Movie Review – CinemAbility: The Art of Inclusion

Now Available 

From the saintly, asexual disabled women who get rewarded with a medical cure by the end of the movie (as in City Lights) to the vengeful, recently disabled, villainous men who want to take their anger out on the world (like Dennis Hopper's cop turned bus bomber in Speed), disability stereotypes have become ingrained in our culture throughout film history.

And while that doesn't of course prevent any of the films mentioned from being classics in their own right, when these and other stereotypes – whether coded or more overt – are returned to again and again on the big or small screen, the idea that they're true gets reinforced in people's minds, even if the viewer isn't fully aware of it.

A subject close to my heart, not only as a disabled woman but also as a film major who intended to make it my thesis in graduate school, in this eye-opening documentary (which should be mandatory viewing for those pursuing a degree in Media Studies), director Jenni Gold gives a fascinating overview of the subject of disability onscreen.

Chronicling the evolution of disabled character driven storytelling over roughly 120 years of cinema (and later, television), we discover how much has changed as well as how much remains the same. Additionally, Gold looks at the role that representation plays in legislation as – with the increase of more positive and diverse portrayals post-Vietnam – the Americans With Disabilities Act was finally signed into law by President Bush in 1990.

Reminiscent of a terrific small screen documentary that wouldn't be out of place on TCM, given not only its subject matter but also its slightly retro approach, CinemAbility: The Art of Inclusion is hosted and narrated by one of the film's producers, Jane Seymour and features interviews with a number of famous faces such as Geena Davis, Ben Affleck, Jamie Foxx, and William H. Macy.

Boasting a fascinating selection of film clips and some great analysis by Martin F. Norden, the author of a book I'd highly recommend on the subject (The Cinema of Isolation: A History of Physical Disability in the Movies), the Emmy winning Gold covers a lot of ground, especially in CinemAbility's powerful look at pre-World War II cinema.

From Thomas Edison's The Fake Beggar (which Eddie Murphy paid homage to in Trading Places) and Tod Browning's ouevre from his campy Lon Chaney collaborations to Freaks as well as the complex Golden Rule coded metaphorical morality of Frankenstein up through The Wizard of Oz, there's a lot to process.

And much like the strides made in portrayals post Vietnam, we received what is perhaps our earliest fully three-dimensional disabled character in the form of a WWII vet (played by real WWII vet Harold Russell) in director William Wyler's The Best Years of Our Lives.

Receiving both an honorary Oscar "for bringing hope and courage to his fellow veterans" as well as a Best Supporting Actor Academy Award for the role, Russell's earnest portrayal in the film (which is not without some controversy given Wyler's decision to limit Russell's offscreen independence onscreen) helped usher in decades of new disabled characters on screens both big and small.

From The Miracle Worker to Wait Until Dark at the movies as well as Miss Susan and Ironside on television, viewers were finally starting to see characters whose disabilities were just one aspect of who they were vs. their sole definition in the '50s and '60s.

And although Russell's Oscar success might've also inadvertently led to the ongoing debate surrounding disabled characters being especially attractive for able-bodied actors to play due to their awards bait potential (considering how many bring home Oscars in films from Coming Home to Ray), it still remains that exceptionally rare instance when a disabled actor was cast in a disabled part.

However, there is a heartbreaking follow-up to the universal acclaim for Russell when Marlee Matlin's well-deserved Academy Award win for her powerful turn in Children of a Lesser God was dismissed in the press in 1987 as “a sympathy vote.” Adding insult to injury, when she worked hard to speak the names of the Best Actor nominees the following year while presenting the award to its ultimate winner Michael Douglas, she was accused of betraying the deaf community.

While the sympathy vote write-off is perhaps indicative of a gender double standard, this isn't explored in the film, which already has so much to cover given the complexity, intertextuality, and intersectionality of its subject that it could've led to a multi-part Ken Burns style documentary series.

And with so much on its mind from not only the depiction of disabled characters on film and TV as well as by disabled performers – before delving into the need for more opportunities behind the scenes as well as working in civil rights issues and comparisons to the strides made by African-Americans and the LGBTQ community – the otherwise outstanding doc begins to lose focus.

