Night Catches Us

"Night Catches Us" is the best art-house film I've seen in several months. In fact it bests a lot of the current main-screen fare. It deserves better than the quiet and uneven release it seems destined for.

I saw it back-to-back with the Oscar contender "The King's Speech". It balanced the double bill reasonably well. Although "The King's Speech" is of course superior, the comparison wasn't simply ridiculous.

I saw it twice ...which I often do with films I really like, as I tend to miss too many things the first time.

It's not moralistic. Both sides of survival vs. justice, violence vs. pacifism, united front vs. paranoia, victims vs. victimizers, and this generation vs. the next generation are portrayed sympathetically. Although at first glance one particular style of being seems to be being touted over the others, just a little reflection reveals that the film actually revels in moral ambiguity. Some characters manage to stay on the good side of the respectability line at all times, even while their inner demons are picked up and expressed -sometimes in socially unacceptable ways- by others around them. The camera notices more latent contradictions than the story ever delves into. For example the reverend was apparently beloved by the neighborhood, yet also lived in by far the finest house in the whole area.

The film isn't a polemic and doesn't seem to consciously attempt to portray cops in a bad light. Yet it doesn't shy away from sketches of substantial police bad attitude and violence.

"Night Catches Us" makes liberal use of art-house stylistic conventions. For example the confused, tangled, and partially submerged thoughts of a character are portrayed not by talking about them or even by seeing them in action, but by long leisurely shots from underneath of the crossed branches of overgrown vegetation. For another example, a character's longing for stability and tranquility is portrayed by lengthy shots of the proverbial babbling brook.

I wasn't irritated by the pacing. The film is by no means an action flick or a taut thriller, but I didn't find it like watching paint dry either. I tend to like slower paced films anyway (which of course doesn't mean everybody else will too:-). The most similarly paced movie that comes to mind is Clint Eastood's recent "Hereafter"; if you thought that was impossibly slow you'll probably have the same reaction to "Night Catches Us", but if that character exposition and portrayal of small events grabbed you this likely will too.

All the action takes place over just a few days in 1976. A block of important events that happened about a decade earlier is described mainly through bits of dialog. There are no visual flashbacks nor dream sequences (except of course for the occasional interspersed archival Black Panthers footage).

I found the acting quite good. It doesn't bowl you over as the greatest thing you've seen in years; but it's by no means "just workmanlike". Quite often meaning is communicated not by dialog but by subtle body language or facial expressions, which the actors seem fully up to. Both the individual characters and the chemistry between the characters are believably convincing.

I found the situation (or plot if you prefer to think of it that way) simple and complex at the same time. It's simple in that once you finally grasp it you can describe the whole thing in one short paragraph, and in that if you're one of those people who instantly "get" most movie clues you might be able to divine the whole thing well in advance. On the other hand it's complex in that it's revealed only one tiny bit at a time -sometimes in dialog and sometimes visually- so the whole movie can become a "mystery" to be solved if that's your preference.

I just recently watched this movie and thought to myself. This movie is phenomenal especially with Kerry Washington. A must see with a outstanding cast and incredible storyline.

I'd encourage anyone interested in watching good acting and film-making to watch "Night Catches Us".

The movie is set in 1976, in Philadelphia, and it is not "Rocky's" S. Philadelphia. The main characters have all had experience/involvement in the Black Panther movement, and the movie cuts a path through the complex feelings and realities that have evolved since they were once involved with it.

It's one of those films that revolves around a core group of characters who've all turned into somewhat different people from when they first knew each other. The dynamic is even more intense because each of the main characters has a tie-in to someone who was obviously a leader or loved one -- indeed it was his death years earlier that led the group to disperse.

I'm kinda bummed that awards seasons might be passing by this gem. Kerry Washington is great, but it's Anthony Mackie's film; he has an intensity and dignity. No overwrought acting.

Night Catches Us (2010)

A really fascinating look at an African-American reality in Philadelphia in 1976. The plot hook is more sensational than the movie itself—a former Black Panther returning home has to adjust to regular life and accusations of tattling. What really grips you, though, is the "regular life" part, because the acting and direction make this all feel honest and revealing. A slice of life done well.

If the core of the movie is how Blacks of different attitudes and philosophies learn to get along (and not get along) with each other, there is also the more expected acrimony between the Black community and the mostly White cops patrolling it. It's hard to know how accurate this part is, because here we are shown clichés of some very dumb and mean and hardheaded white cops, and maybe that was the norm. I'd like to think that some other movies have it right when there are those bad eggs on the force, but that many make an effort to get along and be reasonable with the people they are protecting.

But maybe one message of the movie taken whole is just how different it was back then, in the shadow of the truly radical and violent 1960s, as the Muslim influence was rising, as power was promising to shift more evenly between groups but was lurching too slowly. Maybe it was just filled with such distrust it led to caricatures for real. There are several segments of archival footage of Panthers and other protesting, and the gritty roughness of those scenes reveals some kind of glossing over of the situation for this fictional version made 35 years later.

The leading actor, Anthony Mackie, and leading actress, Kerry Washington, are both likable and excellent. You might say too likable and excellent—there is a modern feel to their demeanors that's hard to put your finger on. But they're both a joy to watch act and interact. The intentions are low key, and the result is easy going despite the tensions around them. It's a love story after all! Writer and director Tanya Hamilton is making her first feature film here, and she makes the most of her modest intentions.

As a commentary on race relations it is nearly the opposite of Spike Lee's approaches in their highly produced flair. And whatever the limitations of the film and its script, it has the net gain of a feeling of sincerity. Which goes a long way.

I saw one review on this twisted history movie and had to say something. I lived in this era, I saw the Black Panthers kill a lot of people.I lived in Oakland I saw them burning buildings for no reason except they didn't like the school or the people. I saw them beating up teachers who were trying to help them. The only people killed by these so called 'civilians' were other civilians. The hate was incredible, Oakland turned from a thriving metropolis to a town of empty stores, with newspapers flying in the streets. My whole family lived there my Grandparents were born there and my folks, the town was decent it was full of hard working people. Then the haters moved in and started destroying everything. The city did not help they torn down the Victorian homes that were solid and built slums that had rats within 30 days of occupation because the garbage was everywhere. I saw a whole city implode by shooting and gangs the panthers were just one of many; they were just more talked about than the rest. Anyone who thinks the government was wrong helping the Vietnamese people get away from communist aggression didn't hear the cries for help from them when their cities were destroyed and the people killed in the thousands. We lost only because Congress wouldn't let the military do their job and complete their mission. I know many people from south east Asia that would love to go back to their country if they could worship the way they wanted to without being harassed by the communist regime. Communism isn't pretty! people also forget that the era was full of drugs and immorality it wasn't good and didn't do anything to advance civilization in fact I think it went back a few steps! Docudramas are the bargain basement of movies they take 10 percent real history and 90 percent baloney and everyone thinks it really happened that way! Don't waste your time!