Lord Of War Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
1920x800 | 8012.6 MiB | 1080p | |
|
1280x528 | 4477.47 MiB | 720p | |
|
544x222 | 701.14 MiB | divx | |
|
320x128 | 320.49 MiB | ipod | |
Storyline
TAGLINES
The first and most important rule of gun-running is: never get shot with your own merchandise.
got guns?
Where There's A Will, There's A Weapon.
He Sells Guns... And He's Making A Killing.
This film charts the rise and fall of Yuri Orlov, from his early days in the early 1980s in Little Odessa, selling guns to mobsters in his local neighbourhood, through to his ascension through the decade of excess and indulgence into the early 90s, where he forms a business partnership with an African warlord and his psychotic son. The film also charts his relationship through the years with his younger brother, his marriage to a famous model, his relentless pursuit by a determined federal agent and his inner demons that sway between his drive for success and the immorality of what he does.
| Nicolas Cage | Yuri Orlov |
| Bridget Moynahan | Ava Fontaine |
| Jared Leto | Vitaly Orlov |
| Shake Tukhmanyan | Irina Orlov |
| Jean-Pierre Nshanian | Anatoly Orlov |
| Stewart Morgan | Ukrainian Mobster |
| Jasper Lenz | Gregor |
| Kobus Marx | Boris |
| Stephan De Abreu | Liev |
| Jeremy Crutchley | Arms Fair Salesman |
| Ian Holm | Simeon Weisz |
| Tanya Finch | Ingrid |
| Andrew Niccol |
7.70 out of 10 (33996 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Lord of War may be my new All-Time Favorite
posted on 16 Aug 2009I saw Lord of War yesterday and I was overwhelmed. It's clearly for adults only but with that in mind I can't think of one moment I would change. I would say this is easily one of the most completely satisfying films I've seen in many a year. I'm in awe of its beauty and I left the theater completely inspired. In my mind everyone connected to this film has just risen a couple of notches up in my book. This movie has a point of view, and it is strongly anti-violence, but it is also able to give a realistic sense of the gun-trade that must have taken years to acquire. I would think this is mostly inside information that no one would have wanted known generally.Still glowing from my viewing I went to today's Chicago Sun-Times Weekend insert to see what Ebert had written about it. I was completely surprised to find that there's not one word about it! What could possibly be the reason for this obvious spurn? Well, I always thought Ebert was Jewish and there is one scene, quite a short scene, which is not very complementary to the Israeli Defense Forces that may have offended him though to anyone who has followed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, by almost any non-mainstream media, it's not only justified, it's long overdue. Could that be why he's ignoring it? Or could it be that he takes offense to its portrayal of Africans? I've read Ebert's reviews in the Friday Chicago Sun-Times Weekend insert for years now. You have to amend his stars awarded by these rules: If it's predominantly got Blacks as actors he automatically will give the movie at least an extra star. On the other hand, if it's likely to be a blockbuster regardless of what he and the other critics have to say, he will frequently give the movie at least one less star than it really deserves. The man has a knack for descriptive phrases but his rebuff of this magnificent film will not be forgotten by this movie lover for a very long time.Politically savvy males in particular should run to catch this movie in theaters before it's gone. But those who like to see masterful direction should go to see it as well. It's a rare triumph of a movie and if I were making movies this is one I'd love to have been involved with.
Really Good Overlooked Film
posted on 16 Aug 2009I just rented this the other day. I have to say I really enjoyed this movie. The story was thought provoking, interesting and about something that speaks to these times. It seems that all to often films don't want to deal with the real world, because the "PC POLICE" will come out after them. This film takes a pretty good look at how one's actions can basically affect the world. "Lord of War" had a really strong message. I think the directing was amazing Andrew Niccol did a more than credible job. Too bad this movie didn't fare well at the box office. I think people would be pleasantly surprised. But then again, since it wasn't overloaded with CGI, based on an old TV show or comic book it's no wonder the general public never sought this out.
