The Kingdom has all the potential to be a first-rate political thriller, great actors, interesting premise, terrific set-pieces, but ends up feeling stolid and somewhat predictable. Even the prelude, a documentary-like rapid history of Saudi Arabia, presumably there to educate us Americans so we know who the Wahhibi Muslims are, feels manipulative.
When two Islamic fundamentalists dressed as Saudi police break into an American compound in Riyadh, they start gunning down innocent Americans. They are eventually killed, but this is all a plot to draw an instant response team to the location where a car bomb subsequently goes off killing hundreds and shaking the kingdom to its core. One of the killed is a local FBI agent, and that raises the emotional temperature of the FBI state-side.
Special Agent Ronald Fleury (Jamie Foxx) heads up a large team of FBI investigators in Washington D.C. who have to watch this unfold on video thousand of miles away. Try though he does, he cannot get permission to take a team to investigate on-site. The Saudis don't want the Americans to take over, and the Americans want it all to disappear, since it is just another political hot potato. But with some scheming and subtle blackmail, Fleury gains acquiescence to bring a team of four to the kingdom for five days.
When they arrive they find their investigation is ham-strung by local politics. Appointed a protector, Faris Al Ghazi (Ashraf Barhom), they are baby-sat everywhere they go, and cannot conduct inquiries. The real inquiry is being led by an inept and brutal Saudi soldier.As time starts slipping away, Fleury wins first Faris to his side, and then
one of the many crown princes, and they begin to do real work. At one point, interviewing a father of a murdered wife, the widower yells at Faris, "Does Allah love your kids more than mine?" A tough question, the question of why some die and others live, the movie immediately abandons any attempt at an answer. Later, before going into a room of terrorists, Fleury asks, "Which side do you think Allah's on?" Both questions are symptomatic of the film, raising important issues but dropping them unanswered.The Kingdom shows both militant Muslims as well as pacifist Muslims. It goes out of its way to show them praying, in mosques and in homes. The message is clear, there are lots of Muslims who don't agree with the fundamentalists' terror tactics. But there are also many who do, and the movie does gravitate towards these, showing them making suicide bomb vests and suicide cars.
The finale is an extended set-piece that sees one of the FBI agents kidnapped amidst a violent car chase through the perilous streets of Riyadh (everywhere outside the compound appears scary and dangerous, with everyone being a potential enemy). With three FBI agents and one Saudi policeman, this small team ends up taking on what seems like half the city. Four guns against dozens of bad guys, some with rocket-propelled grenades. Yet in true Hollywood fashion, the good guys emerge from this firestorm with no serious wounds.Where The Kingdom falls down is in its character development. We see Fleury with several children, one his own, but we know nothing about his family situation. And the three team members, played by Chris Cooper, Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman, are cardboard characters, never drawn out. Not knowing them, we don't really root for them. We root for them as FBI agents, roles not real people. And the implication that only the US investigators are capable of solving this crime is nationalistic and patronizing. How is it that in less than five days, they are able to solve the crime, kill the radical Muslim leader, and come home unscathed? Does this happen in real life?
The issue here is violence. The terrorists' violence is deadly, dastardly, despicable, but is the response any better? The Saudis resort to brutal torture of one of their own, who seems to be innocent, and learn nothing. The FBI go to Saudi apparently to help solve the crime. But when Faris tells Fleury he wants to kill the culprits when they find them, Fleury understands, even seems to agree. And in the post-climactic scene, we learn something about both Fleury and the radical leader that leaves us wondering if Fleury is any different than the terrorists themselves.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was shaken by a bomb; in the aftermath, the initial act of violence bred more violence. Worse, it gets insidiously inside the minds of fair men and women and causes them to want to do violence. But there is a "kingdom that cannot be shaken" (Heb 12:28). That is the kingdom of heaven that Jesus spoke about and inaugurated while on earth. His methods were not those of violence. Rather, he spoke of turning the other cheek, going the extra mile, loving your enemies, winning them over apart from violence and terror. That kingdom will come, and when it does the lion will lie down with the lamb, and there will be no more need for guns.
(For a different review of The Kingdom on this blog, see Mike Todd's thoughts: http://mosaicmovieconnectgroup.blogspot.com/2008/01/kingdom-reflections-by-mike-todd.html .)
