catchafire.jpg


Anybody Got a Match?

Catch a Fire / Jeremy C. Fox

Film Reviews | October 27, 2006 | Comments (9)


Like seemingly every new movie not starring Jennifer Aniston, Catch a Fire is based on a disturbing true story. This time it’s that of Patrick Chamusso, a black foreman at a South African oil refinery who in 1980 was falsely accused of planting a bomb that destroyed part of the refinery. The irony is that Chamusso was South Africa’s least likely revolutionary, happy to toe the line and accept whatever crumbs the ruling whites would allow him to catch, but the incarceration and torture he suffered — and especially the torture of his wife — brought out the latent revolutionary in him. He moved to Mozambique, joined the anti-apartheid African National Congress, and returned to the refinery to commit the very crime for which he had been falsely accused.

Catch a Fire was written by Shawn Slovo, whose father, Joe Slovo, was among the leading white South African anti-apartheid activists. The senior Slovo was the head of the ANC’s special ops unit and helped to plan Chamusso’s sabotage on the refinery; it was he who originally planted the idea for the film, many years ago. Slovo’s script has the insight and complexity you’d expect of an insider, showing both Chamusso’s bravery and his moral flaws, but its structure is that of a thriller, with Chamusso (Derek Luke) the mouse to very wily cat, Colonel Nic Vos (Tim Robbins) of the South African Security Branch’s anti-terrorist squad. Chamusso is a familiar archetype — the ordinary man driven by circumstance to extraordinary acts — but at no point does Luke allow his performance to become pedestrian; his Chamusso is complicated, passionate, and not entirely likable. An even more ambivalent sort is cold, clever Vos, who has the foresight to see that apartheid will soon fall but only pities his fellow whites for the privilege they’ll lose, and vacillates between such extremes of Good Cop and Bad Cop that it’s impossible to get a read on his true nature.

In some ways, though, the individual characters are almost beside the point: Catch a Fire is the rare film in which the abstract ideas play as large a role as the action. At a time when terrorism and prisoner abuse are the stuff of each morning’s newspaper, it examines a scenario very different from our current one, in which the terrorists are unquestionably in the right and the government’s anti-terrorist forces not only employ indefensible methods but do so in support of an indefensible regime. The evils of apartheid were so insidious, the film tells us, that even the most innocent citizens of South Africa became tainted by them, as when Vos’ pacifist daughter shoots an ANC revolutionary in self-defense.

If this all sounds a bit Manichean and over-earnest, well, it is. Apartheid is like the Holocaust — one of the rare real-world events that can be seen entirely in simplistic terms of Good and Evil and for which true dramatic complexity is almost impossible to achieve. Slovo and the director, Philip Noyce, struggle manfully to overcome this obstacle, making complex characters like Chamusso and Vos the representatives of revolution and apartheid. Yet the central situation is such a basic, familiar one and the outcome is so predictable (and completely revealed in the film’s trailer) that the film, for me at least, never becomes fully engaging. I admired the performances of Luke, Robbins, and the supporting cast; the cinematography is both handsome and lively; and many elements of South African life, such as the chanting of protesters during toyi-toyi, are used with beauty and expressiveness. Yet never did I feel the full moral urgency of Chamusso’s struggle or the complex set of motives driving Vos; it all remained a bit distant for me. Perhaps this fire is one I’ve just seen burn too many times.

Jeremy C. Fox is a founding critic of Pajiba and a member of the Online Film Critics Society.You may email him at jeremycfox[at]gmail.com.

ofcs.gif


Pajiba Love 10/26/06 | Running with Scissors





Comments

No comments?

Posted by: A Man Apartheid at October 29, 2006 3:31 PM

I've only seen positive reviews. I may rent this.

Posted by: Candy at October 29, 2006 5:12 PM

I still want to see it. Sort of a "lest we forget" thing, especially in light of the US decision to embrace torture officially. And before anyone weighs in with the "it's not the same thing" argument, let me remind you that Dick Cheney opposed the release of Nelson Mandela from prison because he was "a terrorist". I guess he took the "evil" position, Jeremy. At least Dick is an equal opportunity torturer!!!

Posted by: Siobhan at October 29, 2006 9:47 PM

I want to see this as well. Derek Luke has been lauded for this role, and I'm looking forward to seeing him in it.

Posted by: Daphne at October 29, 2006 10:05 PM

Good review. And I will absolutely see this. Siobhan, I didn't realize that Cheney said that - like I needed a reason to fear/hate him more. Derek Luke is carving out a nice little career for himself, which I'm glad to see. And the "lest we forget" concept is an important one, especially when it comes to something like Apartheid, which fewer and fewer young people even understand or know about anymore.

Posted by: TK at October 30, 2006 9:07 AM

Just in case anyone thinks I'm making it up, in 1986, Dick Cheney voted against a US resolution that called for the release of Mandela (it's public record). And as recently as 2000 on the "This Week" news show he said although Mandela and the ANC had "mellowed" over the years, he was "totally comfortable" with his vote in 1986. By the way, according to a former US State Department official, Mandela was originally captured based on a CIA tip-off to the South African Government. I have never seen any official statement that denies this is the truth.

Posted by: Siobhan at October 30, 2006 12:57 PM

The movie sounds amazing. I might have to drag my agoraphobic ass out of the house for this one.

Dick Cheney voted against the release of Nelson Mandela and doesn't regret it? Wow O_o It's not like I needed another reason to hate Dick Cheney, but they just keep on coming.

Posted by: Brandy at November 5, 2006 6:58 PM

Cheney is a bad, bad dude. I've thought boyfriend was sketchy as hell ever since I read that New Yorker article about him. God, he's AWFUL.

Posted by: Samantha T at November 7, 2006 3:00 PM

Great film. No pun intended, but it's not all Black and White. The "good" guy wasn't all good, the "bad" guy wasn't all bad. Patrick had nothing to do with the original attack, but was (somewhat understandably) driven to do something as a result what was done to his wife.

Vos let him go, despite a confession, when it was obivious he was not guilty. Showed some compasion after Patrick was tortured. Hard to gauge if it was a front, or if he really was remorseful.

Before my next paragraph, want to make sure I'm clear, there was nothing good about Aparthied. Not condoning or even sympathizing any part of it.

But, the movie seemed to imply that part of Vos' (Robbins) motivation was the fear of communisim. He felt that the communists were either backing the ANC, or would move in and take over if the ANC was successful. The "Red Scare" drove governments to do things they may have regretted. I won't waste space with American examples.

That said, the things he and his government did were inexcusable, but driven, at leat in part, by fear. Obviously a big part of it was good old fashioned racism, but I think fear was a big factor as well.

The referecnes to Cheney above are ironic, with his love of using fear (scarring Americans) to explain the things in Iraq.

Posted by: Bill at November 8, 2006 11:32 PM





Video ads popping up after each page view? Try clearing your browser's cookies.