DVD/VIDEO: Flight 93

FLIGHT 93 (2006)

My Rating: *** (out of *****)
Starring: Brennan Elliott, Kendall Cross, Ty Olsson, Monnae Michaell, April Telek, Colin Glazer, Meghan Heffern, Laura Mennell
Director: Peter Markle

My Review:
Flight 93, the first non-documentary film to focus on some of the events surrounding 9/11, originally aired on A&E in January 2006 to the tune of some 5.9 million viewers (a record for the cable network). Three months later, Paul Greengrass’ superlative United 93 hit movie houses to become the first theatrical release to tell the story of the only hijacked aircraft on September 11, 2001, that did not reach its predetermined target.

Perhaps unfortunately, I happened to view Greengrass’ film first, and, sadly, Flight 93 pales in comparison. I’m not exactly sure why I had the reaction to this film that I did. I expected to be blown away, as I had been with United 93 and with Jules and Gedeon Naudet’s astonishing documentary 9/11. My reaction was, instead, strangely muted. Perhaps it was my expectations after seeing those other films. Or maybe it was the subpar production values and sometimes unconvincing acting in this made-for-TV version. My reverence for and belief in the importance of the subject matter might also have had an effect. Perhaps it was a combination of all of these factors. No matter what way you slice it, Flight 93 doesn’t come close to creating the emotional impact that is offered by its theatrical and documentary counterparts.

The stories in this film and in Greengrass’ version are identical, though – where United 93 spends a great deal of time addressing the chaos experienced by air traffic controllers, military personnel, and ground crews - Flight 93 chooses to emphasize the passengers and their families (the latter are neither seen nor heard in Greengrass’ film). Portions of each film play like carbon copies of one another (the terrorists’ somber preparations, the initial upset on the doomed aircraft, and the desperate final attempt of the passengers to thwart their captors), though the aforementioned differences in focus make each one a totally separate and unique viewing experience.

Director Peter Markle’s decision to give special attention to the families of Flight 93’s doomed passengers is certainly a noble one. The film forces us to imagine the horror, powerlessness, and anguish that must have ensued for these people, going through the motions on an ordinary autumn morning only to be called by loved ones who had just been sentenced to die within the hour. And certainly, the sheer power of this subject matter creates some intense emotional moments and reactions. Markle gets a lot of mileage out of Meghan Heffern’s quietly authentic and moving performance as Nicole Miller, and the scene where Todd Beamer (Brennan Elliott) prays with Lisa Jefferson (an effective Monnae Michaell) is simply breathtaking. On the other hand, some of the dialogue and performances feel cramped, forced, stagy, and downright weak, thus giving Flight 93 a tepid movie-of-the-week feel that seriously dilutes its effectiveness at certain points. Also, the sloppiness of some of the scenes (while Nicole Miller’s mom talks to her on the phone, children ride their bikes and play the street, when it is more than likely that they were in school on that Tuesday morning in September 2001) is downright distracting.

Alas, in terms of the movie as a whole, what could have struck with the force of a hurricane merely unsettles us with the impact of a bad thunderstorm. Though this is almost tragic when one considers the magnitude of the events depicted in Flight 93, the fact that the story is being told – with at least some level of skillfulness and power – is reason enough to see the film.

PG-13, for depiction of a terrorist attack with moments of related violence, as well as mature thematic elements, emotional intensity, and some mild language

NEW IN THEATERS: The Da Vinci Code

THE DA VINCI CODE (2006)

My Rating: * ½ (out of *****)
Starring: Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou, Ian McKellan, Jean Reno, Paul Bettany, Alfred Molina
Director: Ron Howard

My Review:
So dark the con of man, indeed. This intriguing line from Dan Brown’s bestselling novel is transposed into Ron Howard’s incessantly hyped, critically lambasted, financially successful film adaptation with a piercing irony. The con, it turns out, is not the story’s proclaimed dupe of undiscerning Christian believers by murderous, power-hungry church officials, but rather, the insidious ruse of a clever, forked-tongued author and the filmmakers who have prepared his pseudo-historical fiction for millions of gullible viewers.

The Da Vinci Code’s plot is at once exceedingly complex and shockingly simplistic. Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks, pasty and laconic, but employing enough of his everyman charm to semi-successfully pull off the role) reveals – through a series of car chases, near escapes, and long-winded exposition – “the greatest cover-up in human history” when he and French cryptographer Sophie Neveu (Tautou, losing almost all of her Amelie winsomeness, but solid nonetheless) investigate the bizarre and grotesque murder of Sophie’s grandfather in the bowels of the Louvre museum.

Tracked by a relentless French policeman (Reno, bland) and a psychotic, homicidal, sadomasochistic albino monk of the secretive Catholic order Opus Dei (Bettany, sometimes overacting, mostly frightening), Robert and Sophie join with the eccentric recluse Sir Leigh Teabing (McKellan, always a feisty delight) to learn of the early Christian church’s suppression of the “sacred feminine” and of the “human invention” of Jesus Christ’s divinity, among other things. It all pans out to be a case of the old Gnostic heresies (raised and disproved centuries ago, being almost as ancient as Christianity itself), dressed up in simpering postmodernism that doesn’t say anything definitive about anything, and if it does, clearly highlights the allegedly divine nature of Mary Magdalene over that of Jesus.

So, let’s begin with the notoriously bad reviews received by The Da Vinci Code. Purely as motion picture entertainment, this movie is not nearly as awful as it has been made out to be. The pacing and direction are clunky, with way too much telling and not enough showing, but what is told is interesting. As a result, the film is not boring by any means. The talented cast is underused, but certainly not laughable or lifeless as described by many a critic. Other qualities such as cinematography and music are serviceable if not spectacular.

