Up-and-coming director Alex Stapleton turned the camera onto the camp master in her film “Corman’s World: Exploits of a Hollywood Rebel.”

—–

It follows Corman’s career – over half a century of cheap-as-dirt indie filmmaking – and the resulting 400-plus films that he created in that time. The film launched earlier this month, and Stapleton called BH recently for an interview about her film, Corman’s influence, and getting Jack Nicholson to cry on camera.

BH: Where does Roger Corman fit into the history of cinema?

Stapleton: I definitely think he’s part of the backbone of cinema. I think, creatively speaking as a filmmaker and director, he kind of helped – along with his compatriots – to birth the kind of blockbuster genre film experiences that we experience today that the studios are making.

I think Roger was definitely one of the pioneers in that movement. When you look at the movie “Avatar,” you look at the director and it’s James Cameron, and James Cameron [worked] under Roger Corman for years and… I think that James Cameron would probably tell you the same thing: that he learned a lot about how to put together a genre story by working for Roger.

I also think that as far as moments in cinema history, Roger has had a huge influence, specifically with the American new Hollywood movement, by finding and mentoring people like Peter Fonda, Jack Nicholson, [and] Peter Bogdanovich, starting their careers but also giving them the idea – Peter Fonda, Denis Hopper and Jack Nicholson – giving them the idea to make the movie “Easy Rider,” which is a hybrid movie of Roger’s movies “The Trip” and “Wild Angels.”

“Easy Rider” was one of the… watershed points of movies that kind of changed the game in ’69. So I think Roger’s influence can be seen creatively and also in all the talent that he’s discovered. My movie kind of deals specifically with directors, writers and actors, but Roger also started the career of James Horner, the famous composer. The line of students was way too much to encompass in my film.

BH: Several directors that Corman influenced have gone on to be the big-budget movie-makers that – as Corman said in an interview in the film – he opposed, at least as a younger man. Do you know what his thoughts are on Cameron’s work or Scorsese’s “Hugo”? Because big budget films changed the way he operated and what it was like to see his films.

Stapleton: I think he does not think it’s completely wasteful when you do come up with a movie like “Avatar” where the money is in the effects and you can really trace the money. I think where he has the major problem is when you throw money like that into a romantic comedy where there’s a boy and a girl in a room for 90 minutes, or on the street arguing or talking about their love life, and they are on again/off again throughout the movie, and its like, “There you have it, that’s the end,” and that movie is $90 million. I think that’s when he’s like, “What the hell is going on here?”

BH: Can you talk about his dirt cheap filmmaking style?

Stapleton: I kind of look at his career in two phases. There’s Roger Corman as a director, and then there’s Roger Corman the producer. As a director, I know in one year he made eight movies as a director in one year, which is insane. As a producer when he had the Venice lumber yard he was churning out movies.

The Venice lumber yard was actually a stage, a production facility that he bought, and he had a working stage there and that stage was in operation 24 hours a day, seven days a week, so they would basically build sets … and they would basically have a revolving door with two crews, a daytime crew and a nighttime crew that would come in. The daytime crew would shoot and then they would leave and the nighttime crew would use the same exact set to make a completely different movie.

Then there was a series he did in the 90’s called the Bloodfist movies and that movie was reincarnated so many times (laughing). It was a movie when kickboxing was really big in the 90’s and it was kind of like a spin-off of the Jean-Claude Van Damme films. The first one is like a revenge film set in LA. And then Roger would go, “Let’s change the set and let’s set it in Europe.” It was like the same movie being remade over and over and over again, and I think the last one they did was set in space. And then he would depict the same movie and cast women in it instead of men. So he was definitely pumping out a lot of movies.

BH: It’s interesting that both your documentary “Outside In” and “Corman’s World” focus on underappreciated, independent artists who operate in a non-traditional way. And the Nike “Be True” campaign that you’re working on seems to have that theme as well.

Stapleton: Its interesting. I guess that’s what’s going on in my subconscious mind. I guess I have a tendency to tell the story of the underdog. I’m attracted to those stories. Actually, the title of “Comran’s world,” when I first got started with the movie, was called “The Underdog” because it was before he won the [honorary] Oscar. When I pitched him the idea, I sent him a track by Sly & The Family Stone called “Underdog” and I gave him this whole idea about how I was gonna shoot a trailer set to the song “Underdog.” (laughing) I don’t think he was too happy with that, because I don’t know if he views himself as the underdog.

