Leaves of Grass (2010), directed by Tim Blake Nelson

There was a time when “college dropout” was a pejorative term, but no more. Think Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. But as a teenager in the 50s, conventional wisdom was that getting a college degree was a prerequisite for success in life. Now many years later, I have a different perspective. While there is much to say about the positives of college, there are also negatives. I understand that it is a potentially corrupting environment, that it is filled with its own intellectual biases, and that the possession of a college degree does not guarantee success in life.

All this floated through my mind as I watched Leaves of Grass, the story of two twin brothers, one a Classics professor at Brown University, the other the grower of high grade marijuana in an elaborate and sophisticated hydroponics warehouse. Two bright children, same parents, yet radically different approaches to life. Consider Jacob and Esau in broad brushstrokes.

In the opening scene, Bill Kincaid is lecturing about the perfect world of the Greek philosophers, but he concludes by noting that, in spite of their desire for perfection, they and we still live in an imperfect world. All the brains in the world do not necessarily create a happy or moral universe. The Talmud echoes this when it states that the good deed is superior to the study of holy text. Good actions supersede intellectual accomplishments.

The plot thickens when Brady Kincaid tricks his twin brother into returning to their hometown. His motive: to use him as his double to create an airtight alibi for his own nefarious plans. Complications ensue, and the unpredictability of life asserts itself in a series of surprising, improbable, and violent  events, which on a deeper level reflect the dissonance between the academic world of theory and the real world in which we live.

To underscore this tension between theory and reality, Brady describes his view of God to his friend Bolger. He explains that man and God operate on two parallel lines, always following one another but never intersecting. In the end, man’s quest for God is neither linear nor necessarily satisfying.

This conflict is highlighted when Bill meets Janet, a poet and high school English teacher. Enamored with her, he shares his approach to life, which is grounded in the academic virtues of study, order, and reason. She confides to Bill that she entertained the possibility of teaching college students but found them too close-minded, just the opposite of what our own conventional wisdom would say, and contrary to Bill’s perception of college students. For Bill, this is a cathartic insight as he tries to navigate both his and Brady’s world.

These philosophical understandings are mirrored in the Ethics of the Fathers, a revered piece of Jewish wisdom literature, which says that it is not in the power of man to understand the inscrutable universe, to explain, for example, the peace of the wicked or the suffering of the righteous. Finite man cannot comprehend the infinite God. All he can do is to follow the parallel line of God, as it were, and do one’s best in an imperfect universe.

This philosophical reconciliation with man’s imperfection is signaled by the closing image of Bill and Janet, relaxing on beach chairs and holding hands in the rain. Rain which frightened him as a child now is both calming and restorative. Bill now experientially knows that life does not always provide answers, and that our human task is to persevere in the face of ambiguity.

Purchase this movie from Amazon.com.

First Blood (1982), directed by Ted Kotcheff

As a senior at Yeshiva University in the 60s, I solicited ads for the annual yearbook. Since I had recently purchased a Volkswagen, I asked the dealership for an ad, and they readily agreed. I sent in the ad with the check, and a few days later received a letter from the yearbook editor informing me that he had to return the check and could not include the ad. Why? Because there were many Holocaust survivors who would be upset that Yeshiva University would run an advertisement for a German company.

The incident was eye-opening. I simply was getting an ad, but in the eyes of others who had suffered at the hands of the Germans, my innocent act was perceived as ignorant and insensitive. I quickly became aware that there was a vast gap between my perception of Germany and others who had been victims of German cruelty. Someone who has suffered and endured unspeakable horrors responds differently than someone who has not.  The tourist sees tragedy one way, the resident another. For the resident, it is real, not theoretical.

Those different perceptions inform First Blood, the movie that introduced John Rambo to film audiences. His story begins after the Vietnam War as he journeys to the American Northwest in search of an Army buddy. His unscrubbed appearance makes him look like a drifter and he is arrested by the local sheriff as a vagrant, who judges only by appearances. The long-term effects of the Vietnam War are not on the sheriff’s radar screen. To him, it is ancient history. But to Rambo, it is not.  At the jail he is harassed and brutalized. The sight of a razor about to shave him while he is being restrained evokes a memory of his torture at the hands of the North Vietnamese. He responds by bolting from his captors and escaping to the mountains on a stolen motorcycle. Only later does the sheriff learn that Rambo is a former Green Beret, an elite Special Forces soldier, who was awarded the Medal of Honor.

