‘Between Borders’ A Moving Refugee Story About Christianity Deserved Better Storytelling
(REVIEW) “Between Borders” is a timely film that shows the resilience of refugee families, along with the greatness of Christianity and America. Sadly, mediocre storytelling and simplistic messaging saps it of its emotional power.
One might have noticed that immigration is a hot topic in Christian circles these days. It should be no surprise then that faith-based films have increasingly turned to the topic of immigration. Movies such as "Cabrini” and "Homestead" by Angel Studios and "The Best Christmas Pageant Ever” by Dallas Jenkins and Kingdom Story Company, focus on the struggle Christians face in how to welcome “the refugee and the outsider.”
"Between Borders" exists in that same tradition. Unlike those aforementioned movies, this film focuses on the refugees’ experience. The result has many strengths that other such movies lack — but also many of the genre's typical weaknesses.
The film follows the Petrosyan family as they leave their home in Azerbaijan for Russia to escape violence, where they are welcomed by the Christian community. Those same Christians help them move to the United States to escape the harassment they face from Russians. But once in America, they have to fight in court to prove that they deserve to stay there as well.
The film’s biggest strength is its true-life story. The Petrosyan family’s journey of ethnic and religious persecution, of leaving communism, of being refugees in a foreign land and being welcomed by Christianity and America, is deeply moving. And it's a story that's far more common than is typically told. It's also refreshing to see such a story told through the perspective of the refugees, who are experiencing these stories firsthand and engaging in ordinary acts of survival and heroism.
The story highlights the good work Christian communities are doing to help refugees and how surprisingly welcoming and tolerant America is. The Petrosyan family had settled in Russia where they were treated badly before being embraced in America. While America is chided for its racism, it’s actually less so than other nations. Americans are among the most likely to say they wouldn’t mind living next to people of a different race. America is historically very good at assimilating immigrants, and many have noted far better than places like Europe since America places a greater premium on shared cultural identity.
The actors are both largely believable and likable, particularly Elizabeth Tabish as Violetta Petrosyan, Patrick Sabongui as her husband and family patriarch Ivan Petrosyan. Patrick gives off a rugged wholesomeness and Elizabeth brings all of the thoughtful passion that made her famous in “The Chosen.”
There are some standout moments of tension that really work. The opening scene, where we meet Ivan alone before he walks into a courtroom, is a wonderful example. Other such scenes includes the Petrosyan family hiding while a neighbor gets shot and Ivan when he's being confronted by bullies. These moments show the potential for real pathos and drama.
But the film’s biggest sin is just usually being a bore. Like last year’s "Bonhoeffer" and “Sight,” this film seems determined to have camerawork, editing, acting and writing that is as bland and dull as possible. Dialogue spits out exposition and character work with no flavor. Actors look like they are reciting lines rather than embodying them. The camerawork and editing are done in conventional and boilerplate style with little thought on how to use them to tell the story with the most emotion or drama. Like I said, there are exceptions, but this is the norm in this film.
Framing the film with the trial — while it does focus the story — also often becomes a crutch to tell us things about the characters without showing them to us. We never see how Violetta changes from being a believer in communism to Christianity. Instead, she tells it to the lawyer who is questioning her.
This change of beliefs is underdeveloped. We are told that Violetta believes in communism, but she never explains what she believes about its tenants. She then says she believes in Christianity, but she doesn't explain what it was about communism that she stopped believing in, and why Christianity is more true. The closest they come to is saying that communism failed to protect her but Christianity changed her mom for the better. But all of this is left very thin. Her switch from believing in communism to believing in capitalism is even more underdeveloped.
This creates some problems for the story. First, it leaves out vital character growth. Second, it makes it feel like the antagonist Lawyer is right: Violetta and Ivan don’t have really strong beliefs; they just believe what is convenient to give them a better life. And yet, it's clear we are supposed to believe that the Petrosyan family’s conversion is sincere.
Other confusing moments undermine the message. We are given multiple cases where the family nearly escapes being beaten or killed. Yet, they never bring these up at trial when asked if they were ever “victims of direct acts of violence.” Are they leaving out important information to the court? Did these near-deaths never happen and they’re inserting them into the flashbacks in order to garner more sympathy from the audience? The fact that I have to ask those question represents a failure of writing.
While the message is positive, there is a problem with how they villainize the people (like the lawyer questioning them) who push back on the Petrosyan family staying in America. One of the toxic things about the current immigration debate in Christian circles is Christians demonizing fellow Christians who disagree with them. Faith-based films have not helped in that regard. Movies like “Cabrini,” “The Best Christmas Pageant Ever” and “Homeland” all made sure to treat everyone who wouldn’t welcome the outsider as motivated by racism, self-righteousness, fear and a lack of faith.
I'm not an expert on immigration. I do, however, live in New York. I can recall how everyone in New York would rail against people who lived along the southern border for being anti-immigration. When places like Texas and Florida, as something of a political stunt, sent buses full of migrants to New York, Mayor Eric Adams called it a crisis that could “destroy New York City.” He then tried to block them from coming, before a New York court ruled that move unconstitutional. This giant turnabout in rhetoric was so dramatic it was called out by John Stewart on “The Daily Show.” This is just further evidence that the issue is complicated.
Christians are not served by making art that trains us to think that complicated issues are simple — or that everyone who disagrees with us about them has a moral deficiency. This need to consistently oversimplify complicated issues to create neat heroes and villains is a constant problem in faith-based films. It was true about “God’s Not Dead,” when it comes to Christian vs atheist issues, and it’s true about modern faith-based movies around the issue issue of immigration.
In the end, the Petrosyan family’s story is a worthy one that promotes many positive messages. If the filmmaking had been stronger and the treatment of its topic more thoughtful, it could have been a truly important work.
“Between Borders” is in theaters starting Jan. 26.
Joseph Holmes is an award-nominated filmmaker and culture critic living in New York City. He is co-host of the podcast “The Overthinkers” and its companion website theoverthinkersjournal.world, where he discusses art, culture and faith with his fellow overthinkers. His other work and contact info can be found at his website josephholmesstudios.com.