There is a moment where the Dreamers team is waiting to hear if they will attend an upcoming competition.  They wait. Their coach comes out. “Yes,” she says. The group pauses. Nothing happens. The coach says yes again, and suddenly, everyone cheers. The scene is emblematic of the joys and shortfalls of Angel Studios’ latest and most uncharacteristic film.  You can’t help but hope for the best for the group of girls at the film’s center. The film intends to make you cheer, but the pacing hiccups make it difficult to know when you’re supposed to.  In many respects, “Rule Breakers” follows the model of a classic based-on-a-true-story sports movie. You construct the team. They overcome challenges. They succeed through a series of competitions until the big moment. But the particulars are quite different. Our competitors here are teenage girls from Afghanistan. The competition is robotics. The challenges are not just the discrimination that has become de facto to sports movies but also bombings and customs regulations.  The characters are such personable go-getters facing so many struggles that you can’t help but root for them. The distinct story helps keep the genre fresh. But the same novelty that benefits the film also makes it hard to understand the stakes. What does it take to get admitted to these competitions? Which competitions are important? What is the goal of the young women participating? The reactions from the characters to their placement were different enough from how I felt that I wondered what I was missing. The series of competitions all felt co-equal. It’d be like watching a baseball movie that starts in spring training and ends in July. You’d feel excited for their growth and wins, but it lacks the build-up and climax that is inherent in the form.  Nikohl Boosheri plays Roya who became an early female computer programmer in Afghanistan turned coach for the team. She turns in a controlled, understated acting job. Her performance is believable for someone determinedly overcoming the many challenges she does. But what it has in verisimilitude, it lacks in accessibility. I wanted to understand her journey, but instead, I watched her conquer logistics.  The remainder of the cast follows Boosheri’s lead. For as inexperienced as the ensemble is, there is hardly a misstep. But the characters also don’t feel distinct.  In many ways, the film reminded me of a documentary. It feels as though it follows events, not a story, and it follows people, not characters. But it also doesn’t have the authenticity or immediacy that sets documentary footage apart. I struggle to imagine the misanthrope that wouldn’t like this film. Its themes are so deeply human just about anyone will be able to feel them.  There is one scene between Roya and a Hispanic man named Jesus. They introduce themselves, and she responds, “Like the Christian prophet?” Jesus responds, “Yeah, is that a problem?” Roya takes a beat and chuckles to herself, “No. My father is named Mohammed.”  By being so specific to such a distinct slice of humanity, “Rule Breakers” somehow manages to speak to all of us. It’s far from a perfect film, but if you love sports movies and culture clash movies, you will love this movie. And even if you don’t, you’ll cheer along. This is an easy film to watch with kids. It’s not flashy enough to keep most kids’ attention, but the plot moves well enough to engage older kids. And there is nothing objectionable at any point for anyone except learning about off-screen violence that could be thematically hard for very young children. It may not seem obvious, but this is a family film in the truest sense.  Two and a half out of five stars. “Rules Breakers” releases in theaters nationwide on March 7, 2025. 

How does a community and the families within it respond to a nearly unspeakable accusation? How do you treat everyone with dignity? How do you suss out the truth? Do you need to? “Armand,” the Norwegian submission for The Academy Award’s best international feature film, sets out as though it is interested in answering those questions. The film opens with a young teacher, a principal, and a school staff member wondering what they are going to do. Armand has done something again. The parents are called in. The film’s premise is that Armand was accused of hitting Jon in the bathroom when Jon said he didn’t want to play with Armand. There are many additional revelations about the context, the relationship between Armand and Jon’s families, and the history of Armand’s family. There are accusations upon accusations that both indict and exonerate the boys and the adults around them. But these revelations eke out. It feels like filling up a mug from a leak in the sink. “If you want us to know what’s happening, just tell us,” I felt like shouting at the screen more than once. The film’s first act works well. The cinematography is ragged, framing its subjects well but always just off from what we’d expect. Too close, or the light is just wrong. It felt like how I imagine it would feel to have my child accused of something horrific.  And when the parents first start talking the tension is terrific. Those first few drops of exposition in the mug were thrilling. Oh there’s something happening here; it’s complicated and interesting.  Thea Lambrechts Vaulen, plays Sunna, a young teacher in over her head trying to manage the meeting between Armand’s mother, Elisabeth, played by Renate Reinsve, and Jon’s parents Sarah and Anders played by Ellen Dorrit Petersen and Endre Hellestveit.  Vaulen is particularly effective. She has been sent on a mission by her principal, Jarle, to make sure the whole thing blows over. Watching her struggle to navigate this while the parents are processing what’s been said is captivating. But it just keeps going.  The film’s entire second act consists of learning the basic facts of what has happened and the context around it. This is a complicated situation, and as a viewer I’m interested to see how the compelling characters navigate that situation. But the screenplay seems mostly interested in telling you the information. As though learning that Armand “plays doctor” at school is enough to compel me to the film’s ending. But once the audience finally understands the situation, the third act begins and flies wildly off the handle into surrealism, including two interpretive dance numbers, three over-the-top metaphors, and five straight minutes of Anders’ mother laughing.  The movie feels so desperate to be deep that it forgets to be about anything. It’s the first film of director Halfdan Ullmann Tøndel, so perhaps the bold ideas and beautiful cinematography will be wielded for a more worthwhile story next time. The film is entirely in Norwegian. And its English subtitles include a fair amount of profanity, though not an overwhelming amount. And the accusations that fly include suicide, alcoholism, and sexual assault. So these are adult themes. The film is R-rated, but not an egregious one, it pretty well all takes place in a parent-teacher conference.  I can’t imagine ever showing this to my kids. The themes are hard ones, and the film has nothing worthwhile to say about them. Two out of five stars. Armand releases in US theaters on February 14, 2025.