A Dance for Bethany

Movie Information

The Story: An Asheville reporter sets out to uncover the truth about sex trafficking in the area, focusing on one girl she meets. The Lowdown: Solid, glossy production values, good cinematography and some affecting performances raise the appeal of this well-intentioned but awkward tale.
Genre: Drama
Director: Brian Gurley
Starring: Robin Lively, Lori Beth Edgman, William McNamara, Ann Mahoney, Frank Hoyt Taylor
Rated: PG-13

Local interest should be high for this Asheville-produced film from executive producer Marion Douglas Williams and his screenwriter wife, Yvonne G. Williams. A great many Asheville-based films seem to go out of their way not to show the city in an identifiable manner. That’s certainly not the case with A Dance for Bethany, which showcases numerous city landmarks. All right, so the film plays a little fast and loose with the geography (I defy anyone to show me how you can walk from the Miles Building on Wall Street toward the Laughing Seed and take a sharp right into an alley), but that’s fair game in the movies.

The film is also notable as the best-looking locally based production I’ve seen so far. The cinematography by director Brian Gurley and James Suttles is very professional, and the lighting design is often very creative and good at setting the mood. Similarly, the production design by Gayle Wurthner is striking (where did she come up with that piece of René Magritte-inspired deck furniture?). All this is very much to the good, as is much of the acting, especially that of Robin Lively, Lori Beth Edgman and Ann Mahoney.

The story itself is certainly serviceable, given the film’s intent of raising public awareness of “human sex trafficking” (if there’s another kind, I’d as soon not know) in our country. I don’t for a moment doubt the sincerity of the filmmakers’ intentions in this area, and I may simply not be the best audience for the approach, since I tend to be a little skeptical of films that want to preach to me. But if they are determined to do so, I insist they do it with some degree of believability. With that in mind, there are aspects of the script that I can only call corny and contrived (the ending is definitely too intent on tying up every possible thread of the narrative to an unlikely degree).

I have no intention of questioning the film’s claims that victims of the sex trafficking it indicts are forced to perform sex acts “30 to 40 times a day,” but they certainly fail to convince me that this is the lot of the title character (Edgman), who seems to have an awful lot of spare time for someone so industriously used. In fact, we see very little indication of her prostitution. This may be due to the fact that the filmmakers chose to go for a PG-13 rating, thereby broadening the audience, but limiting the grittiness required for the film to really strike the chord they were after. A scene of Bethany being brutalized by her pimps is similarly not terribly effective, for exactly the same reason.

On another score, the film is sometimes clunky and old-fashioned in its structure (nearly every scene ends on a fade-out), and there’s a tendency for the musical score to veer toward melodrama that ill serves the movie. On this level, A Dance for Bethany is no better or worse than your average Fox Faith offering, though considerably less overt in the religiosity department.

Now, all these reservations aside—and they are substantial—I’ll say that A Dance for Bethany is consistently entertaining, and that the characters are likeable enough to make the viewer care about their fates. That’s a pretty amazing accomplishment in itself. Is it a great film? No. But it is definitely a solid, well-intentioned effort that’s worth the attention of anyone interested in the local film scene. Rated PG-13 for mature thematic material, some sexual content and brief violence.

About Ken Hanke
Head film critic for Mountain Xpress from December 2000 until his death in June 2016. Author of books "Ken Russell's Films," "Charlie Chan at the Movies," "A Critical Guide to Horror Film Series," "Tim Burton: An Unauthorized Biography of the Filmmaker."

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

2 thoughts on “A Dance for Bethany

  1. Nam Vet

    Ken I saw this film because it was shot in Asheville. It was TERRIBLE. The acting was below third rate. The directing was TERRIBLE. Sorry to have this take because I love Asheville, my hometown. At least when they shot “Being There” here in 1979 that was a good film. And 100s of locals got to try out to be extras.

  2. Ken Hanke

    Well, you really can’t compare a film like this with BEING THERE, which was a Hollywood production helmed by Hal Ashby, who’d made HAROLD AND MAUDE, BOUND FOR GLORY and COMING HOME. This was made by a fellow who’d never made a feature before. Also, you can’t expect Peter Sellers, Melvyn Douglas and Shirley MacLaine levels of acting in a home-grown product. Yes, the film has a lot of problems — not the least of which is the unpersuasive nature of its case against the horrors endured by the title character. (One person told me if sex trafficking included all this spare time and a great three room apartment, he wanted to sign up. I didn’t tell him that I doubted his marketability.) But it IS a slick-looking film. In that regard, it really is the best-looking locally made production I’ve seen to date. (And by locally made, I don’t mean a case where Hollywood comes to town and makes a movie here.) That’s a pretty big accomplishment and I think it deserves some notice. Did I personally like the film? Not much, no, but it’s not my type of movie. It’s a little too high-minded for my taste, and the business of tying absolutely every aspect of the plot together got absurd. (I don’t really understand why the sub-plot about the senator was even in there.) But I do admire the look of the film and even the fact that these people got the thing made.

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.