But yeah I definitely like those stories. I probably feel like an underdog myself sometimes. Because I’m a woman and a black woman. There’s not a lot of black female directors, I guess, so maybe there’s some sort of connection I have to the underdog athlete or movie maker or whatever.

BH: So what are you working on now? I heard you have a Corman-esque picture of your own in the works.

Stapleton: I’m currently juggling two documentary projects. I’m doing a series profiling interesting women as part of the whole YouTube channel thing that has been started.

I have the “Outside In” project I’m working with Roger Gastman – he was the curator with the show art in the streets. We’re doing a television series, a six-part, one-hour series that’s going to trace the history of street art graffiti. So it’s expanded into a bigger project. And the Corman-esque movie is still in development. It is a science fiction intergalactic love story I guess you could call it. It takes place with an alien and an earthling. I’m really excited about that. It will be a quickie movie, but fun, with the old-school spirit of Corman movies from the late ’70s, early ’80s.

BH: Is there anything that you learned from Corman or making “Corman’s World” that you’ll incorporate into that film?

Stapleton: Yeah, I mean a couple of things. I never had a chance to go to film school. Making this documentary was kind of my film school-slash-graduate program all in one. I didn’t know how to do anything when I started, so it was definitely a film school for me from the ground up. Roger was like, “When you get started on your first narrative feature you can’t take five years to make that.” So I’m like, “Thanks, Roger. (laughing)”

BH: You got Jack Nicholson to cry on camera. What was that like?

Stapleton: It was the longest interview. It was the Holy Grail interview from day one, because he doesn’t do them. It took two years from the first letter that went out until I was actually sitting down with him. It lasted for hours. It was the longest interview I conducted, with the exception of Roger and his wife, spending time with them.

So it was amazing, and I think that at the end of the day, I was at the right place at the right time. He had a lot to say about Roger and to Roger, and I just happened to have a camera there and picked it up. It was very intimate. I always keep a very small crew size, so there were only two other people in the room besides myself and Jack, and I think he felt very comfortable. We had spent so many hours together by the end of it that he just got very emotional and worked up. So that’s what happened.

BH: Corman’s movies have always had a sort of B-movie feel, and that’s part of their charm. He obviously recognizes that his films are campy, but it seems to be the goal he’s embraced.

Stapleton: Oh yeah. I mean I think he is very, very aware. The only one really that has no camp at all, being “The Intruder,” if anyone said it was campy I think that would be very offensive to him. But beyond that, he’s not in denial that he puts camp all throughout his movies and has since the very beginning. And he loves it. It’s actually harder than one would think to pull it off in a good way, to pull off comedy and genre and slap it all together in an entertaining less-than-90-minute experience with no money, so (laughing) he’s the master at it.

Loner Andrew Detmer (Dane DeHaan), his cousin Matt Garetty (Alex Russell) and class star Steve Montgomery (Michael B. Jordan) are three high school students who stumble upon a glowing crystal-like object in the woods during a party at an abandoned warehouse. In the days that follow they realize they’ve acquired some a telekinetic power to control objects.

It’s not unlike the Force – something that first-time feature director Josh Trank dabbled with in his experimental short, “Stabbing at Leia’s 22nd Birthday.” But as their powers grow from moving a few Legos to crushing cars and flying, Detmer begins to change and lash out. When Garetty and Montgomery try to help, he only grows more violent. His downward spiral leads to an action-packed climax pitting friends and powers against each other.

For a “found footage” hand-held film, the movie has some great shots. It fits into the story – as his powers increase, Detmer uses part of his mind to control the camera, so all three young men appear in shots together. It’s a neat choice, and lets Trank be artistic in a movie that’s supposed to look amateurish. The story, by Trank and screenwriter Max Landis, has the depth and structure that films made by much older professionals often lack.

From well-placed and thought-provoking bits of philosophy that color Garetty’s personality and reveal Detmer’s evolving views about himself, to hilarious dialogue and situational humor mostly from Montgomery, the story captures both the emotional tale of a boy pushed too far along with the joyous escapades of newly-created supermen without letting either part overwhelm the other. The film starts and ends a little awkwardly, but it’s because in both situations teenage boys are trying to express heavy emotion while dialoguing with a camera. In all honesty they shouldn’t be comfortable in that scenario.