What makes First Blood special is its portrayal of the aftermath of war, the emotional scars that remain on a person after the battles are over. In a touching scene in which Rambo shares his pain with his former commander, he agonizingly laments about the dissonance between now and then: “Back there I could fly a gunship, I could drive a tank, I was in charge of million dollar equipment, back here I can’t even hold a job parking cars!” He cries over the loss of a close friend who was blown up by shoe-shine box that was wired with explosives: “The box blew his body all over the place. There were pieces of him all over me. I couldn’t find his legs.” These experiences remain with Rambo long after the guns have been silenced. The memories are part of his DNA for the rest of his life.

Three lessons clearly emerge from Rambo’s trial by ordeal. First, the experience of war is a game-changer in the psyche of man. It leaves wounds that are not always visible, but nonetheless inform a person’s behavior and thinking. We need to understand this when relating to people who have endured such adversity. Second, never judge a person by appearances alone, the way the sheriff judged Rambo. Jewish wisdom literature reminds us: do not look at the bottle but at what is inside of it. Third, judge every man favorably, say our Sages. When we assume the best about others, our own lives will be enriched.

Purchase this movie from Amazon.com.

Contagion (2011), directed by Steven Soderbergh

Do you remember where you were on 9/11? I do. I was principal of Columbus Torah Academy and was called to the office to see what was unfolding on TV. It was a horrific sight, hitherto unimaginable. I called an assembly and spoke to the students about evil in the world and about how good ultimately triumphs because God is in charge. Therefore, know that in spite of the current tragedy, we will endure and live to a better day. In the interim, we need to pray for the victims and do whatever we can to help our fellow citizens in distress.

It is this kind of cataclysmic event that Contagion describes, but in this case it is an unknown, deadly virus that kills millions of people. Contagion is not a horror movie. Rather, it works as a thriller, which imagines in a very logical way the consequences of a virus infection that has no known cure. Although the movie is populated with A-list actors, the main character is the disease. All the players unassumingly portray human responses to crisis. Many respond with fear. Some, such as an unscrupulous blogger, see the crisis as a way to make money by suggesting that the government is conspiring with the drug companies to make a financial killing. Fortunately, some respond with altruism.

Examples of altruism punctuate Contagion. A dying woman offers her blanket to another patient shivering from cold. A doctor injects herself with a trial vaccine to test whether it will be effective with humans. Another doctor gives the preventive vaccine to a neighbor’s son rather than use it himself. A scientist who abandons protocol to find a stable version of the virus does not try to make a profit by selling his research to a drug company. Instead, he shares his findings with the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, the agency best equipped to develop a vaccine to halt the spread of the virus. These vignettes recall the Jewish value of showing kindness to others, and not using crisis for personal advantage.

The Ethics of the Fathers teaches that the world depends on acts of loving kindness. From where is this derived? From God Himself, who clothed Adam and Eve even after they sinned, and who buried Moses at the end of his life.  Moreover, the patriarch Abraham personifies kindness. Even when he is in pain suffering the aftereffects of circumcision, he greets total strangers and welcomes them into his tent. Furthermore, when he seeks a wife for his son Isaac, the litmus test is whether the prospective bride will manifest compassion for weary animals in addition to his emissaries. Rebecca seals her destiny when she brings water for the camels as well as for the tired travelers.

It is comforting to feel that at moments of crisis, good people will step forward to help. Not everyone will be motivated by selfishness. There is a touching coda at the end of Contagion that indicates a hopeful future. Mitch, husband of Beth, the first victim, is privately perusing photos of his wife in his upstairs bedroom. He breaks down in tears, and then hears his teenage daughter calling him. He comes down, sees her dancing with her boyfriend as they prepare to go to Prom Night. He smiles as he realizes that his daughter is alive with a bright future ahead.

