Catch A Fire (or, Is importance more important than art?)

It is rare for me to step into a film without knowing what to expect. In case you haven't guessed, I am a film junkie and I have always taken it upon myself to know what is coming out, when, and how well it has been received. Not so with Phillip Noyce's latest film Catch A Fire. Perhaps it is my ambivalence to Tim Robbins or that I haven't been in the mood for "issues" films recently, but this one just slipped under the radar.

Yesterday though, out with Steff, we decided to catch it because it was the next unseen film on the bill. Clean slate. No preconceptions. Difficult film.

It is problematic to treat Catch A Fire to a regular review because I don't think it is a great film artistically. Yes, it has a resounding social importance and, while it deals ostensibly with the workings of the ANC during the last days of South Africa's apartheid era, it is still dangerously relevant to today's global situation.

Noyce's film basically documents the development of Patrick Chamusso from committed, yet apathetic, family man to crusading "terrorist". There's the rub - Catch A Fire is a document. It doesn't set out to say anything, merely to tell a story. Inevitably the audience is able to glean meaning from that story, and this is probably how the film has won praise for is even-handedness but in removing any overt agenda, Noyce has left the film flat, unimpassioned and voiceless.

It is a pity because the performances are uniformly excellent. The problem is that they quickly hit a wall. Robbins' Anti-terrorist agent is given no growth, no arc. Yes, this is possibly a realistic portrayal of men in such situations but we never get to see how this life affects him. Similarly, Derek Luke's portrayal of Patrick is admirable but ultimately brittle and under-explored.

Catch A Fire is a film you will want to embrace but it will give you little to hold on to.