Copyright 2008, Martin Baggs
his father, who is off serving his country in the navy. Pretty soon, the egg hatches and a water horse, a legendary creature, emerges. A cross between ET and Yoda when it is born, Angus names him Crusoe.
Lewis befriends Angus and his sister and is let into the secret, helping hide Crusoe. The movie certainly benefits from the chemistry that Chaplin and Etel bring to their scenes together.
In the end, this movie is a journey of acceptance. As Lewis is the human glue that brings the family together, so Crusoe is the magical spirit that causes them to face their demons. Angus, in denial of his father's death, can accept the "unreality" of a mystical creature while his mother is the exact opposite. She cannot accept a monster in the lake, but the death of her husband is plain. When she comes face-to-face with the monster, she accepts reality. And, somehow this whole experience has brought the death of his father into a reality that Angus now accepts.
This theme is crucial. Jesse could have taken the youg Ford under his wing, and taught him, trained him, made him. Ford worshiped the ground Jesse walked on. But Jesse made a huge mistake. Rather than granting acceptance, he gives out rejection, and it ends up killing him. And this raises an issue for us. How do we treat those who look up to us? Do we use our position of influence for the well-being and growth of our would-be mentees? Or do we fail to recognize these opportunities to bring good into the world, and instead act like Jesse, impatiently casting aside those who want our time and touch? Perhaps we don't even take the time to dwell on those around us.
rarely see in movies -- cowboys who have homes, with families and furniture, who live in towns and go to churches. They shop, cook, play with their children. He uses time-lapsed photography to show scenes of clouds moving across sweeping landscapes of deep wheat and grass. The camera provides long, slow visuals of horse ride journeys. And he uses soft-focused vignette-stylism to transition scenes so that they communicate the historicity of the drama.
It is clear from the turning point that either the Ford brothers will be killed by Jesse or they must kill him. It is a question of how and when. Toward the end, Jesse gives Bob a beautiful new gun. It seems evident that he knows that Bob will use it to kill him. Why does he do this? He is already a legend. But he is a legend who is troubled by inner demons: "I can't hardly recognize myself sometimes when I'm greased. I go on journeys out of my body and look at my red hands and my mean face and I wonder about that man who's gone so wrong. I've been becoming a problem to myself." He seems to want to die, and is almost setting himself up for Bob. And Bob takes the opportunity given and kills him in a cowardly manner.
With Anwar in custody, Abasi Fawal (Yigal Naor) is the principal interrogater/torturer. To protect America's interests, Douglas Freeman (Jake Gyllenhaal) a local CIA paper-pusher is assigned as the observer. This is outside of his activity, but the local "knuckledragger" is the CIA agent killed in the bombing. So, Freeman is asked to step up his game.
the senator, and you have the makings of a gripping, multi-threaded thriller, along the lines of Crash or Traffic. Unfortunately, the screenplay does not include much character development. These are all flat characters, with no real backstory. Even the acting is subdued, apart from Naor who plays Fawal with strength and conviction. As one of the leads, Jake Gyllenhaal seems miscast in his role. He appears unbelievable as a young CIA analyst asked to do a very dirty job. It is obvious what he will do, and if the audience can sense this, his superiors should too.
Though the story is fun to watch, it is clearly a vehicle for the political statement the director is trying to make: rendition, introduced in the Clinton administration, is being used inappropriately by the Bush regime. The story is so loaded to this end, that only one statement to the contrary stands out. Corrine Williams, when confronted by Alan Smith on this abuse of human rights, says "Honey, this is nasty business. There are upwards of 7,000 people in central London alive tonight, because of information that we elicited just this way. So maybe you can put your head on your pillow and feel proud for saving one man while 7,000 perish, but I got grandkids in London, so I'm glad I'm doing this job... and you're not." We torture one, and save 7000. Those are "good" statistics.