The real problem with The Da Vinci Code (and thus why it merits a one-and-a-half star rating from this reviewer) is the same as that of its source material: pure fantasy and bald-faced lies using real titles, events, and persons to give the impression – at least on the surface – of suppressed historical fact. Many will surely dismiss the controversy over film and novel with cries of “It’s only fiction.” True. Alas, Dan Brown, while calling his work a “novel,” also states that all of the architecture, rituals, organizations, artwork, and documents described within are “accurate.” Hmm. Sounds like a have-my-cake-and-eat-it-too politician to me. And to be sure, the discerning reader and moviegoer will not be influenced in any way by this preposterous baloney. However, and most unfortunately, the average entertainment consumer does not often question media presentations that appear to be true, especially when they convey such ear-tickling, middle-of-the-road nonsense statements as “Why couldn’t Jesus have been divine and married? Maybe human is divine.” (the aforementioned “simpering postmodernism”).

Hopefully, some moviegoers will be challenged and encouraged to look into the real Jesus as a result of seeing this film. Some will want to know more. But sadly, this movie will probably confirm more doubts and encourage more erroneous beliefs about Christ than it will direct people towards truth. For that reason, and for its wildly imbalanced portrayal of those who do believe in Christ’s divinity as perversely disturbed liars and killers, The Da Vinci Code – which (all other things remaining constant) would have garnered a much higher rating given a more honest approach to the subject matter – gets the dubious distinction of being the worst film I’ve seen so far this year.

PG-13 (a joke – the MPAA should be called to task for making this movie accessible to all ages), for scenes of graphic violence, including a lingering, explicit scene of nude self-flagellation with homoerotic, sadomasochistic overtones, as well as mature subject matter, brief sexuality including verbal references, some language, and a momentary drug reference

DVD/VIDEO - ART HOUSE: Born Into Brothels

BORN INTO BROTHELS (2004)

My Rating: **** ½ (out of *****)
Starring: Shanti Das, Avijit, Suchitra, Manik, Gour, Puja Mukerjee, Tapasi, Mamuni, Kochi, Zana Briski, Sunil Halder, Geeta Masi
Directors: Zana Briski, Ross Kauffman
Editors: Nancy Baker, Ross Kauffman

My Review:
Movies have the ability to impact us in ways that no other artistic medium can. Truly great films go beyond political agendas, motives for profit, attempts to wow with flashy effects, and efforts to manipulate emotion with carefully crafted dialogue and perfectly timed music. They allow us to make our own judgments about what the events unfolding on screen actually mean, challenge us with opportunities to grow and learn, and impart such valuable gifts as encouragement, inspiration, and hope. Good documentaries do all of this and more, offering the unique blessing of taking viewers into the worlds they depict as those worlds actually exist.

Born Into Brothels is an exceptional example of this type of documentary filmmaking. Winning the Oscar for Best Documentary Feature of 2004, this 83-minute masterpiece – destined to become a classic of the genre – follows New York photojournalist Zana Briski as she makes her home in the brothels of one of Calcutta’s red light districts. In becoming familiar with the prostitutes of this destitute and oppressive region, Ms. Briski comes to know the children of these women – children born into poverty, sometimes abuse, often a destiny of becoming prostitutes themselves, and usually bleak futures as “outcasts” of their society. Ms. Briski’s connection with and advocacy on behalf of these children comprises the bulk of the film.

Born Into Brothels could have settled for being a completely devastating look at social bondage and hopelessness among the marginalized poor. As such, it would certainly have been impacting, if rather pointless and frustrating. Most thankfully, directors Briski and Kauffman choose to give us more. We certainly feel the darkness and pain in the lives of these impoverished and afflicted families, especially of the children. In the film, however, Ms. Briski not only gives the gift of her presence to these children (a monumental thing for any human being to offer another), but also encourages, develops, and inspires them by sharing her trade and passion: photography.

By developing the eye of a photographer in these young people, Briski not only opens doors of creativity and artistic freedom for them, but also – and more importantly – helps to provide a sense possibility and hope for a brighter future. In fact, the children end up having some of their work auctioned at Sotheby’s, and Briski’s non-profit organization Kids With Cameras (http://www.kids-with-cameras.org/) plans to open schools for marginalized children (such as those depicted in the movie) who would otherwise have little opportunity for education and advancement. Of course, we are vicariously filled with a deep and profound joy as the children discover dreams they didn’t even know existed becoming tangible realities.

Briski and Kauffman rightfully keep the children and their artwork front and center throughout the film. Each one of the selected children is given a segment consisting of interviews and examples of their work, and each one is a treasure – unique, feisty, beautiful, funny, candid, heartbreaking, and best of all, real. Likewise, the children’s pictures are extensions of their marvelously individual personalities, capturing their world – ugly, brutal, and cheerless to some – in ways that only they can. The resulting images are poignant in their simplicity, harrowing in their honesty, and absolutely gorgeous in their respect for life in all its myriad forms.

Putting it simply, Born Into Brothels is a cool, replenishing oasis in a Sahara of cinematic dreck. It is a must for documentary aficionados, and will enrich all others who risk its sometimes disquieting but ultimately uplifting portrait of love – in the form of time, resources, advocacy, and talents shared – bringing life to dead places.

R, for brief moments of strong, abusive, and sexually graphic language, as well as mature thematic material relating to prostitution, poverty, and drug use