The characters are types, but not stereotypes. DeHaan’s Andrew Detmer is an awkward, anti-social, scrawny teen, with hauntingly troubled eyes. The character is colored by his mother’s sickness and unemployed alcoholic father’s abuse, and compounded by bullies in his
neighborhood and at school. With pressures from all around him, he has only himself, and his camera. At first it’s a barrier, shielding him and serving as a lens through which to filter harsh realities. As his confidence grows with his power filming becomes an art form through which to
channel his new-found ability.

But when he embarrasses himself at a party, the old self – filled with loathing for the world around him – menacingly resurfaces. And the camera is there every step of the way. He comes to worship himself, and see himself as a god among expendables. “A lion doesn’t feel guilty when it kills a gazelle,” Detmer tells the camera. “You don’t feel guilty when you squash a fly. And I think that means something.” Then the bullied becomes the bully. It’s a complete transformation, both satisfying and saddening to witness.

As Garetty, Russell gives a great performance as a senior who feigns disinterest in the “cool” parties and activities of high school to cover his own insecurities. There’s a lack of certainty to him underneath the bored façade that reveals itself through his late-blossoming power; he’s the
last to figure out how to fly for a reason. It shows someone whose confidence is an act, someone who is trying to find himself in the world.

Jordan’s Steve Montgomery is the high school star, effortlessly cool and a genuinely nice guy. Jordan, from “Friday Night Lights,” is a leading man, and his vibrant performance helps the film settle into itself. When he’s on screen, the other characters become teens and find
their powers as exciting as they really are.

What sets “Chronicle” apart from other found footage movies I’ve seen is the climactic battle – two teen supermen smashing each other through buildings in downtown Seattle. Trank splices footage from different hand-held cameras, traffic cameras, security cameras and police cameras
to create the multiple views that make up the showdown between Detmer and Garetty. Aside from the audio disparity between shots – a chopper’s camera contains background police band chatter, while a security camera contains no sound at all –Trank’s climactic fight is both enjoyable to watch and fun to analyze.

For that alone, this narrative is worth watching.

Filmmakers Mark Judge and Paul Moon, with their documentary film project “The Story of Whittaker Chambers,” are currently competing for “Project of the Week” recognition at indiewire.com. Each day indiewire picks a “Project of the Day” to feature, and every week readers vote for one project to consult with an independent film website like SnagFilms or IndieGoGo.

These “Project of the Week” winners compete for the “Project of the Month” prize: a consultation with the Sundance Institute, which runs the Sundance Film Festival. IndieWIRE featured “The Story of Whittaker Chambers” on Tuesday.

“Chambers’s story is one that hits on every cylinder,” wrote Judge, an author, journalist and filmmaker. “There is espionage, war, the soul of man, communism, courtroom drama, narrow escapes and God. The story is incredibly exciting, and we want to provide a great ride.”

Communist-turned-conservative Chambers is known for exposing government official Alger Hiss as a Soviet spy. Hiss was convicted of perjury in 1950 and sentenced to five years in prison. Chambers is remembered for his anti-communism, but also for his classic tome, “Witness,” which has influenced conservatism for decades, and continues to do so.

“I reread ‘Witness’ in 2010 and realized it was as relevant today as when it was published,” Judge wrote in an email. “For one, the creeping socialism that Chambers warned us about is upon us. …And it is, without doubt, the coolest and most exciting American story to have not been put on film.”

Unfortunately, Chambers is being forgotten, Judge noted. “America’s public schools and academia are certainly not interested in remembering the man who revealed Soviet espionage in the United States government.”

Judge and Moon are seeking to remedy that. Both had been working independently on Chambers projects. Upon learning of each other, they joined forces.

“We want to get conservatives behind this,” Judge said. “A couple times I was shocked when I mentioned the project and got a blank stare from a conservative. I guess some conservatives went to public school. But then I tell them that the book ‘Witness’ was absolutely pivotal in Ronald Reagan becoming a conservative – and David Mamet as well. In fact, it may not have happened without ‘Witness.’ Then they pay attention.”

He added, “Liberals are still, at long last, trashing Whittaker Chambers today. Still. That says something.”

Voting is free. To cast your vote, visit here.

It’s fitting then that “Control,” (John Hurt) head of the British “Circus” (SIS, commonly called MI6), tapes the pictures of his top underlings onto chess pieces as he considers which is a double agent for Russia. “There’s a mole. Right at the top of the Circus. He’s been there for years,”
Control tells agent Jim Prideaux (Mark Strong) right before secretly sending him to Budapest, to uncover the identity of the traitor.