excellent film - clever and funny
posted on 14 Aug 2009This is a well made and witty film.It is a emotive subject; yet it doesn't (as films often do) get overly sentimental or judgemental.Sorry but could help but comment on another users comments:"I was really surprised that Hollywood was able to tackle a huge moral morass like the black market arms trade…"Wahzoh from North Hollywood, Clifornia (sic)"No US studios would back the film. Foreign finances were secured instead."http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399295/trivia
such a moral battleground
posted on 12 Aug 2009I will not say that I liked this movie. I was very very disturbed by it. And I don't tend to disturb easily but looking below the surface of everything the movie is, it is disturbing to the core. the entire idea and knowing it is based on actual events is beyond words. I know children in the world are trained to be killers but I do not want to see it in a movie, I do not want to see or have implied that children are killed in the name of war. As a mother I could not get past this it was too much. and to know that a father could sell guns knowing they would be used to arm children just like his own. The moral dilemma in this movie, he has no morals but does. He tosses a childs toy gun that his son had, but continued to give guns to poor countries that would arm children, he even gives FOR FREE guns to a village that has children in it (including encouraging the children to take the weapons) so that he can cover his own rear. I'm sickened by it all.
Genius, pure genius
posted on 08 Aug 2009Orlov (Cage) starts this film with an apology, saying that he is who he is, and that he expects no one will think he is not one of the ugliest, dirtiest, most murderous men in the world, because what he is, he confesses, is an illegal arms dealer. With that necessity out of the way, Orlov says he intends to simply tell his story, no matter how much it may offend folks. He just wants to tell the truth about what he did. The film's producers claim that it is based on actual events.And offend the story does! No political correctness crossed this film's sound stage and survived. Cage's narrative does not simply verge on the obscene, it becomes so in a beautifully written examination of and a near justification for the existence of the private arms dealer. Consider, the film asks us, that the greatest arms traders in the world are the US, the UK, France, China and Russia, and that all five of these countries are the only permanent members of the UN Security Council. That fact itself is enough to help viewers begin to see why middlemen, like Cage's character Orlov, not only survive, but thrive in this war-ridden world.In a terribly ugly movie, writer and director Andrew Niccol is able to present comedic and sexual scenes that can make a viewer feel sick for realizing he's laughing. Such sharp ability on Niccol's part is what prevents an otherwise shamefully violent gross-out movie from becoming both a compelling piece of self-examination and a powerful expose of the world's true "foreign affairs." Cage continually plays you and me, people who would work for profit if it were to be made and damn the consequences. While doing so, he admits that he is one of the most powerful men in the world, not because he has the guns, but because it is human nature to kill each other. "That's why all the earliest skeletons of humans have arrowheads in them," Cage's commentator dryly offers early on. And the rest of the film painfully and arduously proves that this nihilistic view is quite accurate.Through the expansive use of information gleaned from the minutiae of Cold War spy games to the outright abandon of any sort of law of the seas or of borders when the Cold War finally ends, Niccol guides us on a tour of Cage's Ukrainian character Orlov as he buys abandoned arms from rarefied areas and sells them to high bidders throughout the Third World, always competing with the dangerous dealers who came before. Niccol also allows us into Orlov's personal life, his marriage to the love of his juvenile dreams, and to the extent he will go to maintain his deception. His wife, the premier occidental Ava Fontaine, brilliantly played by Bridget Moynahan, accepts Orlov's fallacy and ignores his work, just as he asks her. Orlov himself seems often to ignore his own work as well. Pursued intermittently by Jack Valentine, a painfully honest INTERPOL agent played with newfound boldness by Ethan Hawke, and toyed with by Simon Weisz, a character portrayed by Ian Holm with that actor's usual deftness, Orlov becomes THE private gunrunner in the world. He can be tracked, caught, arrested, but he will always be released because he knows of and does those things with which the highest ranking members of the militaries of the world would rather their names not be associated.The grist of this film comes in a variety of fashions. First, we appreciate the mock-comical approach of the narrative that offers profound but accurate aphorisms as we watch Third World children murder and be murdered. Second, we relate to Orlov, because he is really only doing what many of us would reasonably do in his shoes: recognize the horrors around him but hold himself blameless because there is always someone else who would gladly take over the dirty work. Third, Orlov is a real person, dealing with family conflicts and the demands of keeping certain matters secret from his wife and child even while he bestows his love upon them. Finally, Niccol populates the film with colorful, if not downright pernicious, characters who work as Orlov's clients. This technique lends a great amount of credibility to Orlov's refrain of personal innocence. The self-appointed president of Liberia would obtain his arms from whomever, Orlov has us believe. As we watch, it is easy to believe this to such an extent that we become willing to exonerate Orlov for his crimes.The film's only weak points are when Orlov is betrayed by his wife and by his crack-head brother. The scenes are not believable, but their inclusion is understood as explanations for Valentine's ultimate arrest of Orlov. Still, we are left wondering who will be punished, Orlov, his wife or his brother."Lord of War" is not pretty by any means. Avoid it if you have qualms about children dying, about instant murder, or about what may really be happening behind the headlines of events in the Third World. But if you want to catch a clever and insightful glimpse into the history and persistence of underground arms dealers and how they affect global politics, see this astonishingly good movie.
