Berger/Daniels/Michelson's CHARLIE VICTOR ROMEO: Inside the cockpit, pre-crash -- in 3D!

I should think that pilots, co-pilots, navigators, flight attendants and others connected to the airline industry will rush out to see CHARLIE VICTOR ROMEO (or maybe not, given the mostly unhappy endings to these six drama-tized black-box-transcripts that show-and-tell us of what transpired just before the landing/crash. For the rest of us, the movie is one very odd experiment. Filmed in the kind of 3D that makes Hitchcock's Dial M for Murder look like a Michael Bay special-effects extravaganza, this film has perhaps the least reason for being shot in three dimensions than anything seen so far. It's a confined-space movie, for god's sake, in which we're trapped, over and over throughout six different scenarios, in a tiny cockpit, where traffic is restricted so nobody much moves, and the set, such as it is, changes little.

The sense of "space" the movie provides us is very nearly the sense of "no space." Gravity, this ain't. (Although, once Ms Bullock is inside a space capsule, the two films begin, unfortunately, to resemble each other.) Further, the film is taken from a theater piece first staged here in NYC nearly fifteen years ago that has since traveled the country. The film's theatrical roots are never out of sight, right down to the casting -- for budget reasons, no doubt -- of the same six actors to play the 15 to 20 different roles required to fill the six episodes. You'll figure this out soon enough, and of course go with it, but the doubling and tripling of the cast members means that the film never begins to lose its on-the-cheap, off-off-Broadway quality.

As directed by the threesome of Robert Berger (above, left), Patrick Daniels (center) and Karlyn Michelson (at right), the acting, too, seemed to me to be a little off. You may notice, as did I, that no one, until I think the actual crash seems about to occur -- neither pilot, co-pilot nor anyone else -- ever bothers to look ahead directly out the window in front of him/her. Perhaps every incident taking place here happened at night, in pitch dark? As good as are these actors -- particularly Debbie Troche (who is not shown in any of the stills here) as a co-pilot with amazing ability and control -- we seldom get the sense that we're outside the theater in something approaching real life.

Along the way there are some suspenseful, grueling moments and even a little unintentional humor (watching, in a dire emergency, the co-pilot grab, open and begin to look through what appears to be a How to Fly This Plane manual, will not leave audiences feeling very assured about their next flight). And as everything here is taken verbatim from transcripts (except in a few cases when the black box-obtained dialog is condensed or changed for clarity's sake), we must conclude that this is "the way it was."

The press material for the film tells us that the movie "puts you in the cockpit." It does not. Rather, it puts us in the theater audience, first row center, as we watch these goings-on, which move from relatively "normal" to more intense to... a blackout, as each crash occurs. This is followed by an explanation of what happened and why (shown via title cards), the causes ranging from bird strikes to lousy -- no, make that deadly -- plane maintenance.  (The film's title, by the way, is evidently an acronym for "cockpit voice recorder.")

At 80 minutes, the movie still feels like a long haul. But it is something different -- that's for sure -- and something different is one of the hallmarks of NYC's Film Forum, where Charlie Victor Romeo (we might as well call this a documentary of sorts: maybe an "acted documentary") gets its U.S. theatrical premiere for a two-week run beginning this Wednesday, January 29. It will then play at the Downtown Independent theater in Los Angeles from January 31 through February 6.

Note: Meet the directors in person at Film Forum, 

as Robert Berger, Patrick Daniels & Karlyn Michelson 

 appear on Wednesday, January 29, at the 8pm show, and 

Berger & Michelson only appear on Friday, January 31 & 

 Saturday, February 1, also at the 8pm screenings.

Further thoughts on FLIGHT since its disappointing NYFF debut last month

Dat ol' devil, drink, along with the wonders of AA, make a not-so-welcome resurgence in the coincidence-prone, starts-like-a-house-afire-before-fizzling-out film, FLIGHT -- which, after making its debut to close the recent New York Film Festival, opens its nationwide theatrical run this Friday.

The new film (from director Robert Zemeckis and screenwriter John Gatins) stars Denzel Washington, one of the few American movie stars who can still pack 'em into theater seats -- even when, as in this film, he plays a fairly obnoxious alcoholic druggie who can still fly a damaged plane more successfully, it would seem, than anyone else in the world.

It is encouraging to have Mr. Zemeckis (shown at right) -- who in former decades delighted us with everything from I Wanna Hold Your Hand and Back to the Future to Forrest Gump and Roger Rabbit -- directing something other than that faintly obnoxious brand of animation he now seems to prefer, but I wish I could feel a bit more welcoming about the end result: a very well-acted, alternately feel-bad/feel-good, manipulative and mostly mediocre movie. Once the wham-bam beginning-and-succeeding-scenes are over -- which, if you've seen the movie's trailer (and what red-blooded citizen possessing a TV set has not?), you know the entire plot-set-up -- there is little to so but sit back and allow yourself to be lulled by coincidence (isn't it handy that she's being tossed out of her apartment just as he arrives on the scene?) and hammered by nonsensical sentimentality (Mr. Washington's big finale epiphany occurs over a character we barely know and thus seems utterly manufactured).

Consequently, we must content ourselves with some very good acting from just about everybody on board. Washington comes up with his most complex characterization since maybe Training Day; it's not his fault that the movie betrays him via its simple-minded plotting and feel-good (through sadness and tears) resolution.

Ditto Kelly Reilly (above, with Washington) as his off-and-on significant other, who is either in the movie for too lengthy a time or not long enough. Ms Reilly has never given anything less than a sterling performance (that I have seen); she brings to the table such specifics that she can handle just about anything thrown her way. But this movie makes, first, too much of her character and then too little.

Zemeckis' and Gatins' use of that wonderful actor John Goodman (above) is another problem. In his couple of major scenes, Goodman registers so strongly and comically that he throws the film off balance. In his final scene, we go from a kind of sleazy, creepy hilarity to the movie's big, faux-emotional set-piece, and these tonal changes are jarring, to say the least.

Other big names on view include Don Cheadle (above, center), Bruce Greenwood (above, right) and Melissa Leo -- all working hard, in roles that are simply beneath their talent. They're fine, all right, but you end expecting more from--not them--their roles. It's Brian Geraghty, in fact, as Washington's co-pilot, who probably comes off best overall, in terms of his performance matching his character's importance to the movie. (That's Tamara Tunie -- below, right -- and Nadine Velasquez as part of Flight's flight crew.)

On balance, I suspect that the trailer for this film, as exciting as it was, does its source a disservice by raising audience expectations for one kind of movie, done well, while actually delivering another, done in only so-so fashion. Flight premieres this Friday, November 2, all over the U.S. and Canada. Click here, and then enter your zip code next to GET TICKETS NOW, and click on GO to learn if the film is playing near you.