RELEASED gives us a moving pep talk for & about prisoners--from a quartet of ex-cons

For a film with a heavy-duty and not-at-all-subtle agenda that doubles as a hour-plus commercial for The Fortune Society and The Castle (that organization's ex-con rehab facility), RELEASED is a surprisingly moving, thoughtful and educational movie. Based on the play, The Castle, it basically tells the stories (four of them) about ex-cons who have struggled mightily and finally managed to succeed in the world of the "free."

Basically, that's it; the film is mainly talking heads, either on-stage, as they perform their play, or off, as they tell and sometimes show us, via old photos and film images, the lives they led before and during their various incarcerations. Yet the stories these four tell, together with the arc of their labors and achievements, become sometimes incredibly moving and surprising as the details build and our engagement with the four grows.

The movie begins with the statistic that some of you may already have heard: in these United States, two-thirds of all ex-cons return to prison within three years of their release. Some 68 billion dollars are spent each year on their "care," which is around $34,000 per convict -- that's as much as yours truly made yearly as a free-lance writer (during a good year). Surely, there's a better way to handle our incarcerated, and this is not just some bleeding-heart liberal speaking. From a purely monetary angle, since The Castle has recidivist rate of only 10 per cent (a hell of a lot better than prisons' 33!), more Castles in our society would lead to less incarceration and more responsible citizens.

Released does not go into this, but I fear our society's glee in and determination to make felons suffer is part of why the above scenario will not come into being. That, together with all the money that private investment and corporations now make off prisons, colluding with local, state and federal government in building and maintaining them, is simply too sweet a deal to give up.

Meanwhile, we have this movie to buoy us, and it does, offering a believable antidote to the pain- and-no-gain most prisoners suffer. The four storytellers -- Angelo (seen above), Caismiro (three photos up, with his daughter), Kenneth (two photos up) and Vilma (shown below) -- are theatrically compelling as performers and believable and empathetic as people. Consequently, when we see them in their pre- and convict days and then watch and understand how they slowly become responsible adults, the effect is both bracing and joyous.

Their stories contain those occasional moments of insight and inspiration that rivet: When he learned to read, rather far into his adulthood, Angelo explains, "For the first time I discovered I had a mind." Notes Casimrio: "Civilians are afraid of ex-cons. But not as much as we are afraid of them." As well directed by Philip Frank Messina, shown below, right, the movie appears to have been shot at various times during the play's performances in different venues, especially at prisons. Seeing the reactions of the prisoners as they watch is often as moving as the performance itself.

When, toward the end of the film, we finally arrive at The Castle and learn how and why it is there, how it works, and the statistics on its success rate, we can only hope that this film will be seen by audiences that might include those very few decent politicians our country has left, who might then work toward real rehabilitation rather than the generally corrupt, useless, costly and repetitive imprison-and-punish system we currently have.

Released, from Winner Pictures LLC and running just 70 minutes, opens for a week's run at the Quad Cinema today, Friday, May 10. I should hope DVD and VOD possibilities will be in the works soon.

Dror Moreh's THE GATEKEEPERS expands in NYC and L.A., while opening elsewhere

"Interesting -- but it didn't tell us anything we didn't already know -- or couldn't figure out," said the friend who accompanied me to the screening of THE GATEKEEPERS, which has just expanded in New York City to Film Forum and City Cinema 123. She's right, but the thing that makes this film worth seeing and considering is just who is doing the telling. The talking-heads here are six men who, over the years, have led the Shin Bet, Israel's secret service organization in charge of overseeing the country's "war on terror" -- initially against Arabs but later against Israelis, too. (Remember the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin by a super-right-wing Israeli law student?)

The new documentary, nominated for an Oscar this year and directed and co-produced by Dror Moreh (shown at right), brings together these Shin Bet leaders (all six are shown below) and gets them to talk on record for the first time. Why did they do it? I am guessing (and from what they say, this would seem to be the case) that they feel the current and recent past Israeli governments are going down exactly the wrong path -- toward further war, death and destruction rather than toward anything peaceful. And since these are the men who, over the decades, have had to deal with leaders on both sides of the fence and who understand what is going on perhaps better than any others -- including, especially, most politicians -- one might think that attention should be paid.