Boring
posted on 04 Aug 2009I rented this movie to watch with my husband. We were both bored by it. I found it lacked passion. There was no chemistry between Nicolas Cage and Bridget Moynahan. The relationship between Nicolas cage and Jared Leto as brothers seemed cold as well. The narrative performed by Nicolas Cage during the movie was monotonous. Perhaps if the lead character had some passion for his wife, brother, or son the movie would have come across better.Although there was an underlying message to the movie, I don't feel it was worth watching for this alone. I expect to be entertained by a movie, but Lord of War did not do this.The movie was rated 14A in Canada. In my opinion it should have been restricted. There sex scenes, although not as revealing as they could have been, were explicit. The violence was also graphic. I cringe to think that 14 year old children are watching this movie.
A Movie That Surprised Me...
posted on 04 Aug 2009This movie is impressive because it shows what is, and not what can be. If you look at the description you can probably understand it is yet another movie trying to show the ills of the worlds and how you should change things.While it tries to do that it succeeds on a completely different plane. It succeeds by not looking at the macro picture, but the micro picture of a single gunrunner. It shows his world and how he likes his world.When "Hollywood" gets these types of films it tries to show the evils and then has some ending that says, "see this is how things should be." But this movie does not do this. This movie says this is how it is. The fact that the gunrunner was so emotionless made it very hard to digest the film.If you think that he kills in cold blood like most movies make people to be then you are sadly mistaken. This is not classical "Mob" and honor type movie. No, this about cold, emotionless, calculations and strategy. This is what makes this movie so scary and how come this movie just saps the energy out of you.I really enjoyed this film and if you are in the mood for something serious and dramatic then this movie is for you.
Tries hard, but doesn't really make it's point (MILD SPOILER)
posted on 02 Aug 2009A good cast, decent directing and good editing do not make up for a lack of content. This is especially so in the case of a film which pretends to educate about a very serious subject - such as the arms trade. And even more so when said film claims to be based on actual events.Whatever actual events were sewn together to create Lord of War, their 'actuality' did little to help me suspend my disbelief. The nearly constant voice-over narration didn't help either. Like many other Andy Niccol films, Lord of War has an odd humor which seems to dwell just below the surface, but unlike The Truman Show, S1m0ne and the brilliant Gattaca, it does not work with the very serious and deadly themes in this film. Niccol has done some brilliant and near-brilliant work, but Lords of War is, IMO, his weakest effort thus far.In Lords of War, Nicholas Cage plays Yuri - a completely merciless gun-runner, Jared Leto plays his cokehead brother, Ethan Hawke plays an Interpol Agent (why does Hollywood perpetuate this myth????) pursuing him, and Bridget Moynahan plays his completely in-the-dark wife. Cage is fairly convincing, but the script creates problems for his role. Leto and Hawke are outstanding.The film chronicles Yuri's rise to power and the fulfillment of many of his dreams, falling victim to many clichés along the way, before yielding to an enormous cliché in the end.While the film certainly spends a lot of time examining how guns are moved about illegally from place to place (and most of the scenarios are highly improbable), it really fails to make any profound points or provide any deep insight into the busine$$ of war. Anybody interested in seeing the film is very likely to know most of what this film tries to teach before they walk into the theater. It is difficult to imagine the film doing anything but preaching to its own choir.So, if you think the business of selling arms is morally corrupt, and are entertained by seeing your own views illustrated in an exaggerated, propoagandistic and highly unrealistic manner, with a lot of voice-over in place of coherent visual narrative, then this might just be the film for you. O/W I can only recommend it for fans of the principal cast, whose performances outshine the story and the roles they were given.