Control’s suspects are the top men of SIS: Percy Alleline, Circus director of operations (Toby Jones); three Circus officers: Bill Haydon (Colin Firth), Roy Bland (Ciarán Hinds) and Toby Esterhase (David Dencik); and the Deputy Chief, George Smiley (Gary Oldman). Control nicknames each from an old nursery rhyme – tinker, tailor, soldier and so on.

Unfortunately Control never learns the mole’s identity, because Prideaux is captured during the mission and tortured for information. It’s as if the Soviets knew he was coming. The resulting scandal forces Control to resign. He dies soon after. Smiley, as second in command, is forced into early retirement.

It’s too bad for Smiley, a man of unflinching loyalty to Control. He gets the chance to redeem himself when Undersecretary Oliver Lacon (Simon McBurney) contacts Smiley and asks him to continue Control’s investigation from outside of the Circus. With Circus agent Peter Guillam (Benedict Cumberbatch) secretly working for him from the inside, Smiley begins to uncover a trail that will lead him to the mole.

Numerous spy films end with an agent uncovering a huge conspiracy, a fact that cushions the impact of this film’s ending. Add, too, that the twisting story and flashbacks make the film difficult to follow, and its lack of excessive explosions will make it downright boring for anyone
who isn’t committed – like Smiley – to finding the mole. It takes focus and a bit of work, but those who invest in the film will be rewarded with a rich story, good acting and excellent camerawork.

“Tinker, Tailor” is undoubtedly a more accurate portrayal of espionage than your “Bourne,” “Bond” or “Mission: Impossible” films. Guns are rarely drawn and less often fired (though it’s pretty raw when they are). The film’s most anxious moments include Agent Guillam’s theft of documents from Circus archives. He doesn’t even break in. If this were a typical spy film, Guillam would no doubt enter at night through a skylight to swap the documents before heading off on more explosive escapades.

In “Tinker, Tailor,” the story focuses as much on Smiley’s calculations and investigative interviews as it does on the fieldwork to find and stop the mole. Fortunately Alfredson crafts each scene into a work of art. He uses a gray noir style – there are a lot of noir elements here – to capture cold, dreary England, the moral ambiguity of spy life and the uncertainty of loyalties.

For their part, screenwriters Bridget O’Connor and Peter Straughan effectively pack le Carré’s vision into about two hours – hours less than the book’s award-winning television adaptation.

For Oldman’s Smiley, finding the mole in the Circus is a thrilling quest for personal redemption. He’s old, a bit washed up, mentally exhausted from years at the Circus, and, with the chance to redeem himself, as devious and conniving as any double agent.

Oldman is bolstered by a veritable army of excellent British and European actors, including notably Firth and Jones, but it is Strong as Prideaux and Cumberbatch as Guillam who stand out – two young agents calculatingly wielded by their superiors. Their emotional characters are powerful, and they keep the human element from getting lost in a complex story of spy versus spy.

As Smiley’s assistant, Cumberbatch’s Guillam is a dedicated underling whose unflinching loyalty to his boss reflects Smiley’s own past service to Control. Such “father-son” relationships are scattered throughout the film, and guide agents’ actions more than duty or patriotism. It makes betrayal more painful, and devotion more valuable.

“Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy” isn’t the book reincarnated, but it pays a healthy tribute to its source, and is a refreshingly original and realistic take on the Cold War world of espionage.

Mike’s boozing self-medication is interrupted when his agent asks for another book. Mike decides to visit the lake house in the town of Dark Score, hoping for inspiration and, perhaps, an answer as to why his wife hadn’t told him about her pregnancy.

In typical King fashion, chaos and terror strike soon after Mike arrives in Dark Score. First, after finding a little girl named Kyra (Caitlin Carmichael) wandering in the middle of the road, Mike unwittingly finds himself involved in a custody battle over the girl between a young woman named Mattie (Melissa George) and her sinister father-in-law Max (William Schallert).

At the same time, Mike’s nights at the cabin are haunted by twisted dreams, and his days are interrupted by the paranormal as ghosts – both friendly and not – pulling him into a decades-old mystery surrounding the disappearance of a blues singer and a number of child drownings. Brosnan’s ability to shift between mourning husband, tentative detective and celebrity writer provides the right tone for each scene.

