Review - Rendition

It's a shame that the movie-going public is so addicted to popcorn movies that it won't give philosophical movies like Rendition a chance. Rendition, featuring such Hollywood heavyweights as Meryl Streep, Reese Witherspoon, Jake Gyllenhaall and J.K. Simmons seems like it should have been an unquestioned box office success but its thoughtful treatment of the US policy of "extraordinary rendition"(a policy in which our government can legally take suspected terrorists, arrest them, send them away and have them tortured for information without due process of any kind) was far too serious of fare for a country that would rather see Larry the Cable Guy moon the camera for an hour and a half.
The film itself is a great success, featuring knockout performances from its entire cast but it really excels in the scenes where the moral issues aren't as black and white as they seem. it's easy to denounce these ideas when we know that El-Ibrahimi is innocent and undeserving of questioning but its also hard to disagree with Streep's Corrine Whitman, the government representative who authorizes the kidnapping, when she argues that 4,000 people were saved in London by information gathered through rendition. It's difficult for our idealism to remain strong when we are reminded of the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the London bombings and the Iraq War. Some part of me wanted Anwar to be guilty of collusion with the terrorists because it would have made the moral conundrum that director Gain Hood presents even more difficult to reason.
The actual construction of the film left something to be desired. A chronological twist at the end of the film is confusing upon the first viewing and unnecessary on the second and there is a lot of wasted potential for the amazing ensemble of actors and actresses that grace the screen. Hood spends far too much time stirring up animosity within his audience by focusing on scenes of torture rather than emphasizing the psychological changes happening within Gyllenhaal's Douglas Freeman or pondering the ruthless efficacy and detachment of Streep's cold-hearted Whitman. The best scenes of the film are her confrontations with Witherspoon and Peter Sarsgaard, who turns up as a powerful Senator's aide.
In his shining moment, he ambushes Whitman at a party, offering to send her a copy of the constitution so that she can brush up on the civil rights she is violating by imprisoning El-Ibrahimi. She retorts with a promise to send him the 9/11 commission report. Their ideological clash is the essence of the entire movie. Hood makes it impossible to remain neutral. You either have to side with the wicked witch of the FBI or the naive young politician's aide. There is no middle ground.
If pathos is more your form of argument, you might find it easier to subscribe to Witherspoon's ambush in the Senator's office where she demands to know where her husband is and Streep coolly replies, in typical government rote, that she has no idea.
Ironically enough, the strongest scenes of the film are also the best evidence of the films major weaknesses. It just doesn't manage, within the context of the film itself, to make the moral argument strongly enough. It is too clear which side of the argument Hood supports. A truly thought provoking film would have presented both sides of the argument as strongly as possible and allowed the audience to make its own decision rather than simply ruminating on the immorality of the topic.
But maybe thats not what Hood was trying to do. Maybe he was simply trying to make a film that demonstrated the devolution of American morals and our sacrifice of the moral high ground in the face of fear. If that's the case, then Rendition is a wildly successful venture.