Jumping around in topic and tone in its last half hour, CinemAbility's talking heads discuss various aspects of on and offscreen portrayals and their reactions to everything from Million Dollar Baby to the depiction of disability based humor.

Needless to say, this doesn't flow very well and while it's all very interesting, the meandering final section of the documentary isn't nearly as solid as the stellar, film school worthy tour of disability onscreen in the first half of the twentieth century which opened Gold's work.

Ambitious, necessary, and long overdue in our cultural conversation, in the end, having too much to say is always preferable to too little. However, because of the limited format of a feature length film (as opposed to say, a five part series on issues such as: stereotypes and depictions, genre approaches, approaching role as an actor, TV vs film, and inclusion in the industry), I think Gold's subject is better served with more analysis and cinematic examples than occasionally repetitive opinions from the interviewees.

Yet, despite that, by covering so much territory, it's bound to not only inspire vital post-film discussion but also cause viewers – both disabled and able-bodied alike – to consider some of their favorite films in a new light.

A crucial jumping off point to greater study, CinemAbility is a fast-moving, funny, and frequently surprising documentary that illustrates in both its examples and interviews, how much our culture benefits when we see people from all different walks of life represented onscreen, including those that might not walk but don't have to be psychopaths, helpless, or superheroes to be fascinating in their own right.

Text ©2018, Film Intuition, LLC; All Rights Reserved. http://www.filmintuition.com Unauthorized Reproduction or Publication Elsewhere is Strictly Prohibited and in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.  FTC Disclosure: Per standard professional practice, I may have received a review copy or screener link of this title in order to voluntarily decide to evaluate it for my readers, which had no impact whatsoever on whether or not it received a favorable or unfavorable critique. Cookies Notice: This site incorporates tools (including advertiser partners and widgets) that use cookies and may collect some personal information in order to display ads tailored to you etc. Please be advised that neither Film Intuition nor its site owner has any access to this data beyond general site statistics (geographical region etc.) as your privacy is our main concern.

Blu-ray Review: Changing Lanes (2002)

Now Available on Blu-ray



Already Available on DVD

Bookmark this on Delicious

Print Page





Obviously it’s an understatement to say that life is full of contradictions but an especially challenging one is trying to figure out when to remain still and when to fight back.

It’s a lesson that’s extraordinarily hard to pass on to the next generation—wanting to ensure that they don’t become violent bullies but at the same time (or at least it my point-of-view) reminding them that if they are being struck, it’s definitely okay to stand up for themselves. Provided, that is, that any physical response they make to defend themselves is purely in self defense. But, as we all know when tempers flare-- lines get crossed fast and the victim can become a bully shortly after the first punch is thrown.



Filmmaker Roger Michell’s Changing Lanes—a cinematic representation of an angry moral minefield—raises all of these contradictions and questions shortly after the film begins when two men with completely different backgrounds (both undergoing an overwhelming amount of stress) collide in a traffic accident during the a.m. rush hour on New York’s FDR drive.



Intriguingly, we discover that both men are on their way to settle legal situations. On the one hand we have Samuel L. Jackson as a recovering alcoholic Doyle Gipson who's preparing for his last plea to the family court judge to receive visitation rights to his children. And to balance out the equation, Gipson is matched with Ben Affleck’s smooth-talking yuppie Gavin Banek who is on his way to present an important series of documents in an ethically shady case that’s netted his law firm a ridiculous sum of money.



While it’s Affleck’s speeding Banek that crashes into Gipson, the two begin go through all of the motions they’re supposed to as responsible citizens by trading insurance information and ensuring the other person is okay. However, while Gipson wants to do everything by the book—Banek’s patience wears thin after a few seconds of requisite cordiality before his privileged sense of upper class entitlement and legal ease takes over. After he tries buy off Gipson with a blank check for the damage done to his vehicle, he feels his work is done and-- ignoring Gipson's request for a ride-- Banek leaves the scene of the accident with the thoughtless comment, “better luck next time.”



