AMERICANS WITH NO ADDRESS: THE DOCUMENTARY is a well thought out, superbly executed, inspirational documentary that explores the homeless crisis in the United States. Despite increases in homelessness in recent years, government funding to reduce the number has increased by three times in the last 12 years. Clearly, government has failed to solve the problem. The filmmakers interviews dozens of people, including experts, government officials, homeless people, doctors, and charity workers. Many argue that government initiatives make the problem worse. The movie shows how nonprofit groups have banded together to fill the gap.

More than a million homeless people in the United States lack basic needs, self-worth, medical care, and a sense of community. Each person has inherent dignity, because every person is created in God’s image. The government may have failed, but private citizens have rallied to answer the call. AMERICANS WITH NO ADDRESS: THE DOCUMENTARY stands apart because it lays out the need, while also highlighting some solutions. However, the movie has plenty of disturbing content about crime, poverty, substance abuse, and mental illness. Strong caution is advised for pre-teenage children.

(CCC, BBB, V, AA, DD, M):

Dominant Worldview and Other Worldview Content/Elements:

Strong Christian, biblical worldview in documentary about the issue of homelessness, with dozens of interviews of experts, government officials, homeless people, doctors, and charity workers, including many Christians;

Foul Language:

No foul language;

Violence:

Some discussion about violent crime, plus a brief scene from an upcoming movie where a man holds a knife against an elderly homeless man;

Sex:

No sex;

Nudity:

No nudity;

Alcohol Use:

Discussion about alcohol abuse and alcoholism, and the need for rehab and recovery;

Smoking and/or Drug Use and Abuse:

Discussion about drug abuse, overdoses and the drug epidemic and the need for better rehab and recovery programs; and,

Miscellaneous Immorality:

Some discussion about mental illness and its effect on homelessness.

AMERICANS WITH NO ADDRESS: THE DOCUMENTARY is a very well thought out, superbly executed, and inspirational documentary that explores the current homeless crisis in the United States. All political parties agree that the government has failed to solve the problem, and some argue that the government has made the problem much worse. This masterfully done documentary includes content with adult topics, such as drug use, violence, broken families, and crime. So, MOVIEGUIDE® advises extreme caution for children.

The movie explores the homelessness epidemic in 20 cities across 18 states in the United States. It interviews dozens of people about the subject, including experts, government officials, policemen, homeless people, doctors, and people working in nonprofit groups giving food and shelter to the homeless.

According to the United States government, homelessness rose 12% in 2023, to 653,104 people. Also, it’s been estimated that one third of the population knows a family member or a friend who became homeless in the last year. Homeless encampments that were once only associated with “Skid Row” in big cities are now seen everywhere. Yet, government spending on homelessness has tripled in the last 12 years.

The documentary says the homeless problem isn’t new. In fact, it’s been brewing since Congress passed the IMD Exclusion Act of 1965, which left the problem of homelessness to the states. This essentially means that the federal government will not offer assistance to any homeless persons between the ages of 21 and 65.

In 2013, the federal government began providing HUD housing to homeless persons without requiring treatment for substance addiction recovery and mental health illnesses. Experts agree this is a system set up to fail. To make matters worse, in the last several years, state governments have stepped in to provide clean needles, straws and other paraphernalia to assist homeless people in their substance abuse issues. Hospitals are only allowed to provide 15 beds to mental health patients, no matter the size of the hospital. Many people in need are turned away or end up in prison. The rate of incarceration has exploded in recent years. Moreover, the closure of most mental hospitals in the 1970s and 1980s only made the problem worse.

The system clearly is broken, the movie argues. In fact, the movie shows that many of the measures taken have been detrimental to those in need and is costing taxpayers even more money. For example, the city of San Francisco spends $257,000 per day to clean up homeless encampments. This doesn’t solve the problem, because the homeless population simply moves to another nearby location.

More than physical needs, scores of people are bereft of love, self-worth and a sense of community. Each person has inherent dignity as every person is created in the image and likeness of God.

The movie quotes Mother Teresa, a champion for the homeless, who once said, “We think that sometimes poverty is only being hungry, naked and homeless. The poverty of being unwanted, unloved and uncared for is the greatest poverty.” Then, movie also quotes the co-founder of the Salvation Army in 1865, Catherine Booth, who said, “You are not here in the world for yourself. You have been sent here for others. The world is waiting for you.” Amy Grant personalizes it best in the movie when she ponders, “What if I were that person? Because life can turn on a dime.”

The government has failed us, but private citizens have rallied to answer this call to care for our brothers and sisters who are “outcasts, lost and forgotten.” Some of these organizations across the country include Step Up, Haven For Hope, Community First! Village, the Salvation Army, St. Vincent De Paul, Harbor of Light, Helping Hands, and The Helping Up Mission, a collaboration between Johns Hopkins University and The Helping Up Mission. These programs are spread out across the country. All of them are successful, to one extent or another, the movie notes.

In the end, the movie’s best, most enlightening parts are the stories of the people involved in this issue, whether it be the homeless people themselves or the Christians and charity workers helping them.