This also is a Jewish sensibility: to go beyond mourning and to see continuity. The traditional Jewish mourning food is the egg, totally round and without an opening, without a mouth. Our Sages tell us that this is a metaphor for mourning, a time when we cannot articulate our pain. But the egg is round, and this symbolizes the reality that life moves on beyond tragedy, and that a cycle of renewal can begin even after great loss. This is a valuable life lesson for all of us.

Purchase this movie from Amazon.com.

Boiler Room, (2000), directed by Ben Younger

My wife and I have bought a few homes in our lives. Each purchase probably represented the largest purchase we made until that point in our lives, and the down payment represented much of our savings. However, we, like many others, bit the bullet and made the purchase on the assumption that our income would eventually enable us to pay the mortgage. Sometimes we made money on the sale of the house and sometimes we lost money. Over the years we have become philosophical about ups and downs in money matters. We cannot control the housing market and, in the final analysis, God is in charge and whatever happens is for the best even if we don’t always see it in the short term. Nonetheless, the purchase of a home can be a stressful moment in the life of a family.

Nowhere is this more evident than in an excruciatingly painful scene in Boiler Room, a coarse, profanity-laden look at the world of young stock brokers who cold call customers with promises of big returns on their investments. One call goes to Harry Reynard, a family man who gives $50,000, his entire savings for a house, to Seth Davis in return for what is essentially worthless stock. We watch in agony as Seth lies to his client in order to make the sale. Harry buys the dream and loses his money and family in the process. It is a gut-wrenching scene to watch.

Boiler Room, based on real-life accounts of stockbrokers, is very disturbing. Young men are schooled in how to lie to clients in order to make big profits for themselves. There is a culture of conspicuous consumption at the firm. Successful brokers buy expensive cars, the latest techie gadgets, and have neither heart nor soul. They make a pact with the devil and revel in it at the unsuspecting client’s expense.

Seth Davis, the narrator of the story, is the son of a judge, and even though his relationship with his father is turbulent, he understands the ethical problems with his new job. He is torn between financial success and moral responsibility. Ultimately, it is the relationship with his father that moves him to try to make things financially right for Harry, his desperate client, and ethically right for himself.

Boiler Room reminds us of the perils of living a life where the only goal is the acquisition of more and more things. People become objects to exploit, not good friends and neighbors. The Ethics of the Fathers tell us that the truly rich man is the one who is content with his lot, who does not spend night and day trying to amass wealth. Wealth in Judaism is a means, not the end goal. Wealth enables us to help the needy, to welcome guests to our table, and to support community institutions and worthy causes of all types. Wealth is to be shared, not hoarded. The Book of Ecclesiastes states: “the lover of money will never be satisfied with money; a lover of abundance has no wheat.” The acquisition of worldly goods is ultimately futile. Only good deeds accompany a man to the grave.

There is another lesson in Boiler Room. Harry purchases the worthless stock without consulting his wife. Our Sages tell us, in reference to a quandary of Abraham, that he should consult with his wife Sarah. The spouse who loves you and has your best interest at heart should not be ignored when making major decisions in life. It is important to “listen to her voice” as the Sages say. A pow-wow with a loved one reinforces peace in the home.

Purchase this movie from Amazon.com.

Alien (1979), directed by Ridley Scott

In my career as a school principal, parents from time to time would ask me to break a school rule when their child was in trouble. In one case, the parent told me that enforcement of a particular rule would turn off his child from Judaism and I would be responsible for his son’s lack of faith. Such a comment weighed heavily on me. Moreover, in my early years, I wanted to be liked, and enforcement of the rule would make me unpopular with a few parents. Fortunately, a mentor of mine reminded me that my goal in my professional life should not be to be liked but to be respected. He impressed upon me that whenever I make an exception for one student, I have to make it for all students. There is no such thing as a private deal when it comes to maintaining the integrity of a school rule. Everybody has to follow the same Bible. Whatever expedient decision you make in the short term may bring you some satisfaction and peace momentarily, but it will eventually bring you havoc. It is just a matter of time.

