Carl Brashear, Jr. was the first black man to achieve the rank of Master Diver in the Navy. He was also the first amputee to be returned to active duty in the armed services. In this movie, produced by Bill Cosby, Brashear gets the kind of respectful, go-for-the-Oscar® treatment that reached its zenith in the 1960’s. Everyone tries very hard, but the story is old-fashioned and predictable — even down to the marriage proposal that melts the girl’s heart and the courtroom climax. The real problem is that the characters are so one-dimensional, the good guys so good and the bad guys so bad, that it has the feel of an after-school special.

This is the kind of movie that begins with one character being transported by MPs and then goes into a flashback of a little black boy running through the woods and diving into the water. It has big-serious-movie cinematography, with every autumn leaf perfectly outlined against every cloudless sky and diving gear that looks like burnished armour in its grandeur.

Brashear’s saintly sharecropper parents (Carl Lumbly and the woefully underused Lonette McKee) urge him to get as far away as possible and not come back for a long time. He has to quit school in 7th grade to help out at home, but when he grows up (played as an adult by Cuba Gooding, Jr.) he enlists in the Navy. The armed services have just been desegregated, and he has hopes for new opportunities.

It turns out that desegregation is more theoretical than real, and he is relegated to one of the few positions open to blacks — kitchen duty on board an escort carrier. When the ship’s captain discovers what a strong, fast swimmer he is, he is promoted to the search and rescue team, though he still has to bunk with the stewards. He dreams of becoming a master diver, one of the men who go on the most dangerous underwater missions. He sends over 100 letters of application before being accepted. Then, when he gets to the training facility, first they won’t let him on the base and then all of the white sailors but one refuse to stay in the barracks with him.

Billy Sunday (Robert De Niro) a master diver grounded due to an embolism, is in charge of diver training. He is a profane, angry, alcoholic, racist, abusive guy who, deep down inside, has more integrity than all those pretty-boy officers put together blah blah. Sunday begins by mentioning his namesake, the famous evangelist, explaining that “the only difference between me and that old preacher is that he worked for God and I am God.” He throws every possible obstacle in Brashear’s way, and even gives a medal Brashear earned to another sailor. But Brashear, true to his father’s orders, never gives up. He gets help from a pretty med student named Jo (Aunjanue Ellis) on the academic side, and relies on his own natural talent and determination to pass the performance tests. Despite the orders of Mr. Pappy, the commanding officer (Hal Holbrook), that no black sailor graduate, Brashear makes it. Then Brashear’s star is on the rise. And Sunday’s begins to fall.

Ultimately, Brashear marries the pretty doctor and becomes a star diver. But he loses a leg and the command wants him to retire. Sunday re-appears to help him prove that he can return to active duty.

The story is a stirring one. De Niro, Gooding, Charlize Theron (as Sunday’s beautiful, well-bred, but unhappy and alcoholic wife), Michael Rapaport (as Brashear’s one friend), and Holbrook all do their best, but the script does not give them enough to work with and the result is that movie feels simultaneously overstuffed and empty. Brashear candidly discusses his alcohol abuse problem in his book, but in the movie other than being an absent husband and father he is portrayed as just about perfect.

I couldn’t help thinking about the recent Spike Lee movie, “Bamboozled.” The need to make the fictional Brashear so idealized echoes Lee’s concerns about the minstrel show aspect of popular culture, making a real story less real to make it more entertaining. It would show more respect for both Brashear and the audience to let us see a character with more depth and complexity. It is especially disappointing that the story is so simplified that it should be suitable for kids, but it has strong profanity, earning it an R rating.

I could not help being very curious, too, about Jo Brashear. A black woman doctor in the early 60’s must have a story that is at least as interesting as this one. But we get no sense of what went into her life choices or how she handled her challenges. In real life, the marriage did not survive. But in the movie, she shows up at the crucial moment to provide love and support.

Parents should know that the R rating is primarily based on salty Navy language, including racist comments. Characters are in peril and one is badly injured. There are some sexual references. Characters have alcohol problems and one is shown in rehab.

Families who see this movie should talk about what motivates the characters. Brashear is asked why he wants to be a diver and he says, “Because they said I couldn’t have it.” Brashear asks Sunday why he is helping him after the amputation, and Sunday says, “To piss people off.” It is pretty clear why Mr. Pappy does not want Brashear to graduate — he’s a racist. But why does the later commanding officer want Brashear to retire so badly? Talk, too, about the meaning of “ASNF” on Brashear’s father’s radio, and Sunday’s response to it.

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy “An Officer and a Gentleman,” but there the R rating is well-deserved for explicit sexual situations, so parents should watch it before deciding whether it is appropriate for teens.

Rachel Griffiths (Oscar nominee for Hilary & Jackie) plays Pamela Drury, a harried 30-something magazine writer who wonders if she made a mistake, 13 years earlier, when she turned down a marriage proposal from Robert (David Roberts). She gets a chance to find out when she is hit by a car driven by none other than herself, the Pamela who married Robert and who is now living in the suburbs with husband, three children, and a dog.