Although most audience members by now would simply assume that Banek is the villain and Gipson the unlucky hero—both men prove in their subsequent responses over the course of a very long, sinister Good Friday that they’re more than willing to bully and push back. And in doing so, each one ratchets up the level of pain in actions that go well beyond self defense into the realm of deadly serious attacks.

To their credit-- especially since the film is already a bit overly exaggerated and heavy-handed as it is-- filmmaker Michell and his screenwriters Chap Taylor and The Player scribe Michael Tolkin genuinely make an effort to sidestep any major “black and white” racial overtones, aside from one killer scene where Jackson gets the chance to deliver one of his trademark long monologues to two racist strangers while discussing his idea of a perfect Tiger Woods ad.

Yet—and despite the fact that from the earliest scenes the characters are presented on the surface as generic stereotypes (of both “race” and “class”)—Affleck and Jackson bring a great amount of layers to the roles that find them playing decidedly against type. To this end in both the press notes and behind-the-scenes documentaries, the former acknowledged he’d never had the opportunity to really act prior to this film (following Pearl Harbor up with Lanes) and the latter enjoyed the opportunity to play an uncool, unhip square for once.

However, the racial inequities, class struggles, religious symbolism of Good Friday and idea that both men were different levels of ethically ticking time bombs are laced throughout. Although on the surface they appear to have nothing in common—on that particular day when their vehicles and lives intersected and we realize they had an obscene amount to lose, their similar natures come out. As a result, they go into urban warfare using everything at their disposal when Banek tries to manipulate Gipson into giving back an important legal file he accidentally left in his hurried escape from the traffic accident and is too impatient to just meet up and talk things out.



However, life in an untouchable skyscraper gives Banek the edge to seriously destroy at will in an effort to save his career, marriage, and reputation when the file isn’t immediately returned. And although his former lover and colleague (Toni Collette) stars as his “conscience,” she also provides him with the contact information of a man (Dylan Baker) who can speed up the recovery process by taking a white-collar criminal approach to ruining Gipson.



It’s once this particular cyber attack is leveled in destroying Gipson financially that the film (which had already been moving from angry towards ferocious) becomes downright psychopathic and mean-spirited as a sort of twenty-first century version of Falling Down. And accordingly, the men take their frustrations out on each other in the most reprehensible of ways involving frightening Gipson’s children and nearly killing Banek on the road.

At its surface, of course, it's meant to illustrate the lesson that we never know exactly what’s going on in another human being’s life at any given moment. Yet, what started as an ingenious if obviously magnified and slightly dubious thriller of rage-fueled revenge gone wild instead falters given the exaggerated circumstances of the men and consequently turns into an absolutely repugnant depiction of attack and counter-attack run amok.



However, this being said, Lanes was critically lauded upon its initial release for its provocative approach and unabashed depiction of the very worst urges lurking in the hearts of men. Despite this, I feel pretty confident in the assumption that the film would not have been nearly as well received if Michell and his writers hadn’t tacked on a protracted penance filled ending which simply appears out of nowhere like a speeding car as the filmmaker’s attempt to crash some semblance of hope into the narrative.



Bolstered by a brilliant concept and terrific performances—especially by Jackson, Collette, and Sydney Pollack as Affleck’s boss and father in law—the film manages to push well past plausibility and audience empathy for the characters in its grueling final act in its transformations of two ordinary men who become the worst of bullies, never sure if and when they should step back and call a truce or just pummel each other beyond recognition.



And it’s in this strange attempt at marrying these two conclusions after we’ve just experienced one horrific event after another to the point that we no longer care about Banek or Gipson (or honestly 90% of the film’s cast) that made me question the filmmakers motive for Lanes as anything more than just in the end a clunky grown-up version of an after-school special.



Aside from the heavy-handed Good Friday religious symbolism that pervades, the work had enormous potential as a definite morality play set in contemporary America. In fact, seeing the film again now in a world where it seems that every week another citizen goes off the deep end and causes violent chaos in a gory shoot-out, it’s even timelier today than it was in 2002.