The consequences of a decision to break a long-standing policy for a short-term benefit, however noble it may seem at the time, is the catalyst for all the mayhem that erupts in  Alien, a tense and disturbing science fiction thriller, which spells out in grim detail the horrific results of breaking one rule to ameliorate an immediate problem.

The Nostromo, a commercial towing vehicle traveling to Earth with over a million tons of mineral ore, intercepts a signal which the crew perceives as an SOS. When Kane, a crew member, leaves the ship with the captain and investigates the origin of the signal, he is attacked by a foreign life form which attaches itself to his head. Some crew members want to bring Kane back to the ship to see if they can save him; but Ripley, the commanding officer when the captain is not on the ship, refuses to bring Kane back on board, citing quarantine protocol and the real danger of putting more lives at risk. In spite of her ruling, one of the ship’s officers disobeys Ripley and opens the door of the spaceship allowing the contaminated Kane to enter. This marks the beginning of the end of most of the crew who do not realize that they have allowed the alien to enter the ship as well.

The Ethics of the Fathers tells us that the wise man is he who foresees the consequences of his actions, who does not put others at risk to satisfy his own immediate needs. One rash act can leave in its wake a plethora of tragedy.

It is a Jewish sensibility to do whatever we can to prevent danger and harm to others, to minimize risk to our friends and neighbors. The Torah lists numerous laws that are designed to protect people. When we build a house, we are enjoined to erect a guardrail on a roof. Furthermore, we are enjoined not to possess an unstable ladder, not to own a vicious dog, or do anything that may create a hazard for anyone who enters our home. Moreover, contemporary authorities in Jewish law argue that driving recklessly is a violation of Jewish law in that it puts the lives of others as risk. In truth, when a Jew drives with courtesy, it is a way of sanctifying the name of God.

Although Alien deals with a foreign universe, it reminds us of the importance of following the rules and not placing others at risk. We cannot predict the outcomes of our actions. Therefore, it becomes incumbent upon us to think wisely before making an exception to the rules.

Purchase this movie from Amazon.com.

The Killing Fields (1984), directed by Roland Joffe

My wife and I have been blessed with many new friends since coming on aliyah to Israel. But there is nothing like an old friend who has known you for many years. For example, my friend Harvey, who I have known since I was 12, gave me two important pieces of advice or insights that have proven to be invaluable to me. When I was struggling in my Torah learning in 1966, he suggested I come to Israel where I could develop my learning skills and be free of secular distractions. Later on when I was about to enter the rabbinate, he told me that the most important thing for me to do is to love people. If people sensed that I truly cared for them, I would be successful.

The nature of friendship is at the core of The Killing Fields, which takes place in Cambodia in the mid-70s. The country is in the midst of a civil war between the Cambodian national army and the communist Khymer Rouge as a result of the Vietnam War spilling over into its borders. The two central characters Sydney Schanberg, a New York Times reporter, and Dith Pran, a Cambodian interpreter, form a deep friendship as they document in stories and photos the tragic plight of the Cambodian people who are caught in the crossfire of a war on its periphery.

Because of the mounting instability in the country, Pran’s family is evacuated with other international diplomats, but Dith Pran stays with Schanberg in spite of the risk. Pran’s situation worsens when the Khymer Rouge demand that all Cambodian citizens in the French embassy be turned over. Forced to live under its totalitarian regime, he uses all of his resources to stay alive. Meanwhile, Sydney returns to New York and launches a campaign to find him. Years pass with no word from Dith Pram; but in 1979, he is located in a Red Cross facility in Thailand.  Sydney flies there to see him and immediately asks for his forgiveness for not encouraging him to leave safely when he had the chance. Dith Pram tells him that there is nothing to forgive. They embrace as John Lennon’s “Imagine” plays in the background and the Cambodian victims of war look on, mystified by the show of friendship between these two different men from different lands. The lyrics resonate as we watch Cambodian and American embrace: “You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one. I hope someday, you’ll join us. The world will live as one.” Friendship means thinking of the other as part of you. It is the one of us.