The message here is no read-between-the-line kind of thing. Instead, it's rather clear, really, and is evidently felt -- to some degree, at least -- by all six of the men interviewed.  While these interviews are done individually, it might have been even more eye-and-ear-opening to have had these guys together in one room at the same time. No doubt they'd not have agreed to that one.

As it is, some of things they say seem a tad self-serving, and occasionally contradictory, but the most important thing to Mr. Moreh (and to most of us viewers, too, I suspect) is the sense that a change in policy by the Israeli government is necessary and long past due. Looking the other way, turning a blind eye, and allowing the settlements in the occupied territory of the Palestinians to move forward and the settlers to get away with most anything they want: All of this must end. The men appear to have come to a more conciliatory stance, with -- yes! -- a Palestinian/Arab state as part of the solution.

Not that these guys seem in any way "soft" on terrorists. Though, as noted by the most recent Shin Bet leader, Yuval Diskin (above), Israel and the Shin Bet themselves are perceived by the other side as "terrorists." Even to an Israeli intelligence agent, it would seem, there are limits. The six men are clearly smart, well-spoken and surprisingly open; it is difficult to imagine top men from our own CIA being half as honest as what we see here. (That's Avraham Shalom, below, who reigned from 1980-86 and was, according to one of the other fellows interviewed, something of a "bully.")

In the course of the film's 95 minutes, we hear pieces of the interviews and see some historic footage pliced in for variety and additional substance. This includes photos (in each case, the one below the current shot of the man) of the older men in their younger days, which has a certain charm and interest. We hear and see (in what I take to be staged recreations, as below) something of the Shin Bet's greatest hits (the assassination of one of the top "terrorists" Yahya Ayyash) and greatest misses (a one-ton bomb dropped on a house that killed a bunch of civilians but missed its intended target, and of course the Rabin assassination, for which, we are told, the Shin Bet was totally unprepared).

Last November another Israeli documentary opened here in New York City (also at Film Forum) that accomplished, I think, quite a bit more than does The Gatekeepers. Made by Ra'anan Alexandrowicz and titled The Law in These Parts (my full review from the time is here), this documentary -- in which the filmmaker interviews retired judges who enacted the laws that have ruled and still rule the occupied territories quite differently for Arabs and Jews -- is much harder-hitting and of a more "activist" slant. It does not allow its interviewees leeway to set their own stage. Alexandrowicz asks specific questions, for which he demands real answers and won't accept anything less.

Mr. Moreh's movie has, I think, an agenda, and it's a good and sensible one of pushing Israel and us viewers toward conciliation and a dual state. The Law in These Parts may have something similar in mind down the road, but it is first concerned with justice now, and it demonstrates pretty thoroughly why this does not look likely any time soon. By all means, see The Gatekeepers, but don't stop there. Watch The Law in These Parts, as well (it's from Cinema Guild and I hope will be available soon on DVD, VOD and/or streaming), for a fuller understanding of the situation.

The Gatekeepers, from Sony Pictures Classics, is playing at three theaters each in New York City and the Los Angeles area. Click here to see all currently scheduled playdates, with cities and theaters, around the country.

The penulitmate photo above is of Carmi Gillon, who served as Shin Bet head from 1994-96; the final photo, just above, is of Ami Ayaon, who served after Gillon, from 1996-2000. The photo of Dror Moreh, second from top, is by Kevork Djansezian, courtesy of Getty Images.

Toby Perl Freilich's INVENTING OUR LIFE explores the Israeli Kibbutz--then and now

Has it really been one hundred years since the first Kibbutz was created? More actually: 102. Watching the new documentary --INVENTING OUR LIFE: The Kibbutz Experiment-- written, produced and directed by first-time director Toby Perl Freilich, this non-Jew discovered more about Kibbutz life, its history and how it has changed over the years, than he had learned so far in his perhaps too-sheltered life. As a kind of celebration of its century-long tradition, Ms Freilich (shown below) fills us in on the very first of the kibbutzes (1910), the purpose of which, as then declaimed, was to create a fledgling socialist state. Indeed, as found in the film's description on the IMDB, the kibbutz is "one of the world's longest running and most successful experiments in pure Communism." Take that, Eric Cantor! And let's hear it for the old Israel -- and a Zionism that was meant to be, according to some of the folk interviewed in this movie, a lot more inclusive than many of us imagined.