However, simplicity instead of exaggeration should’ve been the goal of those involved to try and make the two characters even remotely relatable or worth the investment, in lieu of depositing them in elaborate “schemes” and only-in-Hollywood plot points.



For this is especially the case as it concludes disappointingly with a reaffirmation of the same two stereotypes of the men that had opened the picture rather than making us feel that-- despite the excellent turns of the men portraying them-- Banek and Gipson had really changed all that much after all. Thus, Lane’s “happy ending” is damned in the end because it isn’t genuinely earned in the least as anything over than a convenient screenwriting contrivance.

With the theatrical trailer being the only special feature upgraded to high definition, we’re treated to the familiar yet interesting behind-the-scenes making-of-featurettes the include interviews with the cast and crew, an extended scene and deleted ones. Likewise, it contains a feature length commentary track by the director who-- after Lanes-- moved his career into far creepier territory with the eerie Enduring Love and excellent yet disturbing film The Mother (both of which starred the man who would become James Bond a.k.a. Daniel Craig).

Of particular interest to fellow writers would be the “Writer’s Perspective” extra that includes some insights from Michael Tolkin who was brought into work on the completed screenplay (always a sign that Wonder Boys, The Hours, and No Country for Old Men super producer Scott Rudin knew it was in trouble at the structural stage).

The Blu-ray itself is of excellent quality with first-rate sound throughout in one of the best Paramount soundtracks included on their slate of impressive 5/19 Blu-ray releases (that also included 3 Days of the Condor, Paycheck, Enemy at the Gates, and The Machinist) and a very sharply defined visual presentation that adds extra clarity to some of the tight, boxed-in shots, rapid-cuts, and darkly lit scenes.

Heightening that sense of feeling like a caged claustrophobic victim-- the Blu-ray completely pulls you in with an exceptional transfer of the unique production design and visual style, even if at times you'll have to remind yourself that there's no one you can push back amidst the chaos since after all, it's only just a film.

Blu-ray Review: Paycheck (2003)

Now Available on Blu-ray

Previous Editions on DVD

View a Photo Slideshow from the Film

Bookmark this on Delicious

Print Page





As a technologically gifted wizard who reverse-engineers devices in order to find out precisely what makes them work for his greedily amoral employers, Michael Jennings (Ben Affleck) is used to solving puzzles when all of the pieces have already been assembled and he can relish in taking it apart.

However, when he finishes up his most recent top-secret effort of technological piracy and submits to the requisite short-term memory wipe which deletes all memory of his participation in the event from his brain, Jennings is startled to discover that-- in lieu of a seriously large paycheck-- he’d changed his mind sometime during the process and instead requested that an envelope filled with twenty everyday items be placed in his hands instead.

An odd twist of fate of receiving parts to assemble instead of a whole product to disassemble, Jennings must work backwards trying to build the mystery from the ground up in a way that involves the audience into the quick witted mind of an engineer.



However, after he’s chased by both the authorities as well as ruthless killers-- the Cary Grant likened Michael becomes a Hitchcockian “wrong man” on the run, turning to an Eva Marie Saint style cool blonde in the form of Uma Thurman’s Rachel-- an old flame he doesn’t remember since his involvement with Rachel along with what exactly he did while working for his friend Aaron Eckhart’s company have all been conveniently erased from his mind.



No, this isn’t a play on Christopher Nolan’s brilliant unreliable narrator neo-noir Memento but yet another adaptation of the dangers of technology, the undeniable lure of the almighty dollar, major governmental conspiracy, and psychological paranoia as originally penned in story form by Total Recall, Blade Runner, Minority Report, Next, and A Scanner Darkly scribe Philip K. Dick.

Although it's filtered twice to decidedly different effect, first through the screenplay crafted by Dean Georgaris (Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life, the newest version of The Manchurian Candidate, and the underrated Tristan and Isolde). And secondly it's changed again by filmmaker John Woo, who-- despite doing one hell of a great job making us think otherwise with Face/Off--notes on this Blu-ray that he dislikes science fiction. So in response, decided to draw greater inspiration from Hitchcock’s North By Northwest than the Philip K. Dick cinematic landscape with which we’re usually presented.