Screenwriter Matt Venne’s streamlined script rearranges a few things from the book to focus on bringing out the classic King horror elements, and all four hours are tense, bursting with the unnatural. Early on, Mike hears a scratching under his bed. When he checks it, his dead wife is
suddenly dragged screaming away from him into the darkness. It’s the first of a series of excellent cuts, under the direction of Mick Garris (TV’s “The Stand”), that compound the terror.

What’s lost in an effort to make the mystery terrifying is the story, which only comes to a sensible conclusion after a couple of monologues by George and Gish to explain all the abnormal occurrences. It doesn’t help that King’s ghost-filled climax looks kind of corny on screen. Still, almost every loose end is wrapped up in the conclusion, except for perhaps the biggest question: Why on earth did Mike stay in a house that seemed to throw temper tantrums, blowing pictures from the walls, books off the shelves and shooting records at him like Frisbees?

Thankfully in the end, it’s clear that those who survive will sleep well at night again. That’s not the case for viewers though. Only the dead will sleep easy after this one.

For years, Matt’s been the “back-up parent,” quietly plugging away at his job and, lately, managing the sale of his family’s trust – a large parcel of paradise passed down through the generations. Meanwhile, his wife Elizabeth (Patricia Hastie) manages their spastic preteen Scottie (Amara Miller) and her ex-druggie older sister Alexandra (Shailene Woodley), while racing boats on the side.

Then a speedboat accident lands Elizabeth in the hospital, in a coma from which she won’t recover. Her will states that Matt must pull the plug, and so he and his daughters begin to tell family and friends to say goodbye now before Elizabeth is gone forever.

But Matt’s image of his wife and daughters is transformed as he reconnects with his reckless children and learns that his wife was having an affair and was ready to leave him. In a move that is part vengeful husband and part sympathetic guardian, Matt and the girls start searching for Elizabeth’s lover, to give him an opportunity to say goodbye.

Writer/director Alexander Payne co-wrote the film with actors Nat Faxon and Jim Rash. Payne, whose previous work includes “Sideways” and “About Schmidt,” has crafted another strong character in Matt King. Much like the leads in “Sideways,” Matt is a type – like the wine lover and B-actor for which Payne won a best screenplay Oscar. He’s a middle-aged father, reconnecting with his daughters and realizing that the reality he knew was far from the reality that actually was. While the film is marred with excessive set-up narration and a few traipsing scenes in the middle exploring the family land deal and the hunt for Elizabeth’s lover, Clooney’s Matt keeps things moving. The tired, aging, slightly oblivious father and husband he delivers is complex and relatable.

Matt’s journey is set against Hawaii’s beautiful beaches and countryside, with an islander soundtrack of harps and guitars, juxtaposing the story’s weight with a carefree setting. It makes the film more contemplative and less emotional. It also helps the humor scattered throughout to land easily.

Matt’s daughters help him along the way. Miller’s rowdy Scottie is kind of confusing, and way too crass, which has something to do with her rebellious older sister Alexandra and probably more to do with the minds behind the movie. Woodley as Alexandra is fantastic, though – she’s a nice balance of wild child and caring daughter. Her sidekick, pot-smoking guitarist Sid (Nick Krause), keeps things light with his dim-witted humor as the group island-hop their way to finding Elizabeth’s man.

There’s not much to hide about the ending. Throughout the film, the inevitability of Elizabeth’s death hangs over everything. But Hemmings’ story and Payne’s adaptation still manage to surprise with the power of Matt’s subtle transformation from workaholic to father.

Even in Hawaii, family is what makes life beautiful.

‘In Time’ takes place in a future where physical aging has been genetically altered to end at 25. At that time, a year begins to count down on your arm. When your time runs out, you die. If you can earn or steal more time, you can extend your life infinitely. In this world, people are divided in time zones based on their wealth, and Timekeepers – half cop, half agents of order – ensure that no one breaks the rules and advances illegally.

Justin Timberlake plays Will, a struggling factory worker who has been gifted over a century of time by Henry (Matt Bomer), a man who has grown tired of living. With his new wealth and knowledge, Will goes to New Greenwich, the lap of luxury, intent on stealing time from the wealthy to distribute to the masses – time that has been stolen from them through manipulated markets that ensure the rich earn more time while the poor continually struggle to make it through each day. There, he meets Sylvia (Amanda Seyfried), the daughter of Philippe (‘Mad Men’s’ Vincent Kartheiser), who owns an eternity of time. When Timekeepers track Will to New Greenwich and try to arrest him for supposedly stealing the minutes and murdering Henry, he kidnaps Sylvia and goes on the run, racing against not only the Timekeepers but a dwindling clock.

