The film’s title is a reference to the term “extraordinary rendition,” which is the United States’ policy of transporting suspected terrorists to other countries where they can be interrogated without due process. In other words, outsourced torture. Politics and morality aside, the studio should’ve come up with a catchier title. Although I’ve been eagerly anticipating seeing the movie, I kept forgetting what it was called. So by default it became “The Jake Gyllenhaal, Reese Witherspoon, and oh yeah Meryl Streep’s in it too, U.S. Tortures A Terror Suspect Film.” In any event, a mediocre movie by any other name is still a mediocre movie.

 

The plot(s): When Egyptian born terrorism suspect, Anwar El-Ibrahimi (Omar Metwally), “disappears” on a flight from South Africa to Washington DC, his pregnant American wife, Isabella Fields El-Ibrahimi (Reese Witherspoon), enlists the help of her politically connected friend, Alan Smith (Peter Sarsgaard), to figure out what the hell’s going on. They discover that on the orders of CIA head, Corrine Whitman (Meryl Streep), Anwar is being detained in some secret Middle Eastern interrogation facility. Meanwhile, a rookie CIA analyst, Douglas Freeman (Jake Gyllenhaal), begins to question his assignment as he witnesses the brutal and seemingly ineffective measures taken by professional torturer, Abasi Fawal (Yigal Naor), to get information from Anwar. And, while not torturing Anwar, Abasi is trying to locate his daughter, Fatima (Zineb Oukach), who has left home to hide out with her boyfriend, Khalid (Moa Khouas), so she avoid an arranged marriage. This is all a lot of story for such little substance.

 

I was surprised and hopeful when I learned there was a major release that would examine such an immensely current and emotionally charged issue. Is it worth the karmic stain to brutally torture 10 suspected souls in order to get information that will save 1,000 others? What if 9 of those 10 prove to be innocent? And, morality aside, is torture even an effective means to obtain information. If you asked the current administration, they couldn’t say because as far as they’re concerned the U.S. doesn’t torture. Most other informed people, from William Shakespeare to Senator John McCain, will tell you a tortured person will say anything to stop being tortured (*Just Google “Inquisition” or “Salem Witch Trials”). Yet unfortunately and unsurprisingly, this Hollywood product has all the depth and subtlety of a bland melodramatic television movie of the week. As much as I was in this film’s corner, RENDITION is not an important or even particularly entertaining effort.

 

Because Anwar’s innocence is never in doubt, audiences are not put through the inconvenience of having to seriously think about the issue. Consequently, the point is reduced to: “Of course torture is wrong… when you torture the wrong guy.” On top of this, in true Hollywood fashion, Agent Freeman recognizes Anwar’s innocence and predictably decides to do the right thing. This simply serves to reinforce the often heard rational for torture: “If you’re innocent, you don’t have anything to worry about.” Never mind all those innocents who are locked away, never to be heard from again. As a result, this story could have just as well been about the wrongful use of the death penalty or wiretapping or after school suspension as much as it deals with the torture of terrorism suspects. Such negates any importance the filmmakers claim this product has. Moving on to the entertainment factor, it doesn’t really have it. Every single beat of the script is predictable, from Anwar’s incarceration, to All American Isabella’s despair over his disappearance, to Corrine Whitman’s stonewalling Alan Smith’s efforts to get to the truth. There is a manipulative “twist” at the end that is so contrived it only reinforced my creeping suspicion that the screenwriter really, really, really liked CRASH. The characters are written one-dimensionally, and the performances aren’t interesting enough to elevate that at all. The cinematography is too pretty to make you feel upset about the violence. Agent Freeman might be experiencing inner despair about what he witnesses, but you wouldn’t know it from his appearance. Even after he narrowly escapes a suicide bombing, Gyllenhaal’s hair still looks ready to walk the red carpet. Don’t get me started on Anwar, because after weeks of torture he looks no worse (actually much better) than David Hasselhoff does the morning after a drunken night of eating burgers off the bathroom floor. And the torture scenes themselves are mild in comparison to what we’ve learned from the TV news (or 24’s Jack Bauer). 

 

While I would love to see more Hollywood films attempt to take on serious political issues, I cannot in good conscience recommend RENDITION. The subject matter is dealt with in such a shallow way, there is nothing to be learned here. If you want to inform yourself about state sanctioned torture, save your ten bucks, go to Wikipedia and look up “extraordinary rendition.” Or “Abu Ghraib.”