I once enlisted the aid of a rabbi older and wiser than I to come to Atlanta to strengthen the Torah program of the Yeshiva of which I was principal. Surprisingly, the rabbi said he would come, but he told me something that sticks in my mind to this day. He was sensitive to the political undercurrents of my situation, and he said he would come only if I was sure it would be helpful to me. If at any moment I had second thoughts about my invitation, it was okay for me to change my mind. There was no self-interest on his part. This is what true friendship is all about.

The Ethics of the Fathers underscores this when it praises the love between the Biblical characters Jonathan and David. They loved one another and wanted to do what was in the other’s best interest. This is the kind of friendship we should all strive for, friendships where we ask ourselves what can I do for my friend, not what’s in it for me.

Purchase this movie from Amazon.com.

Moneyball (2011), directed by Bennett Miller

I like teachers and have great respect for them. This is why in my early years as a school principal, I always found it difficult to fire a teacher even when it was clear to me that it had to be done. One particular case still haunts me. The teacher was a wonderful person, but was boring. After much observation, I knew I would have to terminate him but I was conflicted. He had a large family and my firing him would have great consequences for his family. I agonized and finally called a mentor for advice. He was quick and to the point. He said: “You are not an employment agency. You must do what is in the best interest of the students.” It was one of those whiplash moments. Everything became clear. Students come first, and that conversation guided much of my subsequent decision-making in my professional career.

I was reminded of that conversation as I watched Moneyball, a smart, insightful movie about the business side of baseball. Billy Beane, general manager of the Oakland Athletics must release a player and he does it with intelligence and style. He knows that his goal is to win games, and he will do whatever is necessary to achieve his end. He never loses his focus. He calls the player in the office and with a smile informs him: “Jeremy, you’ve been traded to the Phillies. This is Ed Wade’s number. He’s a good guy, he’s the GM. He’s expecting your call. Buddy will help you with the plane flight. You’re a good ballplayer, Jeremy, and we wish you the best.” The parting is necessary, but it is humane and brief.

Beyond serving as a model of management, Billy Beane’s story also has other important life lessons. Billy determines that players are valued incorrectly and that even a team with limited financial resources can find undervalued players who can be melded into a winning team. His strategy: select players with the highest on base percentage. Don’t buy players; buy runs and you will win ballgames. The strategy is successful, setting a precedent for how players will be recruited in the future. The lesson: sometimes we have to shift our paradigms in order to be successful at solving problems.

I had to shift my paradigm when I first began teaching. At first, my primary concern was teaching the material. In a few years, I realized that to be successful, I needed to alter my perspective. The successful teacher focuses on students, not just information. That paradigm shift would make a dramatic difference in the way I taught and the way students learned. I was now teaching people, not facts, and the classroom dynamic changed.

Another life lesson: statistics alone cannot predict the future. Scouts saw Billy Beane as a first round pick and they offered him a huge contract with a major league team right out of high school. Billy then came to the proverbial fork in the road: should he go to Stamford on a full scholarship or sign with majors. He chose the latter, but never fulfilled the potential that scouts saw in him. Money and fame were the allure; but when he left professional baseball, he vowed never again to make a decision based upon money alone.

These lessons reflect Jewish sensibilities. The ability to see alternate points of view, to shift paradigms, is the essence of Talmudic learning. The great rabbis Hillel and Shammai looked at the same realities but possessed vastly different approaches to solving problems. Moreover, King Solomon reminds us at the end of his life that wealth does not bring happiness. The truly wise man is the one who is happy with what he has.

Purchase this movie from Amazon.com.

Proof of Life (2000), directed by Taylor Hackford

Over the years as a rabbi, I have done some marital counseling. One standard piece of advice I give to couples of all ages is never go to bed angry, never leave a problem hanging and allow it to fester overnight. The consequences can be far-reaching and potentially devastating. My wife and I do not agree on everything, and we probably never will. But we both understand that it is foolish not to resolve a divisive issue as soon as possible. We have learned that there are three very important phrases in any marriage: “I’m sorry, Forgive me, and I love you.”