Niccol both wrote and directed the film. There’s been some scandal over whether the premise was his or borrowed from a short story, but I’m inclined to believe it’s originally his. He has a history of writing provoking films, including ‘Gattaca,’ ‘Lord of War’ and ‘The Truman Show.’ Regardless of where it came from, ‘In Time’ is an intriguing and generally well-crafted story.

The film has a timeless aura, amplified by cars and clothes that could fit as easily in the 1920s as the 2010s. The story takes time to develop, and it matures along the way, as does Timberlake’s acting. Seyfried deserves kudos for taking the cliché role of a sheltered heiress and turning her into a sexy Patty Hearst-Bonnie Parker sidekick. Kartheiser is basically himself from ‘Mad Men,’ but wealth suits him, and he’s a good choice to play the villain.

The best character in the story is the Timekeeper Raymond (Cillian Murphy), whose unflinching dedication to his job, like that of Inspecter Javert in ‘Les Miserables,’ drives the film. Murphy is not the creepy Scarecrow here; instead he’s obsessed with the status quo.

If you’ve seen the trailer, you already know the basic political thrust of the film. The rich have gamed the system and the poor can’t survive in it. The mantra of the upper class is a Darwinian one – the many must die so the few may live forever. Will’s response is simple: If even one must die, then none should live forever. Accepted at its face value, the film seems to assert the liberal notion that we need to spread the wealth around because greedy corporations are hogging it all. In the film though, time is a finite, scarce resource. There’s a limited amount of it, and so letting anyone live forever means that many must suffer because of it. But with wealth, there’s no need for others to suffer, because wealth is generated through work, not just redistributed.

Then there’s Levi (August Emerson), a priest who runs a time bank where he literally gives his time away to those who need it. He’s the moral compass of the film, showing that good people exist in this dog-eat-dog future, and he also serves as Will’s Friar Tuck, his point-main in distributing stolen time to the needy.

Coupled with the fact that the film doesn’t really address whether it’s a one-world government or a series of businesses running the time-stealing scam, the film’s political message is cloudy. In the end, it’s really just a decent story that you can either discuss with your friends long after or simply write off as time that was – for the most part – well spent.

—–

Since the late 1990s, an American preacher has stood against this threat, his orphanage a safe haven in the ravaged land. That man is Sam Childers, a violent drug-dealing biker who underwent a mostly complete transformation after coming to Christ. I say mostly because two things haven’t changed: He still loves motorcycles, and he still loves to fight. Now though, he fights not in dim-lit bars after too many drinks, but in Africa against the LRA. There, he and a few soldiers from the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army take the conflict to the LRA. When LRA soldiers attack a village – intent on torturing, murdering or kidnapping its inhabitants – Sam and his team ride in, guns blazing, to stop them.

“Machine Gun Preacher” is that amazing story, told with great authenticity (thus the R rating) by screenwriter Jason Keller and acclaimed director Marc Forster, whose previous work includes “Monster’s Ball,” “Finding Neverland” and “Quantum of Solace.” A uniting force to Forster’s wide array of films is great characters, and he’s found an epic in Sam Childers, played forcefully by Gerard Butler.

It’s a compelling and accurate portrait of the preacher as a killer angel, the story of one man’s personal journey from drugs and theft into ministry on two continents.

Keller’s story crunches 30 years of Sam’s life into a few hours, and Forster’s film flows quickly from one moment to the next, roughly splicing scenes together with music and voice-over (but not narration) linking them. Forster’s transitions are artistic, though more easily appreciated the second time around.

Keller’s script is a study in how to correctly tell a vast story in a limited amount of time. He covers everything: Sam’s rough years, his conversion, his first trip to Africa, his calling to minister in the U.S. and Sudan, building his orphanage, fighting the LRA, struggling to fund his ministries and keep his family together through the lean years. Nearly every second of screen time draws from one or more real moments from Sam’s life, as Sam will tell you and his book can confirm. Additionally, Keller’s time studying old Westerns during a program in London has colored the story. The film’s protagonist is a perfectly crafted white knight gunslinger, toughened by time and circumstance into a man who takes the law into his own hands.