Review: ‘Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story’ is a heartfelt documentary that dives deep into the life of the beloved actor who portrayed Superman on-screen and embodied resilience off-screen. Directors Ian Bonhôte and Peter Ettedgui craft a moving narrative that interweaves Reeve’s rise to stardom with his devastating horseback riding accident in 1995, which left him paralysed. The film balances his extraordinary public life and the intimate, personal moments shared by his children, wife Dana Reeve, and close friends.

The documentary’s emotional depth is driven by interviews with Reeve’s family, including his children, Alexandra, Matthew, and Will Reeve, who reflect on the day of the accident and the profound changes it brought to their lives. Gae Exton, Reeve’s former partner and mother of two of his children, also provides rare insights into their relationship. However, Dana Reeve, his wife and steadfast caregiver, emerges as a quiet hero. Her unwavering support and compassion offer a touching reminder of the true power of love and resilience. The inclusion of home videos adds an intimate layer, showcasing the strength of their family bond even through adversity.

While Reeve’s accident was a defining moment, the film doesn’t dwell solely on the tragedy. Instead, it celebrates his journey from being a Hollywood superstar to becoming a fierce advocate for spinal cord injury research and disability rights. The use of Reeve’s own voice, narrating from his audiobook Still Me, adds a deeply personal touch, reminding viewers of his indomitable spirit.

Visually, the film blends archival footage, rare behind-the-scenes clips of Reeve’s Superman, and innovative CGI to symbolise his paralysis through the metaphor of Kryptonite—a clever nod to his most famous role. The animated sequences depicting Reeve as a superhero confronting his own vulnerabilities are a creative highlight.

The documentary also features candid interviews with Reeve’s close friends, including Glenn Close, Susan Sarandon, and Jeff Daniels. Their stories—especially those about his friendships with fellow Juilliard classmates like Robin Williams—reveal a multifaceted Reeve, one who was both humble and deeply ambitious.

Despite the sombre tone, Super/Man is ultimately an uplifting film. It reinforces the idea that heroism isn’t about superhuman powers but about perseverance, empathy, and overcoming life’s greatest challenges. Christopher and Dana Reeve embodied these values, and their legacy continues through their children and the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation.

While the documentary may leave some viewers wanting to know more about Reeve’s pre-accident career or more details about his family relationships, it succeeds in portraying the essence of his character. This is a touching tribute to a man who, despite unimaginable hardship, found the strength to inspire others.

New York — 

Reports of the demise of the straight play on Broadway are greatly exaggerated, at least by the evidence of the fall theater season that has come front-loaded with high-profile drama.

Sam Mendes’ searing production of Jez Butterworth’s “The Hills of California” at the Broadhurst Theatre, hands down the best play I saw in a spree of late September playgoing, has become the essential ticket for discerning New York theatergoers this fall. Ayad Akhtar’s “McNeal,” starring Robert Downey Jr. in his Broadway debut at Lincoln Center Theater’s Vivian Beaumont, didn’t live up to expectations. But who could pass up the opportunity to hear from one of our sharpest playwrights on a subject that has already begun challenging our sense of reality, AI.

I was scheduled to see Jen Silverman’s “The Roommate,” starring that most enticing Broadway odd couple, Patti LuPone and Mia Farrow, but illness in the cast scuttled my plans. Still, I managed to pack in, on a four-day itinerary, David Henry Hwang’s “Yellow Face” (starring Daniel Dae Kim) at Roundabout Theatre Company’s Todd Haimes Theatre, Max Wolf Friedlich’s “Job” at the Hayes Theater, and in my one off-Broadway run, James Ijames’ “Good Bones” at the Public Theater. (I also caught the jaunty Broadway revival of “Once Upon a Mattress,” about which I’ll have more to say when the production, starring Sutton Foster, opens at the Ahmanson Theatre in December.)

It was a pleasure to re-encounter “Yellow Face,” which had its world premiere at the Mark Taper Forum in 2007. Leigh Silverman, who directed that production, has returned to helm the play’s Broadway premiere, which runs through Nov. 24. This clever comedy, a self-referential work in which Hwang harks back to a theatrical controversy he found himself embroiled in after speaking out against the casting of Jonathan Pryce as a Eurasian character in the 1991 Broadway premiere of “Miss Saigon.” The uproar that followed was more than the Tony-winning playwright had bargained for. But he decided to tackle some of the questions about racial identity that emerged from the casting brouhaha in his play “Face Value,” a spectacular flop that closed in previews on Broadway in 1993.

In “Yellow Face,” Hwang reassembles these related events in a comedy that introduces a fictional device to what is otherwise a straightforward recounting. DHH, the playwright’s surrogate, is now played by Kim, a magnetic screen star (“Lost,” “Hawaii Five-0”) with Hollywood sex appeal to spare. Any male writer would be flattered to be played by Kim, but the casting is delectably ironic in a play that recalls a time when producers would throw up their hands when asked to find an Asian American leading man to anchor a film or Broadway show.