Proof of Life is about a marriage under stress. On the surface, it is an action film about a kidnapping in a South American country, which introduced me to something that, thank God, I know little about; namely, how a hostage release is negotiated with a kidnapper. It is scary, but fascinating. Based on a true story that appeared in Vanity Fair magazine, it recounts the tense ordeal of Alice Bowman and her husband Peter, who is kidnapped by guerilla rebels and taken into the country’s mountains for a number of months.

What makes the kidnapping especially worrisome is the conversation that Alice and Peter had the night before. Peter’s company is in financial straits, and yet Peter wants to stay in the country. Alice, who suffered a miscarriage when they were stationed in Africa, is emotionally spent and wants to return to the States. Peter, angry at his lot in life, tells her to take a break and leave the country alone; he will stay here. It is an emotionally wrenching scene to watch as the fabric of a relationship between a loving couple, who were once devoted to one another, begins to unravel.

It is against this emotional background that the kidnapping takes place. What ups the ante is the fact that Peter’s company has no insurance coverage for kidnapping, placing his wife Alice in the unfortunate position of personally hiring a hostage negotiator to achieve her husband’s release, all the while knowing that Peter feels ambivalent about the marriage.  After a false start, she engages Terry Thorne, an expert in kidnapping and ransom cases, to help her.

The beginnings of rapprochement and reconciliation occur when Peter asks his captors if he can take a picture of his wife out of his wallet to bring with him on his trek into the wilderness. It is a photo that both comforts and inspires him throughout his ordeal. Alice, too, begins to sense that her husband still loves her when a fellow prisoner who has escaped tells her of Peter’s devotion to her, and how it enabled him to survive pain and humiliation.

Peace between husband and wife is the bedrock of a Jewish home. So precious is spousal harmony that the Bible speaks of a ritual in which God’s holy name is erased in order to promote marital harmony and save a marriage in peril. Moreover, the classic dictum of “loving your neighbor as yourself” refers specifically, says the Talmud, to the relationship between husband and wife who are not only lovers but the best of friends.

Proof of Life on one level refers to the proof that the hostage negotiator wants before transferring money to kidnappers. On another level, it refers to the deep love that asserts itself when marriages are being tested. Resolving disputes, daily expressing love in word and deed to one’s spouse, is an affirmation that, in spite of adversity, love will endure. Love itself is proof of life.

Purchase this movie from Amazon.com.

Good Will Hunting (1997), directed by Gus Van Sant

For a number of years as a synagogue rabbi, I officiated at funerals and gave thoughtful and comforting eulogies. But it wasn’t until my mother passed away that I really understood what loss meant. I had spoken to her on a Thursday night right after Passover in 1976; the next morning I received a call from my father who was crying, telling me at the same time that Mommy had died. I felt an emptiness within; and at the funeral service the following Sunday in Mt. Vernon, New York, I was speechless and could not sing her praises. I could only share with the officiating rabbi my strongest memories of my mother, and the rabbi in his eulogy gave voice to my thoughts.

After that seismic event in my life, my sensitivity towards mourners who had just suffered a loss was more heartfelt. Loss was not just a sermon topic; it was something that changed my perception of death, which made me more empathetic, and more understanding of what it means to be a loved one left behind.

There is a line in Good Will Hunting uttered by Will Hunting’s therapist, Sean, which expresses the difference between just learning or hearing about tragedy and experiencing it.  Sean tells Will, an arrogant, cocky, but brilliant, young man, that “You’re just a kid. You don’t have the faintest idea of what you are talking about.” Furthermore, he doesn’t know about art, about love, about war. All he possesses is book knowledge, not wisdom that emerges from the crucible of life experience. Sean has lost his beloved wife to cancer, and Will casually presumes to know everything about Sean because of a painting he saw in Sean’s office.  Sean responds to his facile remarks stridently: “You don’t know about real loss because it only occurs when you’ve loved someone more than yourself,” and clearly Will is self-absorbed. To sharpen his observation of Will, Sean, aware that Will is an orphan, declares honestly: “You think I know how hard your life has been because I read Oliver Twist?”