The second Pamela disappears, leaving Pamela One to cope with assorted domestic crises. At first, in a daze, she lets the kids eat pizzas in front of the television, and she is so used to shopping for one that she forgets to take food for them at the grocery store. But she loves being with Robert, and begins to warm to family life. She teaches the baby to wipe his own bottom and the older boy to stop calling her “dumbhead.” She finds herself responding to her daughter’s first period the same way her mother responded to hers. She is disconcerted to find that the married Pamela is also a magazine writer, but of women’s magazine drivel like “ten ways to keep your marriage alive.”

Things are more complicated than she thought. As Pamela One, she met an attractive and sympathetic teacher named Ben (Sandy Winton), who tells her he once thought of being a journalist, and who dashes her hopes of romance when she sees him with a wife and children. As Pamela Two, she meets him in his other incarnation, now a single journalist who never got over the death of his first love.

Things get pretty much sorted out by the end. As in “Groundhog Day” or “It’s a Wonderful Life,” the main character gets a different perspective on his/her life, and gets a second chance to make it work. But this situation has some special poignance because it relates to the central conflict of many women’s lives — and many men’s, too — the balance between work and family. Pamela’s struggle, as Pam Two, to make her writing assignment into something meaningful about the modern woman, is a metaphor for her experience. So is her Pam Two nightie, with “Tic Toc Tic” on the front.

What Pam learns from experiencing her “what if” helps to turn her from someone who recites affirmations to herself every morning to someone who truly learns to value herself enough to connect to someone else.

The movie opens with young girls telling us their dreams — fashion designer, supermodel, wife and mother. Pam asks her own daughter (well, Pam Two’s daughter) about her dreams, but she is content for the moment to be open to everything.

Parents should know that the movie contains strong language, sexual references, including adultery, and sexual situations, including a comic encounter with a diaphragm. Characters smoke and drink, including use of alcohol to soothe anxiety, loneliness, and fear. One character attempts suicide.

Families whose teenagers see this movie should talk about how we make decisions and handle the consequences, and how any meaningful achievement at home or work requires sacrifices in other areas. They may also want to discuss why the youngest child is the only one who can tell the difference between the two Pams — is he the only one who really looks at her? — and how couples handle the challenges of long-term relationships.

Families who enjoy this movie will also like Sliding Doors with Gwyneth Paltrow and Groundhog Day with Bill Murray.

Plot: Doris Walker (Maureen O’Hara), an executive at Macy’s, is responsible for the Thanksgiving Day Parade. When the Santa Claus she has hired for the parade shows up drunk, she quickly subsitutes Kris Kringle (Edmund Gwenn), who is an enormous success. She hires him to serve as the store’s in-house Santa. There he is an even bigger success. He tells customers to shop elsewhere when Macy’s doesn’t have what they want. The employees are aghast, but it turns out to be a public relations triumph, and Macy’s is known as “the store with a heart.”

Doris has a little girl named Susan (Natalie Wood). She has decided to raise Susan without any fantasies or illusions, to help her handle “reality.” Susan does not believe in Santa Claus. But Kris tells her that he really is Santa Claus, and when she sees him singing a song in Dutch to comfort a little girl who doesn’t speak English, she begins to believe him. He teaches her how to use her imagination, so that the other children will enjoy playing with her. He has the enthusiastic support of lawyer Fred Gailey (John Payne), who cares deeply for Doris and Susan.

But Kris’ insistence that he really is Santa Claus leads to a hearing on his mental competency. Kris is so unhappy that he does not even want to assist in his defense. Doris and Susan write to let them know they believe in him, and a postal clerk decides to send along with it all of the letters addressed to Santa Claus as well. Fred persuades the court that this is conclusive proof that the U.S. Government believes that Kris is Santa, and the judge rules in his favor. The next day is Christmas, and when Doris, Fred, and Susan all get what they asked for, it is clear that Kris made it possible.

Discussion: In a way, this is the opposite of “Inherit the Wind.” Both are courtroom dramas about how we decide what is true, based on faith or based on provable fact. They have opposite conclusions, however, and the great gift of the movies is that both seem right to us. (One similarity is that in both, the judges are warned that they must make a decision that will have favorable political consequences.)

Doris has been hurt, and thinks she can protect herself and Susan from further hurt by not letting herself believe in anything outside themselves any more. She finds out that both she and Susan have missed a lot, not just in imagination but in the ability to trust, and to allow themselves to get close to other people.

Questions for Kids:

· Why doesn’t Doris want Susan to use her imagination? Why do Kris and Fred think it is important?

· Why is it important that Kris told people to go to other stores to buy things they didn’t have at Macy’s?

· Why doesn’t Mr. Sawyer like Kris?

· Why did Fred have Mr. Mara’s son testify in the trial?

· Why doesn’t Kris try harder to win the case at first? What makes him change his mind?

Connections: Ignore the pallid 1973 (television) and 1994 (theatrical) remakes. The original is much, much better, and the 1994 version completely ruins the courtroom denouement. Gwenn won a well-deserved Oscar, as did the screenplay.