Silverman’s production, in other respects, doesn’t quite seem as comfortable blown up on a big Broadway stage. Some of the comic acting comes off as cartoonish, but the writing is so smart, fluid and free that it hardly matters. And the scenes between Kim’s DHH and Ryan Eggold’s Marcus, the purely invented figure in the play, revel in the hilarious hypocrisies that Hwang impishly sends up.

The conceit of the play is that DHH has accidentally cast a non-Asian performer as the lead in “Face Value,” and Marcus, grateful for this jump-start to his acting career, takes on a communal advocacy role that only makes the situation more farcically dangerous. DHH is afraid of losing face over his role in making Marcus an Asian American star. He came up with the bright idea of claiming that the actor was of Siberian Jewish heritage when learning the truth of his identity. As the accidental spokesperson for politically conscious casting, he’d rather not be hoisted on his own petard.

Hwang’s self-irony is part of the comic wonder of “Yellow Face.” But what is especially refreshing about the play is the way it approaches profoundly serious matters of identity politics with a light touch. Hwang is too agile a playwright to be doctrinaire. He recognizes what must be redressed, but he refuses to lose his sense of humor in the struggle or exempt himself from the human comedy that may be the only reliable equal opportunity employer.

“Job,” which had a much talked-about run last fall off-Broadway at the Soho Playhouse, moved to Broadway’s Helen Hayes Theater this summer and might be the sleeper of the season. A two-character work, the play (which is scheduled to close on Oct. 27) stars veteran Peter Friedman and Broadway newcomer Sydney Lemmon, a Yale School of Drama graduate who happens to be the granddaughter of Jack Lemmon.

Why has Friedlich’s play become so popular with New York theatergoers? The situation of a young woman showing up at a psychotherapist’s office with a gun sets up a self-contained dramatic situation that audiences seem to relish. Lemmon plays Jane, a content moderator at a tech company, who had a breakdown at the office after being exposed to the most horrific videos and now needs a psychologist to sign off on her return to work. Friedman takes on the role of Loyd, a San Francisco shrink who, in a period of time shorter than two sessions, must somehow dissuade Jane from pulling the trigger.

The contrivances of the situation are inescapable, despite the scrupulous honesty of the performers in director Michael Herwitz’s charged production. (As the Berkeley-educated, aging hippie therapist, Friedman is especially good at dispensing professional empathy to save his own life). The play contains a twist that wild horses couldn’t drag out of me, but how convinced you’ll be depends on your willingness to succumb to a plot that has been carefully programmed to ratchet up the dramatic tension. I remained at a skeptical remove, but I appreciated the absorption of my fellow audience members, who were more than happy to suspend disbelief and hop on an 80-minute-dramatic thrill ride.

The final play on my itinerary was “Good Bones,” by Ijames, a playwright I’ve been eager to get to know better after “Fat Ham,” his brilliantly hilarious Pulitzer Prize-winning riff on “Hamlet.” “Kill Move Paradise,” an earlier Ijames play still running at the Odyssey Theatre, constructs an emergency racial justice ritual to confront the epidemic of fatal police shootings of unarmed Black people. “Good Bones,” a play about a married couple, Travis (Mamoudou Athie) and Aisha (Susan Kelechi Watson), who are renovating a townhouse in the city where Aisha grew up, is much more conventional in form.

Aisha, who grew up poor, has a love-hate relationship with her hometown. She works for a company that’s erecting a sports complex that is going to tear down the same projects that she used to call home. Her husband, a chef from a more affluent background, is opening an upscale soul food restaurant in the midtown area. The two embody the spirit of gentrification, but they have as many differences between them as they have with Earl (Khris Davis), a meticulous contractor who still lives in the projects that Aisha wants to dismantle.

Ijames sets up debate drama in which the characters bring their unique life histories to the conflict. Earl’s sister Carmen (Téa Guarino), a finance major at the University of Pennsylvania, introduces a different generational viewpoint when she joins her brother to finish the renovation job.

The production, directed by Ijames’ frequent collaborator Saheem Ali, unfolds in the spacious modern kitchen that Earl is painstakingly refurbishing to restore this historic townhouse to its former luster. The scenic design (Maruti Evans) and costumes (Oana Botez) maximize the production’s televisual appeal. Perhaps this is the reason that “Good Bones” sometimes comes off as a TV pilot. The play has urgent social concerns that are right at home at a theater like the Public, where it runs through Oct. 27, but pat resolutions and a little too much window-dressing prevent the conflicts from becoming uncomfortably real.

“Fat Ham,” “Kill Move Paradise” and “Good Bones” are written in such different styles they could be the works of three separate authors. Except that each play is urgently concerned with the lifeblood of community. For Ijames, that includes not only who is on stage but who is in the audience. Expanding the circle of theatergoers isn’t an afterthought but an imperative for a playwright who recognizes that drama, at its most flourishing, serves as a societal meeting point.

My New York theatergoing brought this dynamism home to me, confirming that a theory of physics holds true for drama. When spectators enter a fictional world, their very presence changes what they observe. Proof of this concept is everywhere in a busy New York fall season that is fostering deeper connections between playwrights and their attentive public.