The results are mixed for the most part for Paycheck as a film overall, but I found myself instantly riveted. For from the start, the brilliant concept of presenting our hero with all of the puzzle pieces he’ll need to survive over the course of the next 118 minute running time is great fun and it works in an effective way similar to David Fincher’s The Game which found Michael Douglas needing to figure out exactly when he had to insert the key into a lock or a handle into a door to escape to safety.

Unfortunately for a movie that’s rooted in an intellectual set-up and—memory wipes aside—a very believable practice of reverse-engineering technology, Paycheck begins to suffer from memory loss fairly on after Jennings only uses one or two puzzle pieces in an in increasingly mindless fashion. And ultimately, we're left understanding that it's a film that cares less about the overall puzzle and pieces involved and more about trying to distract from plot-holes with bravura action sequences and constantly moving, fluid camera work.



Having already succeeded brilliantly at this practice in John Woo’s MI:2 and the cheesy yet ultimately thrilling Broken Arrow, Woo’s attempts here are entertaining from the overall look and retro style of the film (whether it’s in the costuming homage or the fact that just like Hitch, every part of the set was movable and he could shoot in all directions). Likewise, it's a given that his action sequences are first rate but in the end, it’s a dubious and odd work where the actors all seem as though they’d just met each other on the day of filming.

The usual radiance of Thurman is lost here and most likely it’s due to her visibly tired and unhealthily thin physique following her extraordinary turn in Kill Bill 1 & 2. Furthermore Aaron Eckhart and Paul Giamatti’s genuine talent as cerebral actors is wasted in the visual polish and punch of the plot-addled picture, and Ben Affleck isn’t given enough to work with to make Jennings an endearing or likable lead.

In other words, he may be modeled on Cary Grant and Affleck’s movie star looks are well-suited to the production as we discover amusingly that he came highly recommended as the “next” choice when his best friend Matt Damon turned down the script because of its obvious similarities to the Bourne Identity franchise but Affleck is never offered a chance to leave a Grant like impression on a film that isn’t done any favors by its interchangeably bland title.

Overall, one of Woo’s weaker American efforts—Paycheck is additionally one of those films I’ve ended up having to describe to others to remind them that yes, they have seen it since aside from the less than memorable title, in the same token, the film unfortunately drifts from our minds as though we too have had a memory wipe once it’s ended.



A stylishly glossy puzzle that tries to dress itself up with a phony high I.Q. the way a girl puts on high heels to look like her mother and succeeds for thirty minutes or so, Paycheck ultimately stumbles, loses the heels and I.Q. along with its pretense and just tries to deliver on action alone.

However, in the hands of the master who made the incredible Chow Yun Fat picture The Killer, Paycheck keeps you watching with Woo’s trademark motorcycle chases and high impact action sequences but plummets in a ridiculously silly ending that made me hope in earnest that Eckhart’s paycheck was impressive enough to warrant the talented actor’s involvement.



Newly released on Blu-ray—Paramount retains the standard definition presentation of the special features including seven extended and/or deleted scenes, two commentary tracks (one from Woo and the other by Georgaris) and two featurettes that celebrate the Hitchcockian influence and Woo’s work on his Hong Kong features.

And while overall the clarity of the high definition picture impresses indeed and adds a greater depth perception to the work, the balance of the sound is a bit out of whack as the dialogue is barely audible at well past volume level 60 on a high quality LCD television whereas the sound of gunfire and explosions nearly thrusts you out of the chair.

Obviously, with this decision to go for amped up action instead of dialogue—the Blu-ray reaffirms the way that ultimately brains lost out in favor of brawn and the clever little puzzle pieces started to seem like video game pellets to propel Jennings to the next level.

Despite this, it’s a fast-paced Saturday afternoon mindless work of action guaranteed to entertain much, much more than your standard game store cardboard puzzle and looking at Affleck and Eckhart in HD beats looking at a generic postcard landscape any day of the week.