Butler’s portrayal of Sam Childers is remarkable, not only for his excellent Childers accent, which is perfect down to the “you’uns” of Midwest PA, but in his drive. From hurrying African children into his room to spend the night out of the elements, to speeding toward the LRA and mowing them down, to his firebrand preaching, every action oozes passion and a wholehearted commitment to his ministries.

Butler is supported by Michelle Monaghan playing his wife, stripper-turned-church manager Lynn; Michael Shannon as his tie to the old life Donnie (a character comprised of multiple people from Sam’s life); his daughter Paige (played by Madeline Carroll); and his Sudanese friend and sidekick Deng (Ivory Coast actor Souleymane Sy Savane). Each plays their role in the story with depth and feeling.

The film has had a Hollywood makeover that takes Childers’ sometime frustration with God further than he ever did, but as Childers says, it illustrates that “no matter how many times you go back God accepts you.” (Spoiler Alert) In reality, Sam never went back to alcohol. In reality he has never come close to killing himself, though he’s had some very bad days. “If we’re living the Christian faith we all get to that point to where there’s a day that’s just a crappy day,” Sam says. That’s when he turns to Scripture.

But when Sam turns to the Bible for comfort he goes to James 4:17: “So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.” It has driven him to, in real life, give away the last money his family had – money that should have gone to pay their mortgage – trusting that God would take care of them.

There’s also the issue of violence. For Childers it’s simple: He likes to ask, if someone took your child, your wife, your parents, “if I said I could bring them home, does it matter how I bring them home?” Some theologians might disagree with him, but given the circumstances that surround Sam in Sudan, his methods are the only ones that get the job done. For the children he defends in South Sudan, that’s all that matters. For the rest of us, it should lead to some great conversations about a film worth its ticket price.

—–

Sam is a stocky man with an emphatic handlebar mustache. He’s shorter than you might expect – certainly shorter than Gerard Butler who plays him – but he has a presence about him compounded by his biker attire. Jason has the goatee, long hair and overall grunge look of a Hollywood writer.

My first question was about Jason’s introduction to the story. “One of the producers … called me. She said ‘I just heard the most amazing true story.’ She gave me a little thirty second [overview] and asked, ‘Do you wanna meet the guy?’ I said, ‘Yeah, gotta meet him.’ I met Sam the next week and that’s when it all sort of started.”

Keller researched the story for a year and a half before he began to really write. But it wasn’t until after he’d written a complete script that he made it to Sudan. “We were nervous about that,” Jason said of himself and director Marc Forster. “By that time we had a screenplay that we felt very confident about. … But we were scared that we were going to go over there and realize we hadn’t rendered the story in terms of the central Africa [part] accurately. We went over there and we had open eyes. I was prepared to do whatever I had to do to get it right.” Fortunately everything seemed to fit. “We really worked hard to get that screenplay right before we actually were able to go over there and see [the orphanage]. Not a lot changed. The only things that changed were some specific sort of character things for Deng (one of Sam’s soldiers), some specific things for some of the kids … but in terms of structural shifts not much at all.”

Of the story Sam said, “They’ve done an unbelievable job [of taking] thirty plus years and put[ting] it into a two-hour movie. Everything there is based on the truth.” Jason added, “I demanded [Sam’s] input.”

It shows. In his book, “Another Man’s War,” Sam delves deeper into his life and into the spiritual battles he’s fought over the years in his service in the U.S. and Africa. The movie is by no means the book made into film, but parallels exist – in Sam’s own words from “Another Man’s War” – with nearly every scene. “The timeline is messed up, but how else could you do it unless you wanted to do a two-part, three-part movie?” Sam said.

Sam emphasized during the interview that, while southern Sudan voted on its independence in July, the fighting continues. “You can drive six to eight hours from the orphanage and you can be into what you would call an active war area. … Some people would say Joseph Kony is not a threat anymore and he’s not doing much anymore. But since the first of the year he has abducted over one thousand people. So that is a threat. Since the first of the year he’s killed over two hundred people. So that is a threat. For me, if somebody is killing one child that is a problem.”

And Sam’s war with the LRA is where most discussions will start after people watch this film. “On Judgment Day I believe I’m gonna have a lot of things to answer for,” Sam said. “If you’re behind me in line you can think about what you’re going to say for a long time.” He added, “I don’t ever try to claim what I do is right. But I will use the defense that over a thousand children will say what I do is right.”