Shoot early. Shoot often.
posted on 02 Aug 2009The story of how Yuri Orlov went from being the son of a working class immigrant to notorious international arms dealer. From hiding his "business life" from his wife, evading a determined Inter Pol agent, getting his brother out of trouble, and selling a very powerful (unfortunately so) political tool.Visually inventive (love that intro!), politically daring with a non-indulgent role from a Hollywood star this what good movies are made of. Also the film's focus is on Orlov and not on his merchandise making the movie a look into the arms dealing business not just a look at it. Gets into his mind and life and essentially portrays a shameless greedy bastard as just a day-to-day working human being. In fact, no one character is at all demonized here as opposed to typical political thrillers that draw out characters in black and white or nearly so. The plot follows suit the same way: the portrayal of a criminal business as both salvation and destruction. One that ends as many wars as it starts and saves as many lives as it destroys.Load up and watch. --- 9/10Rated R: violence, drug use and profanity
How is it that New Zealanders make such great films?
posted on 31 Jul 2009The Australian Prime Minister has been celebrating his ten years in office this week.I disapprove of the Australian Prime Minister.He's a "rear-view mirror vision of society" kind of guy. It is often suggested that he hankers for a return to some long gone, probably mythical time. Some golden era when virtuous and upstanding citizens carried on their cloistered lives behind white picket fences.He denies it.But then back in 1997 he denied the state premiers and their health ministers the opportunity to participate in a properly supervised medical trial, to establish whether there were more suitable approaches to the problems of drug abuse then simple-minded prohibition.The Prime Minister did not want the issue confused with evidence based upon observations made under controlled conditions. His attitude was reminiscent of the Renaissance Catholic Church and its opposition to the early Enlightenment practitioners of the scientific method.The Prime Minister still believes the Viet Nam War was a just and worthy exercise in the battle for freedom. Never mind that its best-known proponent, the former US Defence Department Secretary, Robert McNamara, has publicly expressed his heart-felt regret over his, and his country's actions.And of course the Australian Prime Minister was vociferously happy to make a puny contribution to George Bush's coalition of the willing. So puny that, to my recollection, Australia is not even mentioned in the list of unlikely allies catalogued in Michael Moore's film, "Fahrenheit 9/11"My charge against the Prime Minister is simply this.He is guilty of sapping the spiritual, intellectual and moral resources of my country.Think about just three of the rash of truly amazing films by American film makers hitting the cinemas at the moment, questioning the spiritual, intellectual and moral fabric of that country.Good Night and Good Luck Syriana Lord of WarIs it possible that they are a direct response to the re-election of a power clique that flagrantly mislead (read "lied to") their constituents and were exposed in their perfidy? Cut. Back up a minute. Did you spot the odd one out? Lord of War was written and directed by a New Zealander, Andrew Niccol.He's a countryman of Peter Jackson (Lord of the Rings) and Lee Tamahori, who's criminally under-rated Mullholland Falls, was a profound insight into the state of the post war American malaise and its causes.How is that New Zealanders can produce such great films?I love Australian films, but I have to admit the last few years have not really produced anything astounding. I have to go back to David Caesar's 2001 film, Mullet to nominate a film I consider to be truly great, and who has heard of Mullet?Could it be something about the cultural climate the form and pressure that has moulded the age and body of its current fabric?America, Australia and New Zealand are, or were, members of a military alliance until New Zealand had the temerity to insist that American ships bearing nuclear armaments would be denied docking facilities in its ports.Tiny New Zealand, the shaky isles, that antipodean outpost where the population suffers an irrational and guilty fear of pronouncing vowels, found the internal strength of character to stand up for a conviction.Of course Australia, then led by a nominally left wing government, had no such scruples. And of course Australia supported the invasion of Iraq, not heeding the lesson taught by the Viet Nam fiasco. that such modern day crusading should not be attempted without rigorously defined and specified goals and a pre-planned exit strategy.But then Australians are apparently fearful of causing any trouble that might endanger their life-defining, life absorbing obsession with amassing wealth, in the form of land and buildings. And God help anyone who does anything that might upset the delicate balance required to keep this chimera of prosperity intact.Is that the reason that Australian culture is currently so second rate? Is that the reason that the local film industry that is capable of producing such great art is currently struggling to produce even mediocre films?Let's not delude ourselves. New Zealand is probably no "heaven on earth". And yet it keeps throwing up players who strut the world stage with such assurance and artistry.Take Andrew Niccol.He wrote the script for the Truman Show, only to have it taken from his capable hands and given to an Australian director, who did a competent but not breath-taking job.Then he wrote and directed Gatica. Films about androids, clones and genetically modified humans doing battle with mere mortals are not really my thing. But Gatica was engaging, intelligent and well made.But with Lord of War, Niccol has really hit his straps, An unbelievable plot line that is totally credible. Its denouement catches the viewer unawares, after watching the arms dealer Nicholas Cage manoeuvre his way brilliantly through the minefields of international arms dealings for one hundred and twenty minutes. This is George Bernard Shaw's Major Barbara retold for a twenty-first century audience.The film looks great - apparently it is cheaper to gain access to warehouses full of real guns than to mock up sets with fake ones.All the performers are first rate.The narrative maintains a forward momentum, built as it is around Cage's engaging off camera addresses to the audience. And the inventiveness of his character's ploys to escape prosecution and maintain good relations with amoral killers while wooing and winning his childhood femme fatale keeps the viewer constantly entertained.Australians have made amazing films for relatively small amounts of money. They have cobbled together a laconically passionate and yet surprisingly morally self aware and searching film culture.But it has not been evident for a while.Maybe around ten years?