In the book of Exodus, we are told that Moses went out to see the suffering of his brethren. Until that time, he was isolated from them and did not comprehend their pain. Witnessing first-hand the beatings they were receiving at the hands of the Egyptians gave him a different perspective. He identified with them and so began his odyssey of redemption. Seeing things from the balcony may be academically satisfying, but it is only through the shared life experience that one learns to understand human tragedy and become more empathetic.

There is another challenge Will has to overcome:  low self-esteem. This is nurtured by a cohort of friends who spend all their free time drinking beer, carousing, and engaging in the language of the gutter. Will is unable to see beyond his lowly origins. Only through his friendship with Sean, who does not abandon him in a time of crisis, does Will begin to see his future differently.

The Ethics of the Fathers states that sitting among the gatherings of the ignorant remove a man from the world. Association with the philistines of society makes you one of them. It is only when you separate from them that you can begin to create your own independent identity and soar.

Good Will Hunting implicitly suggests to us that a life of meaning is based on shared human relationships. It also reminds us that sometimes we have to make a clean break with the past to have a bright future.

Purchase this movie from Amazon.com.

The River Wild (1994), directed by Curtis Hanson

Rafting brings to mind the rafting trip that Jim and Huck Finn take on the Mississippi. It is a metaphor for a journey from youth to adulthood, and defines the travelers as they experience adventures along the way. Another memory is a rafting trip I took many years ago with Jan Siegelman, an Atlanta friend and veteran whitewater guide, and my two oldest boys, Dani and Elie, on the Ocoee River in Tennessee.

We encountered serious rapids. My boys handled it well but I fell off the raft three times, once stuck underwater for a short while until Jan freed me from being trapped between the raft and a rock. For me, river rafting was no longer just an exciting wilderness adventure. It represented risk-taking and danger. The River Wild, a thriller about a family rafting trip, viscerally depicts the inherent danger in navigating the rapids, and also describes how a moment of crisis can serve as a defining moment in the life of a family.

Gail and Tom have a troubled marriage. Tom, obsessed with work, is emotionally distant from his wife and young son, Roarke. Gail, whose father is deaf and uses sign language to communicate, looks to her mother for guidance. When Gail tells her that things are hard, her mother responds: “You don’t know what hard is. That’s because you give yourself an out.” Her mother wisely counsels her that marriage is by nature a challenging relationship, requiring consistent effort to endure.

Gail percolates with this wisdom as she begins her rafting trip with her son and husband who, surprisingly, joins them at the last minute. The trip takes a sinister turn when they are joined by Wade and Terry, armed fugitives who pretend to be carefree vacationers on a rafting excursion. Gail and Tom try to find an exit strategy, but it doesn’t work. They are trapped by men who threaten harm to their family if she does not cooperate. Their goal is to compel Gail, an experienced whitewater guide, to take them to safety downriver, where they can escape the law. The problem, however, is that they will have to go through the gauntlet, a section of the river where a rafter has recently died and another was paralyzed. It is a formidable and dangerous task.

The River Wild says a lot about the ties that bind a family. It demonstrates that spouses need to spend time with each other and talk to one another. When there is no dialogue, relationships are hard to maintain. Men are from Mars and women are from Venus is not just a clever maxim. It is a reminder to married couples to spend time trying to understand each other, to appreciate the everyday interactions and kindnesses that form the bedrock of a strong marriage. Moreover, the story reminds parents to be present for their children, to engage them, and celebrate their special moments with them.

Beyond these lessons about family, the film reminds us of the Torah requirement to preserve life and to avoid danger. The Talmud, in fact, states that the rules protecting us from danger are more important than ritual prohibitions. Without life, there is no opportunity to do God’s will. There are even laws that prohibit walking near a crumbling wall or an unstable bridge.

In The River Wild, crisis brings the family together, and forever after defines them as a loving unit, committed to one another for the long haul. Roarke sums it up when he responds to the policeman who asks him what happened. Roarke, smiling broadly, says: “My mom got us down the river and my dad saved our lives.”

Purchase this movie from Amazon.com.