Jason’s own views were shaped through the course of the filmmaking process. “I’m against violence,” he said, but added, “When I traveled to Sudan and I met those kids and I saw the scars of war literally on their faces and I saw a land decimated by twenty-plus years of civil war, the answer to that question [of violence] becomes really complex, and there is no easy answer. … In my view the people who say violence is bad, and you’re not a Christian if you commit violence, I say [to them] that’s easy to say when you’re safely ensconced in your home in the United States and you have takeout pizza down the street. It’s a different thing to say when I’ve seen the places that Sam has been to on this planet. The answer to that question becomes very complex.”

Sam’s own answer is simple. He relies on James 4:17, not your typical verse for comfort and encouragement, but a driving force in his life nonetheless: “If anyone, then, knows the good they ought to do and doesn’t do it, it is sin for them” (NIV). For Sam, defending the children of Sudan is the good he must do.

“Machine Gun Preacher” hits theaters on Sept. 30.

—–

The story follows Sawyer (Nathan Gamble), a quiet kid whose cousin and only real friend (Austin Stowell) has just shipped off to the military. During a visit to the beach, Sawyer finds a dolphin, Winter, tangled in a crab trap and helps the team from Tampa Bay’s Clearwater Marine Aquarium to rescue her. When the injury requires Clearwater director Dr. Clay Haskett (Harry Connick Jr.) to amputate Winter’s tail, Sawyer and Haskett’s chatterbox daughter Hazel (Cozi Zuehlsdorff) are there to help Winter learn to swim again. But Winter’s new swimming style puts pressure on her spinal cord and threatens to paralyze her.

Meanwhile Sawyer’s cousin returns home after being wounded in an explosion during his tour of duty. While visiting him at a veteran’s hospital, Sawyer runs into prosthetics specialist Dr. Cameron McCarthy (Morgan Freeman). In a race against time, Sawyer convinces the doctor to create a prosthetic tail for Winter while financial concerns threaten to close Clearwater permanently.

If it feels like you’re watching “Free Willy” (1993) or any number of 1990s animal-themed movies, that’s because the minds behind it were responsible for some of those films. Director Charles Martin Smith directed “Air Bud” (1997) and one of the screenwriters, Karen Janszen, wrote “Free Willy 2” (1995). Janszen co-wrote the story with first-time writer Noam Dromi. Their end product is sometimes corny, sometimes moving. To maximize the 3D, Smith uses long montages of Sawyer swimming with Winter, and a goofy chaotic scene where Hazel loses control of Sawyer’s model helicopter and crashes it. These scenes differentiate this generally enjoyable family film from classics of the genre, since they’re fun for the kids but generally pointless.

The story also takes a long time to set up. Half the film has passed before the Clearwater team even begins to think about using a prosthetic tail on Winter. That’s when Freeman comes along, and his presence gives the story needed momentum.

The acting is solid throughout. Gamble and first timer Zuehlsdorff as homeschooled Hazel are both strong young performers. Their supporting cast, including Sawyer’s mother (Ashley Judd) and Hazel’s grandfather (Kris Kristofferson), are genuine, though not likely to win any awards like Sandra Bullock from Alcon Entertainment’s hit “The Blind Side.”

As a whole the story’s pretty PC. Clearwater is struggling financially because of lost government grants, and they are fighting to keep a real estate mogul from buying up the property. For Winter – a disabled animal that no other marine hospitals or zoos want – this means she will have to be put down once her home is bought out from under her. (SPOILER) In the end the real estate mogul saves the day, buying Clearwater and funding it instead of building another hotel in its place. But whether this is supposed to be an anti-corporate or pro-philanthropic message is debatable. Also, young Hazel prays once for help from above – but she prays to her mother who has passed away. It’s a scene that’s kind of distracting and unnecessary.

The biggest take away though comes from the more obvious theme: all life is precious. And I’m not just talking about the dolphin. It’s the veterans that the film dwells on, the handicapped that it portrays not just sympathetically but vibrantly. In one scene a mother brings her obsessed daughter to Clearwater to see Winter. Only as she helps her daughter out of their van do we realize why her daughter has been so caught up with this particular dolphin. The little girl is disabled herself. The film later closes with documentary footage of Winter’s rescue and rehabilitation, along with visits from disabled children and adults who come to be inspired by an animal that beat the odds.

While there’s a good deal of added plot and montage 3D for the kids, “Dolphin Tale” is a feel-good film that’s enjoyable and inspiring for all ages.