The Battle of Shaker Heights

Directors:

Efram Potelle

&

Kyle Rankin

Erica Beeney’s screenplay for The Battle of Shaker Heights was chosen as the second winning entry in Matt Damon and Ben Affleck’s popular HBO series Project Greenlight. Similar to another Greenlight release Stolen Summer, 2003’s The Battle of Shaker Heights surrounds the friendship of two boys coming of age. Sweet natured and original, the undisputedly predictable yet charming film helped introduce the world to former Holes star Shia La Beouf before he became a new sensation with roles in Hollywood hits such as Transformers.

Set in the Cleveland, Ohio suburb of Shaker Heights, La Beouf plays Kerry Ernswiler but highly intelligent teenager who spends his weekends as a civil war reenactor where he befriends the wealthy, kind Bart Bowland (Elden Henson) who not only gives him access to his father’s collection of legendary battle artifacts but also introduces him to his gorgeous but engaged older sister Tabby (Amy Smart), on whom Kerry develops a hopeless crush. The son of hippies in the from of a recovering addict father who sometimes lets the at risk homeless people he works with sack out on the family sofa and a mother who runs a bizarre sweat shop mass producing portraits of horses with her Asian staff, Kerry spends increasing amounts of time with Bart. Along with his new friend, Kerry tries to devise a strategy to take on the school’s biggest bully who incidentally is the son of Kerry’s exasperated history teacher who gets routinely challenged by the young war buff in class.

Although the ending wraps things up far too easily and abruptly and the film at times feels uneven in its tone which further research revealed may have been indicative of the studio’s battle to turn the film into a teen comedy whereas the filmmakers intended it to be a drama, it’s still an entertaining time-waster and even more enjoyable than the Affleck/Damon production Stolen Summer.

Hollywoodland

Director: Allen Coulter

HBO director Allen Coulter (Sopranos, Sex and the City) made his film debut with this highly stylized noir based on the mysterious true events surrounding the death of George Reeves, the actor who was famous to millions of American families for his role as TV’s Superman. However, after the man of steel proves that he is not faster than a speeding bullet after all when found dead of a supposedly self-inflicted gunshot wound, other facts come to light indicating that the “suicide” may in fact have been murder. Fame and fortune hungry sleazy private detective Adrien Brody goes on the case uncovering some of Reeves’s dirty little secrets including his long-time affair with Toni Mannix (Diane Lane), the married wife of MGM studio boss (Bob Hoskins) and his relationship with the younger, manipulative, sexy and possibly dangerous fiancé at the time of his death, Leonore Lemmon (Robin Tunney). The film, which benefits greatly from not only the aforementioned performers but most notably from the impressively mature and astute performance of Ben Affleck as Reeves who proves once and for all to those who’d written him off in the past that he is a truly gifted performer, earning several nominations for the role including an award as Best Actor from the Venice Film Festival (giving him some promising early Oscar buzz that unfortunately never paid off). While it was never Coulter’s and screenwriter Paul Bernbaum’s intention to make Hollywoodland turn into a Reeves biopic, the finished product, while based on some intriguing facts, does end up as a relatively uneven and unsuccessful noir that works best when dealing exclusively with the flashbacks of Reeves and the questionable characters and events that surrounded his demise. However, too much time is spent on the usually excellent Adrien Brody, who was unfortunately given a clichéd role that bogs the film down with a far less fascinating storyline as he comes off as a sort of Humphrey Bogart meets Sam Spade archetype that calls more attention to itself as a cinematic noir entry when it should’ve been a far more natural and involving mystery in its own right. Overall, the actors save the film and keep viwers riveted, especially thanks to the female turns by the dominating and underappreciated Tunney and a fearless Lane as the vulnerable older woman. When the movie ended, however, I found myself doing some independent research on the Reeves mystery as the film, while well-constructed, ends up raising more questions than offering any kind of answer or resolution, opting instead to be just simply a showcase of mostly smoky noir-esque mood cinematography and shady characters.