Apr. 5, 2007
‘Reign Over Me’ doesn’t do justice to the tragedies of 9/11
Jeremy Kopp
koppj@marietta.edu
Here is Hollywood's first mainstream movie about the tragedies of 9/11, and though writer/director Mike Bender certainly means well, that's no excuse for his poor execution.
The film has a nice premise, anyway. Alan Johnson (Don Cheadle) is an affluent dentist with an attractive, pleasant family, but the tediousness of his middle-upper class existence has left him bored and feeling trapped.
Then one day he runs into Charlie Fineman (Adam Sandler), his former college roomie who he hasn't seen in years though is well aware of what Charlie suffered on September 11 when he lost his family in one of the planes that flew into the towers.
Charlie doesn't recognize Alan at first, and Alan certainly isn't recognizing the Charlie he knew in school. It's clear Charlie has been severely traumatized, as he's constantly skittish and uncomfortable in conversation, and, as Alan later learns, erupts with anger and violence the moment his family is mentioned.
Alan's sad to discover Charlie sold his dental practice and has become a recluse, emerging from his apartment on occasion to scooter around Manhattan and purchase supplies for a kitchen he's constantly renovating while rocking out to the 70's and 80's on over-sized earphones.
Alan wants to save his friend, and Charlie eventually warms up to Alan's efforts. They go on a series of cutesy man-dates - a rock club where Charlie plays drums, a Mel Brooks triple-feature, a jam session at Charlie's place - and the changes we see in Charlie are inspiring.
Their relationship is `Reign's high point; unfortunately, it has a lot of low points.
Take Alan's newest patient, Donna (Saffron Burrows), who absolutely must perform fellatio on him, and when she's refused, slaps a lawsuit on his practice claiming he sexually harassed her. A silly subplot, and one I first thought was included only to show how loyal Alan was to his wife (Jada Pinkett Smith) despite their differences.
But I was wrong.
Before I go on, I'm going warn you that there are some spoilers in the next few paragraphs, and if you're still interested in seeing this film, STOP READING NOW.
Conveniently enough, the naughty nympho happens to be seeing the same shrink (Liv Tyler) that Alan convinces Charlie to see. Charlie was always jealous that she wanted to blow Alan and not him, so it would only make sense for a psychiatrist to hook two of her emotionally unstable patients up, right? Please. It makes for a happy ending, anyway.
And then there's Judge Raines (Donald Sutherland), who oversees Charlie's trial after - in a terrible, terrible turn the movie takes - he attempts a suicide-by-cop.
Not only does the judge allow the trial to blow up in Charlie's face, but he makes completely irrational rulings; for example, despite Charlie's recent behavior, Raines suggests that they give him time to “find himself” out on the streets. What!? And then he puts Charlie's fate in the hands of Charlie's in-laws (Robert Klein and Melinda Dillon), who Charlie clearly wanted nothing to do with at the time. Ridiculous.
And finally there's Sandler's portrayal of Charlie. It's the same character he played in `Punch-Drunk Love' (for the three of you out there who saw it), only in `Reign' I'm wondering why he's autistic. I thought he was just supposed to be traumatized.
I've never considered Sandler to be all that talented of an actor, but he can channel rage just fine, which he certainly does enough of throughout this movie. And there's the scene where he finally confesses the details of his family's death; it's a showstopper, but I'd attribute that more to the content than his delivery of it.
The first two-thirds of this film were decent, anyway, but the supporting characters' subplots and the irrational decisions--which no respected figures in Manhattan would make--make the last third almost comical. And that's a shame, because Hollywood's first major attempt to honor those who lost their loved ones in 9/11 should be no laughing matter.