Great movie !
posted on 29 Jul 2009I really liked this movie , great act , great players , great job and i really recommend this movie to all of u guys , because i really enjoyed at my first time i saw this movie . I really liked this movie , great act , great players , great job and i really recommend this movie to all of u guys , because i really enjoyed at my first time i saw this movie . I really liked this movie , great act , great players , great job and i really recommend this movie to all of u guys , because i really enjoyed at my first time i saw this movie . I really liked this movie , great act , great players , great job and i really recommend this movie to all of u guys , because i really enjoyed at my first time i saw this movie .
an excellent movie
posted on 27 Jul 2009In my opinion this movie is a masterpiece. The suspense, the black humor and tension are extremely well mixed in this one. I think this is one of the best movies with Nicholas Cage as a primary character. This is a realistic movie with characters resembling real ones. They act very unpredictable, as in real life, adding to the tension as you can't guess what the next step will be. There are no bad or good guys, there is no black or white there are just shades of Gray, as the main character himself notices. Althrough the CIA guy, which represents somehow the good side (if such side exists) in the world of violence seemed to be also corrupted by violence. Through the movie we take notice of the old saying "He who draws the sword will die by the sword". It strikes from the beginning that the main character is a very complex and well depicted one. Is not your regular mobster with a gun at people's head. Somehow he has a sense of justice buried deep inside him, who is hunting him down in his depressions. Highly adaptable, is learning quick from his friends or foes alike. In a word he's a survivor, outwitting the competition and everything that stands in his way. Somehow his reasons are uncertain even for him as he discovers that he has no real motive for doing it, money being out of the question. A masterpiece movie in my opinion, which i give a ten out of ten. A must see for every people who still thinks violence is the way to do things. The movie gives a warning to all democratic states of the globe to understand the danger and consequences of global inequality, poverty and violence.
Lord of War is the Lord of Movies this year.
posted on 25 Jul 2009Yuri Orlov(Nicolas Cage) tells his humorous, disturbing, and tragic story of coming from nothing to becoming the greatest gun-runner in the world.Lord of War could not have been made better. The narration by cage was not only hysterical but when needed to be, emotional. The acting was the best this year. Cage showed me that he could find a character that actually fit him and the supporting cast with Jared Leto and Bridget Moynahan was incredible. I have never seen a movie that was so funny and so dramatic since my viewing of American Beauty.The writing was beautiful. There is nothing more to say about it. It was just B-e-a-t-i-f-u-l. The movie is also very entertaining which can't be said about most dramatic movies but then again this movie is more than just dramatic, it's in it's own category! The story is gripping and makes you want Cage to succeed in his illegal actions after you have seen the other side of his criminal lifestyle. It characterizes every day warlords to the point where you understand them and sympathize for them and maybe even blame the American government due to fact that it is based on actual events. Overall, the movie was incredible and honestly one of the best this year.I highly recommend this movie.
Beginning entirely annoying...
posted on 23 Jul 2009It wasn't a horrible movie, I felt it just couldn't find it's place, yet Nicolas Cage did fantastically (after getting over the whole , what the hell, he's playing a Romanian thing) But, I became thoroughly annoyed by it just form the opening credits. It wasn't(as some have said) that the graphics were bad, it was just not what you would expect from a film that has been labelled as 'indie'. It was what would be seen in a second rate action movie, it reminded me of something Vin Diesel was in, obviously a bad sign, or even worse a stupid little Michael Bay trick. It for me started the picture off horribly, and gave me the idea that I couldn't like the rest of the movie, yet the film itself wasn't strong enough to overcome these early downfalls.