Summer has arrived. “Mission Impossible 2” is the essence of a summer movie: gorgeous stars, sensational stunts, nerve-wracking chases, steamy romance, some “gotcha” plot twists, and lots of explosions. And this time, the story makes sense!

The first one was a huge success, but most viewers thought that the real mission impossible was trying to understand the plot. This time, they make it simple so we can just sit back and enjoy.

Alfred Hitchock used the term “McGuffin” to stand for whatever it was that the hero and heroine were after — the stolen jewels, the secret formula, the Ark of the Covenant, or the map of the hidden treasure. He said it did not matter what it was. All you had to do was establish that it was important, and then get out of the way.

This time, the McGuffin is a secret formula – a monster virus somewhere between the Hong Kong flu and Ebola. And our hero, Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) has to retrieve it, even though it is really, really hard to get because it has been stolen by one of Hunt’s former colleagues who knows all his tricks. As Hunt’s boss (an unbilled Anthony Hopkins) says, “It’s not Mission Difficult; it’s Mission Impossible.”

As in one of Hitchcock’s best, “Notorious,” the hero has to persuade the heroine to get romantically involved with an ex-flame. Thandie Newton plays Nyah, a brave and beautiful jewel thief who just happens to be the bad guy’s former girlfriend and our hero’s current love interest, providing lots of tense moment and a couple of opportunities for Cruise to show some emotion between karate kicks.

Director John Woo makes the whirl of a flamenco dancer’s skirt, the flutter of birds taking off, and the smoke from an explosion mesmerizing to watch. His trademarks are all here — the hero sliding across the floor in slow motion, firing two guns at once, the balletic combat, the villain’s streak of sadism (just two words of warning: “cigar cutter”), and an engaging willingness to tweak, even spoof, his own conventions. The bad guy (“Ever After’s” Dougray Scott) explains that Hunt will “undoubtedly engage in some acrobatic insanity” to retrieve the virus, and even mocks Cruise’s inimitable grin.

My one quarrel with the movie is that it leaves out the best part of the original “Mission Impossible” concept, back in the days of the TV show, and that was teamwork. It was a lot of fun to see how the special expertise of each of the MI team members was going to come in handy. Ving Rhames returns as the world’s least geeky computer genius, but aside from a couple of great lines, impeccably delivered (“Punk put a hole in my Versace!”), he never gets a chance to show us what he can do. Hunt is more like loner James Bond than he is like MI’s Jim Phelps.

But that’s a small point. It is a terrific thrill ride of a movie, just the way to start the summer. Cruise just keeps getting better, and I can’t wait for MI3.

Parents should know that the movie has intense scenes of peril and a lot of violence and sexual situations (not graphic).

Families who see the movie should talk about the statement by the scientist that “every search for a hero must begin with something every hero needs – a villain.” A corporate CEO applies this in very literal terms of supply and demand. Older kids may want to talk about the controversy over biotechnology and the risks of scientific inquiry. Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy James Bond classics like “Goldfinger,” “Thunderball,” and “Goldeneye.”

Sandra Bullock the producer found a pretty good vehicle for Sandra Bullock the actress in this variation on the classic Hollywood “makeover movie.” As in predecessors from “Cinderella” to “My Fair Lady” to “Pretty Woman,” this is at its core the story of an ugly duckling who finds empowerment and a boyfriend after a few pointers on good grooming and accessorizing. But Bullock’s performance and a couple of new twists on the classic formula make it a pleasant and entertaining effort.

Bullock plays the ironically named “Grace,” an FBI agent who lives for her job. She gets in trouble for not following orders and is considered so expendable that she is the one sent to Starbucks for coffee. She is more at home subduing a suspect than having a conversation with an attractive man, and spends more time with her gun than she does with a hairbrush or make-up mirror. When the FBI needs an agent to go undercover as a contestant in a beauty pageant (sorry, I mean “scholarship pageant”), she is the only one who might be able to pass. So the Bureau hires Victor Melling (Michael Caine), a consultant, to oversee her transformation and her transition into the world of big hair and baton twirling.

There are few new jokes to be made about beauty pageants, but Bullock delivers the lines as though no one had ever said them before. The plot is so flimsy that it would disappear if I tried to explain it, but Bullock plays it as though it is really happening. She gets some fine support from Caine and from Candice Bergen and William Shatner as the pageant’s director and master of ceremonies, both far more three-dimensional than Benjamin Bratt as Grace’s FBI colleague/Prince Charming.

Parents should know that the movie has some strong language, a bulimia joke, some sexual references (“No wonder you’re still a virgin!”), including a lesbian contestant, and there are various shoot-outs and scenes of peril (no serious damage). Grace makes a joke about praying that some people might find insensitive.

Families who see this movie should talk about why “in place of friends and relationships, has grumpiness and a gun.” What does the incident from Grace’s childhood tell us about the way she turned out? Was she afraid to get close to anyone? Grace gets in trouble for not following orders in the beginning, and it turns out that she was wrong. But later on, she refuses to follow orders again, and urges her colleague to “throw out the rulebook.” What rules did she follow? How did she decide? What did she learn from the other girls? What did the villain hope to accomplish? How?

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy “Some Like it Hot” and “Smile.”