It's a noble enough idea: get five directors to each direct a short film highlighting a problem in an underdeveloped area of the world, then put them together into one feature-length film. Kind of like Paris, je t'aime, only darker and considerably more depressing (but hey, what would a film festival be without a slew of depressing documentaries to remind us of how mundane the problems of our modern lives are when compared to war, rape, child abductions, and obscure-but -deadly diseases that no one at the big pharmaceutical companies seems to care about?)

It is a decent idea, to be sure, and producer Javier Bardem's heart was in the right place in conceiving of the film Invisibles, but somehow the end result is five films that feel disconnected from each other in spite of their common theme of addressing the "invisible" people of society -- the disenfranchised, the victims of long wars, the poverty-stricken residents of slums and remote villages.

Part of the problem with the film is that several of the segments feel like they were shot for the kind of late-night infomercials that appeal to well-to-do insomniacs to donate money to their various causes. I kept expecting Sally Struthers to show up on screen, guiding us from short film to short film while holding a malnourished Third World child in her arms. Documentaries, even ones that highlight relevant social causes, still need to tell a coherent story that draws us in, makes us care about the people or causes we're learning about. Even with short docs, we still need a compelling story to engage the audience, and most of the films in Invisibles just don't accomplish that.

Am I the only one who didn't know anthology films compiling related segments by different filmmakers (New York Stories; Four Rooms) are called "portmanteau" films? Well, regardless of what we call them, there's a new one in the works called The Invisibles. Though it may sound like a comic book movie, it is really a set of four stories focusing on overlooked conflicts and world causes. Wim Wenders is doing one of the segments, which is about violence towards women in the Congo. The other subjects are sleeping sickness in Africa, young soldiers in Uganda and a non-fiction part about displaced Colombians (this time I spelled it right, even though Empire Magazine didn't!). Other people involved in the project include Oscar-nominated actor Javier Bardem, Spanish directors Fernando León, Mariano Barroso, Javier Corcuera and Isabel Coixet (wait, I have a feeling there are more than four segments).

Wenders may seem to stick out like a sore thumb, but I'm sure he isn't the only one whose segment is worth watching. Typically, I figure there's at least one part in these things that weighs the quality of the whole film down. Although, after Eros, which I hear was weak all around despite featuring three very well-regarded filmmakers, we probably can't even depend on the majority of the segments to be worth the effort.