The deepest irony about what we don't do
posted on 23 Jul 2009I expected an average film based on critics review. Most of the movie kept me watching/ focused on the engaging flow - it played like a global 'pulp fiction'. I thought J Travolta might have played the lead quite well. Best part of the movie was the last 15 mins or so. I gradually woke up to the films irony. 'Evil happens when good men do nothing - I just think that evil happens' (comment by lead Yuri Orlov character). I Finally realised why Cage did this movie it seemed a bit out of character? After the film finished the film kept evolving in my brain - - this was a commentary on each and every one of us - and it left me endarkened about our species. PS I am definitely not a greenie or a pacifist - but this film got through to me - below the radar!
instructive and thorough examination of the arms smuggling
posted on 15 Jul 2009I found this comedy/drama extremely interesting in his documentation of wealthy countries gun trade at the expense of poor people. Andrew Niccol delivered a didactic piece of work, log lesson but never tiresome. This work manages to combine dramatic events and a dark humour, succeeding in making laugh in spite of the seriousness of the subject. Nicholas Cage's acting performance is not as perfect as usually but decent anyway, the script is quite solid and the direction too, that's why the movie gets its message, dealing with ethical matters without ever being heavy. Bridget Moynahan gorgeous but surprisingly less believable than in other films.
Fair, and barely that
posted on 13 Jul 2009This is the kind of film that makes me not think much of Nicolas Cage. The film has such promise, but in the end it just comes up very short. The basic story is fine (and, at the end, the credits state that it's based on true events). It's Nicolas's acting that gets in the way. He just isn't cut out for this type of part. In this film, he sells guns, but doesn't use them. And that's all wrong for Nick. The rest of the cast is pretty decent so it's Cage that's holding it back. Cage becomes very successful at selling arms and staying just one tiny (sometimes comically so) step ahead of the Feds. Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms are very interested in his dealings. The film actually tries to show that most of these weapons end up in the hands of villagers or warlords who then slaughter villagers. It shows that the arms dealer, who sees some of the violence wrought by his wares, is able to distance himself from it. The one decent thing that this film has going for it is that fact that, at the end of the film, Yuri still hasn't seen the error of his ways and is still in business. Had this film starred someone other than Nicolas, I probably would have liked it much better. I gave it a 6.
An interesting, if somewhat unfocused, movie...
posted on 07 Jul 2009I liked the movie, but over all it seems to become less than the sum of it's parts. Acting-wise its put together seamlessly. While Nicholas Cage has not always chosen wisely in his acting roles, he does an admirable in his portrayal of the lead in Lord of War. In fact most of the actors seem well suited to their roles. The script seems solid enough and well written. It is in the focus of the movie seems to be missing. Lord of War starts out as a sort of black comedy then becomes a morality tale and ends more as political statement, the movie cant seem to decide if it wants to be entertaining, thought provoking, or just prompt political and moral outrage in the audience. A good film, if a bit confusing on that note.
Violence is the queen of the war
posted on 07 Jul 2009The main character played by Nicolas Cage as Yuri Orlov is an in migrant who tried to follow the American dream: to get his own success and prosperity, but without academic basis, neither a professional career, he got desperate and thought he found the magic road to richness: dealing and selling arms under the water and the main customers were corrupt political leaders and ambitious people with no remorse and no values. He lied to the love of his life, got married with her and acted as an active business man, he led his younger brother to drugs and death and finally he ended as an insignificant insect in the spider web of his actions.
More boring Hollywood moralizing
posted on 28 Aug 2009The story of an amoral arms dealer from New York could be made into an interesting movie, but this isn't it. "Lord of War" is a paint-by-numbers, preachy, finger-pointing, "oh, isn't the arms trade so unethical and it kills kittens and puppies too" piece of Hollywood garbage. Whatever happened to characters, stories and dialog? The big studios wonder why box office numbers keep declining, well its because of crap like this.Nicholas Cage stars and narrates the entire movie, as Yuri, the arms dealer, who with help of his brother, becomes an arms dealing kingpin. This movie takes you from his start, in Little Odessa, to his time at the top. It was a boring story with boring characters, where nothing happened. I couldn't sit through the entire thing.