Ms Freilich shows us what various events -- from the creation of the state of Israel to the War of Independence and onwards has done to the kibbutz, which, in order to survive, has had to keep changing. That change, as we clearly see by the end of the movie, is still going on and is perhaps more important than ever for the survival of the kibbutzim (that's the plural, for you other non-Jews). Her film is but 80 minutes long yet it packs in an extraordinary amount of good informa-tion and statistics, interesting ideas, and even a non-pushy questioning of where Israel, Judaism, Capitalism and communal living might be headed. For instance, though some of us might strongly associate Israel with the kibbutz, even at their prime, kibbutzim made up only five per cent of the Israeli community.

Via narration and some old film footage, we learn of the early kibbutzim (the kids above are from kibbutz Hulda, circa 1948), and then visit some of the more recent occupants, like Dana Shani and her daughter Romi (below). Initially inclusive, the Kibbutzim became more arrogant, particularly toward Muslims, when immigration to Israel began in earnest (sounds familiar, no?)

We learn some of the differences between country or desert kibbutz and the urban variety, how difficult the earlier version could be toward couples and any kind of "standard" family upbringing, and of the first all-Americian kibbutz, called Sasa, founded on the former Arab village of Sa'sa'. Following the Six-Day War came a kind of seismic shift in the control of Israel, and the kibbutz, long associated with the Labor Party. Now it's more likely to be a community made up of private families. At the end of the film we see one kibbutz being made to come to terms with this increased privatization, which for its older members is simply anathema.

Inventing Our Life, like most really good documentaries, is an education. It forces you to think, consider and decide, and you leave the film chastened, maybe saddened but definitely provoked. The movie -- from First Run Features and one of its better documentaries of late -- opens this Wednesday, April 25, in New York City at the Quad Cinema. You can click here to see other currently scheduled playdates, with cities and theaters.

Peter Joseph's ZEITGEIST: the Movie & its Addendum make powerful, pointed--if Utopian--viewing

When, a few months back, TrustMovies received a request to take a look at a film called ZEITGEIST: THE MOVIE, he said, sure -- send it. And there it sat on his fireplace mantel (where he keeps his "To Watch" pile) for a long while. He knew practically nothing about the film -- which is often the case: maintaining as close to a tabula rasa as possible strikes him as beneficial to both movie-maker and viewer. When he finally stuck the DVD into his player last Saturday morning, so impressed (with reservations) was he that he spent four hours-plus viewing Z-The Movie and its companion disc ZEITGEIST: ADDENDUM with which he was even more impressed (and about which he had even more reservations).

Can you embrace a documentary even as you are resisting its "overkill" touch? This question crops up time and again, especially during the beginning and end of both films, though, as we shall see, these offer quite a bit more than a documentary double bill. It's more like a call to arms -- especially Z-Addendum. Many of the visuals in the early and late sections of the two films are so obvious as to be boring, and the filmmaker's use of repetition -- repeating words or phrases ad infinitum (complete with an echo chamber!) can be grueling. Well, it's sometimes a heavy hand that renders the truth. A possible truth, at least -- because the first of the films deals at length with what many will term "conspiracy theories" that includes 9/11, Vietnam, WWII and even WWI (remember the Lusistania!).

The first part of Peter Joseph's film (though, according to an argument on Wikipedia, this is not the filmmaker's real name) tackles organized religion and wrestles it to the mat by showing us how, in religious myth after religious myth, a "virgin birther" comes along, grows up, teaches the masses and is killed -- only to rise from the dead. Uh-huh. Yet Mr. Joseph's (I believe it is he -- shown below -- who narrates the film) history of religion and its leaders proves genuinely interesting and thought-provoking.

