Jam (2006)

My title is a reference to Season 2, Episode 13 of the classic sitcom "Taxi" in which the mediocre aspiring actor Bobby Wheeler is describing his latest mediocre theater gig. Bobby says:"Stall. It's an experimental play about 12 people stuck in a stalled elevator. It raises an age-old question: which is the greater agony-- to be stuck in an elevator or to be watching a show about being stuck in an elevator?"While "Jam" isn't quite as apocalyptically awful as that, I couldn't help but associate with Bobby's underwhelmed audience while I was watching "Jam" an experimental film about 12 or so people stuck in a traffic jam.The premise, believe it or not, was interesting, and for a low budget production it was remarkably glossy in its cinematography and editing. Then where did it fail? There were just too many characters that I hated. And I'm not talking about hating the obvious villains like the snobby socialite on the day of her plastic wedding (she was actually one of my favorite characters); I'm talking about hating the characters whom we're evidently supposed to like.Therein lies the fatal flaw of this film. Its setup is so cartoonishly obvious, bad guy here, good guy there, that if we don't happen to agree with the allocated bad guys and good guys, the experience is annoying. I'll give you an example so you know what I'm talking about.A lesbian couple is having a baby in the middle of the traffic jam. The script spends 5 seconds establishing that they are the "good guys" by showing a snobby rich housewife snub them in their time of need. So the lesbian couple proceed to an RV and demand entry because the pregnant one needs to lie down. The occupants of the RV have a good reason for denying entry (I won't spoil it), but the lesbians are enraged and commence kicking in the door of the RV, and even after they are allowed in they treat the RV owners like dirt (and of course the RV owners are back woods hillbillies so we too are supposed to assume they are dirt).My point with this example is that the film draws HEAVILY on stereotypes, and I mean HEAVILY. Lesbians = good because they're persecuted by society. Hillbillies = bad because they are ignorant criminals. Rich people = bad because, well, they're rich. And so on.30 minutes into the film I found myself so aggravated that I had to take a break and go watch Fox News so I could get more of a fair & unbiased picture. Ha.Note to all filmmakers: stereotypes are funny within the context of thick satire. For example in "Edward Scissorhands", the syrupy thick satire of a candy colored surburbia was hilarious because the entire town became the antagonist to Edward, the deer-in-the- headlights protagonist. Or in possibly the greatest satire ever, "Catch-22", the U.S. Air Force was mercilessly skewered as a tangle of beauraucracy where generals acted more like Wall Street CEOs than military men. Very effective and funny. But the use of stereotypes fall flat when they are thrown in just because the filmmakers are too lazy to have proper character development. That seemed to be the case here.I hated almost every character, especially the ones I was obviously supposed to like. For that reason, "Jam" never got out of first gear.

Writer/Director Craig Serling takes a break from "Survivor" and "The Amazing Race" to bring us this interesting slice of life that won him an Independent Spirit Ward, and deservedly so.While it may seem jumbles, and go back and forth, it cannot be helped given the nature of the story. After all, when you have a dozen or so people trapped on a highway waiting for help, you just have to go back and forth with their stories.And, there were some really good stories. Lilac (Gina Torres) and Rose (Mariah O'Brien) are having a baby. It will not wait, and they commandeer an RV stolen by Curt (Christopher Amitrano) and Jerry (David DeLuise) to have the baby. This was the best part of the film, as the two criminals deal with two lesbians that will not be bullied.There were several other interesting stories as three women are on the way to a wedding, a father, who is dying of cancer is trying to reunite with his son, a man is trying to get his wife to have a baby, and another father is off with his children trying to tell them he is moving. The interactions among this cast are touching and funny and thoughtful.Well worth the time.

Surprising interactions, frayed nerves, and raw emotions keep this movie fresh and easy to watch. I have to admit I showed up for Jeffrey Dean Morgan, but left loving the entire cast, especially the playful sweetness of Tess Harper and hilarious bluntness of Amanda Foreman.I felt the heat of the day, the desperation of isolation, the frustration of marital nitpicking, the raw burn of a skinned knee, the urge to chain-smoke, and the embarrassment of potential lust gone awry. I wanted to pat some characters on the back and slap others upside the head.Craig Serling created a movie with an aftertaste of friendship: you want to know what happens to these characters after the movie ends. I'd like to view this movie several more times.Thank you, Mr. Serling, for a sweet, easy to follow, emotional film.

A competent all around cast with actress Gina Torres delivering a sobering performance as a believable protective father. She seems like one to watch. William Forsythe mellows, perhaps over compensating to reconnect to his abandoned son. Jeffery Morgon examines,trying to make sense of it all while the wind stirred briskly by this traffic Jam of people blows on his weathered weary face. A new subject is inferred upon here regarding internet dating and gas guzzlers! You know that's coming. Tess Harper plays a sweet grandma type and is a joy to see keeping Jeffs'kids calm and occupied while everyone tries to figure when this unplanned family reunion might end. Jonathan Silverman plays a yuppie whose power-base seems to erode by the minute. Painfully funny! Happiness sometimes takes commitment! Good Job Mr. SerlingBob Saldana /actor