Bridget Jones's baby

Direction: Sharon McGuire  Cast: Renee Zellweger, Colin Firth, Patrick Dempsey, Emma Thompson, Jim Broadbent ;  Story/ Screenplay: Helen Fielding, Dan Mazer, Emma Thompson.; Producer Liz Glotzer, Martin Shafer, Will Gluck Cinematography:  Andrew Dunn; Music: Vivek Maddala;  Editing:  Melanie Ann Oliver; Genre: Romantic Comedy; Distributor: Universal Pictures;  Location: London, England

Technical assessment: 3.5  

Moral assessment: 2  

CINEMA rating: V14 

Twelve years after we last saw Bridget Jones (Zellweger), we find her once again as we did the first time  we met her—single, lonely and determined to be her own woman—with or without a loved one. So after her breakup with long time boyfriend Mark Darcy (Firth), Bridget, now 43 years old, decides to just focus on her job as big honcho in the television news industry. For a while, she does take control until a one night stand with dashing American billionaire Jack Qwant (Dempsey), the exact opposite of Mark.  Mark himself suddenly resurfaces into her life, relighting a spark between them. But those fateful consecutive one night stands with two different men lead to more complications: weeks later, Bridget discovers she's pregnant.  Who is the child’s father? 

The Bridget the world fell in love with is still as loveable as an older adult searching for herself and romance in that effortless quirkiness and endearing klutziness. The story is old and retold a hundred different ways but Zellweger brings fresh spirits in the development. We might know how things will turn and eventually end but we root for Bridget nonetheless. What is commendable about the script and direction is now it cascades real life’s drama with graceful banter and simple truths. The punchlines are on point and the romance is charming. Firth’s Mark Darcy is as stiff as ever but his character just grows on you. Thompson outdoes herself by weaving her eccentricity into her OB-Gyne character. The rest of the supporting cast help tighten the narrative. Visually, there are no artistic metaphors or outstanding cinematic techniques but all elements fall into place to push the story and emotions where they should be. 

While the culture where the movie was produced and primarily shown is permissive about casual sex, having an affair with different partners consecutively is not acceptable in our local culture—at least in principle. The greatest problem Bridget Jones' Baby poses is portraying sex as just a physical act like eating or bathing. So locally, the film treads on sensitive moral grounds where sex is sacred and an exclusive act for people who love each other enough to commit permanently. Now, the movie depicts another angle about middle age and being single. One, happiness and completeness can be achieved with or without a partner. Two, that motherhood is a joy and grace even for older women. But because the film is centered on the casual sex and comedy of not knowing who the father of your unborn child is, these messages are flooded and lost. The movie may be seen by older teenagers but parental guidance is advised.

Sully

DIRECTOR:  Clint Eastwood LEAD CAST:  Tom Hanks, Aaron Eckhart, Laura Linney  PRODUCER:  Clint Eastwood, Frank Marshall, Tim Moore, Allyn Stewart  SCREENWRITER:  Todd Komarnicki  BASED ON:  Highest Duty by Chesley Sullenberger and Jeffrey Zaslow  MUSIC:  Christian Jacob, The Tierney Sutton Band  CINEMATOGRAPHY:  Tom Stern  EDITOR:  Blu Murray  GENRE:  Drama, Biography  PRODUCTION COMPANY:  Village Roadshow Pictures, RatPac-Dune Entertainment, Flashlight Films, The Kennedy/Marshall Company, Malpaso Productions  DISTRIBUTOR: Warner Bros. Pictures  COUNTRY:  United States  LANGUAGE: English  RUNNING TIME: 96 minutes

Technical assessment:  4

Moral assessment:  4

CINEMA rating:  V14

Director Clint Eastwood translates into film the true story of a US Airways jet landing on the Hudson River that took the world by storm on January 15, 2009.   Playing the plane’s captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger is Tom Hanks, assisted by co-pilot Jeff Skiles (Aaron Eckhart).  Six minutes after the Airbus takes off from La Guardia airport (New York), a bird strike causes double engine failure—a May Day situation that calls for an emergency landing.  The control tower gives its clearance for the flight to return to land in La Guardia but soon loses contact with the plane.  With every precious second, the hope of landing on an airport becomes dim, compelling Sullenberger to rely on his knowledge and experience to arrive at the least damaging solution.  Guided by his instincts he decides to use the Hudson River as a runway—miraculously saving all 155 persons on board.  As the historic landing grabs the headlines and catapults Sully to hero status, the National Transportation Safety Board’s (NTSB) behind-the-scene investigation reveals that the plane’s left engine was not totally wrecked as Sullenberger had asserted, and that he could have made a safe landing in any of the three nearby airports.  If proven wrong, Sullenberger would be stripped of his wings, dishonorably discharged, deprived of retirement benefits. 