In “The Second Renaissance” the main character, the instructor, says, “In the beginning, there was man. And for a time, it was good. But humanity's so-called civil societies soon fell victim to vanity and corruption. Then man made the machine in his own likeness. Thus did man become the architect of his own demise.” And later, “And Man said, 'Let there be light'. And He was blessed by light, heat, magnetism, gravity, and all the energies of the universe.” So much has been written on The Matrix trilogy, on the parallels with biblical faith. Others see elements of Buddhism or new age beliefs. These quotes make it plain that the Wachowski brothers are pulling almost verbatim from the Scriptures. But they are infusing them with a humanistic spiritualism that is opposed to the tenets of Christianity. For example, in the short “Kid’s Story” when the kid
sees Neo, he says to him: “Neo, I knew you would save me.” And Neo replies, “I didn't save you kid, you saved yourself.” According to the makers of The Matrix, we don’t need a savior, we can save ourselves.
his biggest hero, who wants to work with him, as his sidekick, Incrediboy. "I work alone," says Mr Incredible, and this is a recurring theme and weakness of his. In casting Buddy aside, he puts inside him a seed of resentment that will bear bitter fruit years later, when he becomes Syndrome, his arch-nemesis.
The moral premise of the movie, according to Stanley Williams, is that "battling adversity alone leads to weakness and defeat; but battling adversity as a family leads to strength and victory." Throughout the movie Mr Incredible refuses to allow others to help, to work with him, because he finds his identity and purpose in his calling. But he cannot do it alone. And when he tries he fails. But as he learns to let others help with their talents and super-powers, he grows.
This false ethic of working alone, like the legendary cowboy in the old Westerns (e.g., Shane), is one we must face and fight. Whether at home, at work, or in the church, we cannot and must not do it alone. Particularly in the church, God has given each of his Christ-followers one or more spiritual gifts, Holy Spirit-empowered abilities that enable us to serve others. If we try to do it all ourselves we will not only fail and burn-out, we will deprive others of the opportunity to use their gifts. Do you know what your Spirit-given gift is? If so, are you using it to the glory of God to serve Him?
The movie opens with an almost 30 minute prologue, introducing the two lead actors. Leito (David Belle) lives in B-13 and is trying to clean it up, to make it better for those who call it home. When he destroys 1 million euros worth of heroin, his sister Lola is kidnapped by the B-13 crime boss, Taha. Leito succeeds in rescuing her, and capturing Taha, but the police will do nothing. Instead, Leito takes the fall and is sent to prison. Damien (Cyril Raffaelli) is a captain in the Parisian police force, committed to upholding the law, regardless of what it is. We see him at the culmination of a prolonged undercover mission, as he takes down an entire gang single-handedly in the mayhem of a casino bust. Clearly he is not someone to be trifled with.
Immediately after the casino take-down, Damien is asked to go into B-13 where Taha has possession of a stolen neutron bomb. What a coincidence! In the theft, it has been inadvertently armed and triggered. He has less than 24 hours to find it and defuse it. His only help is Leito, who wants to find and rescue Lola. This sets the scene for the final two-thirds. We have a “buddy” movie with two “buddies” on different, though related, missions. 
When Kate goes back to work, she finds a man running her kitchen. And not only a man, but one who is "conducting" the other chefs in a magnificent rendition of Italian opera with passion, while he keeps the food coming. Nick is clearly Kate's opposite. Kate is all cool control, a general giving orders in the kitchen, expecting instant acquiescence. Nick is playful passion, a composer collaborating with fellow creators. They are oil and water.
Inevitably, Nick wins Paula's approval but not Kate's. Inevitably, Nick wins Zoe's affection, and even Kate's approval when he gets her to eat . . . some spaghetti (don't all kids love this?). Inevitably, Nick and Kate date, even if it is a home-cooked Italian dinner on "safari." Inevitably, Nick and Kate kiss, though it takes a while. And inevitably, they break up, setting up the rom-com finale. But it is an engaging ride, played well by the leads, who have good chemistry.
No Reservations, light and comic though it is, serves up a couple of meaty main course thoughts for us to ponder. First, Kate the controller says to her shrink, complaining about Nick, "He's so unpredictable!" She cannot stand such disorder in her kitchen, which is her life. The shrink replies, "Life is unpredictable." How true. We think we have a handle on our own destinies, our lives. We think our plans are working. And then, WHAM, we have a blowout. James says, "Now listen, you who say, 'Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money.' Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. Instead, you ought to say, 'If it is the Lord's will, we will live and do this or that.' " (Jas 4:13-15). God is in the one ultimately in control of things, and God is not predictable. So life is unpredictable. For some of us, like Kate this is difficult to accept.