between film and society, based on academic studies, might support this claim. In addition, taking into account the larger discussion on violence in media, the student may have explored the moral ramifications of employing actual weapons as props in the movie. The selected picture does a good job of encapsulating the violence in the movie and highlights Yuri’s major contribution to its continuation. The comprehension of the film’s visual language is improved by the examination of camera motions and symbolism. Overall, the student offers a well-reasoned critique; nonetheless, their analysis might benefit from additional academic research integration and an ethical dimension study.