Sully is based on Sullenberger’s memoir, “Highest Duty: My Search for What Really Matters” (co-authored by Jeffrey Zaslow).  Consummate actor Hanks is in his element in the cockpit and outside, projecting grace under pressure—the economy of his word and gesture serving as a clue to the aviator’s character.  Eastwood maintains a sober tone all throughout, and wisely avoids background music to overdramatize an already fierce story.  There’s a vivid realism in the cinematic river landing, so that as the plane hits the water and is instantly swallowed by it, passengers are anything but calm, sensing the nearness of death.  And then the plane bobs up to the surface.  Sully couldn’t have been better helmed by anyone but Eastwood—it’s the perfect true-to-life plot for a director who values training, knowledge and instinct more than technology.  What adds to the film’s heart is the presence of the real-life people involved in the rescue: the ferry captain, the frogmen dropped from the chopper, the Red Cross workers, and others reenacting their roles.

Sully offers many learning moments for the viewer.  The hearing conducted by the NTSB team gives us an idea of how airline accidents are meticulously investigated.  Computer simulations of the Hudson River incident demonstrate that indeed Sullenberger could have safely turned back to La Guardia and spared the passengers the horror of a winter river dive.  After calmly watching, Sullenberger drops the bomb: “You are looking for human error, but you are taking humanity out of the picture.”  No pilot has ever been trained to land on a river.  With two engines dead, the aircraft steadily descending over New York City, contact with the control tower lost, and 155 lives in his hands, what could a pilot have done?  His best.  That’s all Sullenberger did.  There was never any practice for such an emergency, whereas the computer simulations—as the federal investigators themselves admitted—went through 17 practices before they could perfect the alternative La Guardia landing.  As the actual footage of the incident was shown for the first time during the hearing, the NTSB sees the light”—computer simulations may be scientific, but an airline crash is no video game.  Lives are at stake; computers have neither conscience nor the capacity for heroic acts.  What makes Sullenberger a true hero is his humility.  Amidst the public’s adulation, Sullenberger does not hog the limelight.  His composure reveals an interior serenity deeply rooted in gratitude for having survived.  Not the one to claim credit for the “miracle”, Sullenberger at the end of the hearing says “It wasn’t just me, it’s all of us.  We all did it.  We survived.”

USS Indianapolis: Disaster at Philippine Sea

DIRECTOR: Mario Van Peebles  LEAD CAST:  Nicolas Cage, Tom Sizemore, Thomas Jane, Matt Lanter,Brian Presley, Cody Walker  SCREENWRITER: Cam Cannon, Richard Rionda Del Castro  PRODUCER: Michael Mendelsohn, Richard Rionda Del Castro  EDITOR:  Robert A. Ferretti MUSICAL DIRECTOR:  Laurent Eyquem  GENRE:  Drama, Action,History  CINEMATOGRAPHER: Andrzej Sekuła  DISTRIBUTOR:  Saban Films  LOCATION:  United States

Technical assessment: 3

Moral assessment: 2

Cinema rating: V14

MTRCB rating: PG

The film depicts the historical fate of USS Indianapolis ship—in 1945, the Portland class cruiser led by Captain Charles McVay (Nicolas Cage) sailed to deliver parts of the atomic to be dropped on Hiroshima towards the end of World War II. While cruising the Philippine Sea, on July 30th, 1945, the ship is torpedoed and sunk by a Japanese submarine that detects them, taking 300 crewmen with it to the bottom of the Philippine Sea, while the rest climb out of the ship and are left stranded in shark-infested waters for five days without food and water.  How will they survive? Who is really responsible for the disaster?                                              

USS Indianapolis: Disaster at Philippine Sea could have been a gripping survival tale on the fate of the soldiers on board the titular ship.  However, the film suffers from obligatory Hollywood stereotyping of telling or re-telling historical disaster stories such as this—like a love triangle that does not really add tension to the story. The film lacks clarity as to who the protagonist really is or as to whose point-of-view the story is being told. In historical films such as this, it is imperative that the point-of-view be clear so there would be a central narrative arc to be followed. Too many subplots also tend to bore the audience as it veer awaymerely serve to distract from the main focus of the film which is the disaster. But then, the film is successful is visually depicting the disaster at sea. Audiences are really taken to the actual event with all its magnitude and danger. Cage is a strong lead and is able to deliver the depth of emotion required for the role of the disturbed ship captain.

It is always interesting to retell stories of war for they bring to the forefront moral questions—whether or not moral choices are still present in time of war. Nevertheless, most war stories really tell that love is present even in time of war so that it might answer some of the most important moral questions.  USS Indianapolis: Disaster at Philippine Sea is no exception. It disturbs moral judgment from the very beginning as the Captain and the rest of the crew are in for a mission they are not exactly aware of. The Captain taking his entire crew on suicidal mission is such a morally disturbing choice. Taking the disaster upon himself in the process perhaps could be a depiction of the consequence of one lapse in judgment. In war, obedience may be the only choice one will have—choosing allegiance may be of no question to most, so one chooses to obey orders no matter how obscure or vague the orders may be. In the end, history will be the ultimate judge, they say, but God is the real ultimate judge.  More than survival, honor coupled with faith and love should be the goal of every human being even in time of war.