Part two of the film uses some of the that same idiot repetition to uncover that 9/11 was an inside job. If you have watched other of those 9/11 conspiracy films (as I have), you'll have a difficult time discounting all of what is being said. By now any halfway intelligent adult should know that our leaders are, time after time, war after war, as deceitful to their own people as they are deadly to whomever is being "fought." So what? Because both of our politics parties, as these films make clear, are beholden to the greater "money" party, we can hardly expect to change this overnight, if at all. More of that repetition occurs. How stupid does Joseph imagine his audience to be? Very. At one point (in the second film, I believe) he compares us to sheep who no longer even need a sheep dog to keep us in line. I agree with the guy. We too often are exactly that.

Part three, by far the most interesting section, offers a history of who owns our government. Joseph takes on the banking industry (the interest rate, money supply, loans and debt) and then the IRS (at this point the film comes perilously close to some of the more crackpot ideas of Libertarianism). Throughout his film Joseph relies a great deal on the use of snippets from Network, the 34-year-old collaboration of Sidney Lumet and Paddy Chayefsky -- a prescient movie if ever there was one -- and these bits made me realize anew why I watch so little television.

What is often left out of all this, however, is any sense of psychology: Freud, for goodness sake.  Governments do not exist in a vacuum but are the extension of their people, whose need for power and adulation, coupled with an enormous ability for denial and hypocrisy, has produced the world as we know it.  The moral here, which Joseph spells out toward the conclusion, is that "a continually fraudulent Zeitgeist is output via the mass media, religion and the education system to keep us in a distracted, naive bubble."  Yes.

The filmmaker's finale, however, seems itself almost religious, though not your standard Christian, Jewish or Muslim variety.  Instead, it's a philosophy based on -- ready? -- love.  Oh, please.  If you plan to watch the two Zeitgests, I would suggest fast-forward-
ing past the beginning and skipping the epilogue, too.  But watch and listen with full concentration to Parts I, II and III.  You'll want to argue with Joseph from time to time, but compared to most of the pap we're fed, I suspect you'll feel rather nourished by the film.

Zeitgeist: Addendum, released 15 months after the first installment, is in widescreen format, while Z: The Movie appeared in TV-size mode. After another unnecessarily arty/farty opening, Joseph concentrates on our monetary system, the Federal Reserve, inflation, and currency debasement.  Following his theses and arguments is a real pleasure; this guy is smart.  He uses a number of talking heads in the second film, one of which is a fellow who calls himself an economic hit man who used to work for our government.  He tells us about the USA's involvement in destabilizing governments from Iran (in the 50s) to Guatamala, Ecuador, Panama, Venezuela, and Bolviia's recent water-for-sale scandal.  At times, you'll be reminded of Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine, at others of V for Vendetta or the latest James Bond film. (We even hear from the late Jim Garrison: yikes!)

Following this we get an interesting take on techno-
logy, which leads us to the heart of the matter: The Venus Project and the attempt to go from a Capitalistic, profit-based society to a resource-based society.  While The Venus Project immediately strikes me as Utopian, Joseph does offer, via words from the project's initiators Jacque Fresco and Roxanne Meadows at least a raison d'etre for the undertaking.  His discussion of alternative energy -- wind, solar and especially GeoThermal (which I knew little about) is worth hearing.

Joseph then covers emergent and symbiotic aspects of natural law, stressing our "interconnectedness."  How might all these new ideas come about?  Peaceful protest is one way, and the filmmaker even offers a list of things you can do to bring about change: Start by moving your bank account -- should you bank with the big (nefarious) three: Citicorp, Chase or Bank of America -- to another bank.  But who's to say that within months, due to some new merger, you won't be right back with the big boys again?

TrustMovies recommends watching these Zeitgeist films.  Each is more than worth your time -- and you'll learn a lot.  Mr. Joseph's venting against the profit motive does not seem hypocritical, either.  These are perhaps the first and only films, after the viewing of which, I have seen on-screen: "Duplication of this educational film is granted and encouraged for non-resale, education purposes only.  Not-for-profit public screenings are also encouraged and require no permission from us." 

You can legally download and watch Zeitgeist: The Movie and Zeitgeist: Addendum by clicking here (then scroll down)  Further, there's a worldwide event planned for March 13, 2010: Z-Day. 
Click here and then click on this event for further information about what's happening in your neck of the world's woods....