SIGNIS REVIEWS JANUARY 2020 1917 ADDAMS FAMILY, The BOMBSHELL BOY CALLED SAILBOAT, A CATS FARMAGEDDON GENTLEMEN, The JO-JO RABBIT JUMANJI: THE NEXT LEVEL PLAYING WITH FIRE SORRY WE MISSED YOU SPIES IN DISGUISE STAR WARS: THE RISE OF SKYWALKER 1917 UK, 2019, 118 minutes, Colour. George Mac Kay, Dean- Charles Chapman, Colin Firth, Andrew Scott, Mark Strong, Benedict Cumberbatch, Richard Madden, Andrew Scarborough, Daniel Mays. Directed by Sam Mendes. 1917 received a number of nominations for best film of 2019. It is a memento of World War I, a re-creation of life and war in the trenches, a tribute to the men. The stories were handed down by members of the Mendes family and writer-director, Sam Mendes, has gathered them into this screenplay, bringing to life the stories and the traditions in his family. The action takes place from afternoon to night to the following morning. It is focused on two young men, George Mac Kay and Dean- Charles Chapman, seen initially on a sunny afternoon, some moments of lazing, before they are asked to report to the general (Colin Firth) and given a significant, if desperate, mission. They are to cross the fields, now abandoned by the Germans, make their way to a town and find some squads ready to attack the Germans – but to warn them that this is a trap and not to advance. The two young men are very earnest, accept the mission, and the film follows them. Time is limited and we wonder how the mission could possibly be accomplished given the dangers. The cinematography is a tribute to veteran British photographer, Roger Deakins. The film seems to be seamless, like a single take, editing not obvious at all. Which gives the film strong continuity, immersing the audience in the mission of the two young men. For those observing the sections which are single takes, it is fascinating and intriguing to watch the directing, the movement of the camera, behind the soldiers, veering around, seeing them from the front, episodes which stop them and enable the camera to do close-ups and then send them on their journey again. And, the re-creation of the trenches (long, extensive, filled with men waiting, often just glimpsed as

the two young men hurry past) is vivid. As is the wasted countryside, wires, explosion craters, abandoned buildings, interiors, rats. There are rivers, barns in the countryside, planes always flying overhead and a German plane crashing. There is darkness in the ruins of a local town. Certainly an immersion in the war experience. There have been many traditions of war but World War I certainly highlighted the nature of trench warfare, British and Germans not far distant from each other, the guns and weapons, the dread immediacy of going over the top. (And with this, there are memories of other World War I films, Paths of Glory, King and Country, and the striking ending of Peter Weir’s Gallipoli.) The two young actors remind the audience of the young British men, in their numbers, sent across the channel, fighting on the fields of Flanders, severe injuries, deaths. Some senior British actors have almost-cameo roles as some of the commanders the two young men encounter along the way, from Colin Firth’s general, to Andrew Scott, to Mark Strong, to Benedict Cumberbatch as the officer in charge of the impending attack. It is now over 100 years since World War I. It is remembered in the context of being the “war to end all wars” soon became a futile claim. In just over 20 years the world was plunged again into worldwide conflict. War? Critique of war? Anti-war? 1917 contributes to all of these perspectives. THE ADDAMS FAMILY US, 2019, 97 minutes, Colour. Voices of: Oscar Isaac, Charlize Theron, Chloe Grace Moretz, Finn Wlofhard, Nick Kroll, Snoop Dog, Bette Midler, Alison Janney, Martin Short, Catherine O' Hara, Jennifer Lewis. Directed by Greg Tiernan, Conrad Vernon. If we thought that the Addams Family had had their day, this entertaining variation on the family will make us think again. While the original television show was highly stylised, looking like an life-action cartoon, this version is lively animation. And, it has a strong role call of talented actors supplying the voices – who would ever have thought of Charlize Theron as steely commanding Morticia Addams? Oscar Isaac is Gomez and Chloe Grace Moretz voices Wednesday. Many audiences will still be remembering the feature films with Raoul Julia, Angelica Huston and Cristina Ritchie. And they were enjoyable too. The opening goes into a bit of back history, the wedding between Gomez and Morticia interrupted by hostile townspeople who cause them to flee. They knock over Lurch who takes them up to the mountaintop asylum – which becomes Home Sweet Home. As so often, it is Wednesday who causes the problems, going to school, making friends with a young student (whose overwhelming-looking and sounding mother, voiced by Alison Janney, leads the hostile citizens against the Addams Family). Wednesday, always in black, starts to experiment with

colour, much to Morticia’s horror. But, in these multicultural times, Wednesday is able to bring some rapport between the Addams and the local townspeople. And, of all things comic, the dominating mother takes a shine to Uncle Fester. The main characters are all here, Harridan grandma (Bette Midler) arriving to take over, especially for Pugsey’s mazurka ritual. And, Lurch has the opportunity to play quite a number of excerpts from familiar songs, some parodies on horror themes, and, of course introducing the finger snapping theme song. Mixed reactions to this film – one comment saying it is particularly unfunny, the next, congratulating filmmakers for making such a funny film. It is over to us. This reviewer offers a pleasant thumbs up. BOMBSHELL US, 2019, 112 minutes, Colour. Charlize Theron, Nicole Kidman, Margot Robbie, John Lithgow, Malcolm Mc Dowell, Alison Janney, Kate Mac Kinnon, Connie Britton, Liv Hewson, Mark Duplass, Stephen Root, Robin Weigert. Directed by Jay Roach. Audiences in the United States, especially those of Fox News, found this story more of a bombshell than audiences in other parts of the world who are not familiar with Fox News and not familiar with its founder and developer, Roger Ailes. Now, with this film and with the television series, The Loudest Voice, and with the momentum of the Me#Too movement, Roger Ailes has become one of the most prominent celebrity figures with his downfall. Jay Roach has directed a number of films about contemporary American public issues, regional (Florida and the 2000 presidential election controversy), Game Change (Sarah Palin for VP), Trumbo (blacklisting in the 1950s), and now dramatises this expose of Ailes, his sexual harassment of his female staff, episodes of sexual exploitation, threats of court proceedings, the appeal to the boss of Fox and Fox News, Rupert Murdoch, Murdoch’s putting the pressure on Ailes and his resignation. This certainly set a precedent for exposure of other sexual predators, especially in the media world, further scandals, revelations, court proceedings. The exposure of Roger Ailes was the work of a number of women working in Fox News, anchors, reporters, staffers. Two women are credited with bringing down Ailes. One is a high-profile anchor, favoured by Ailes, Megyn Kelly, played with authority (but with some doubting moments) by Charlize Theron. More directly, news anchor, Gretchen Carlson, gradually demoted, then fired, is the key to the continued campaign against Ailes, backed up by a number of women employed by Fox. She is played by Nicole Kidman who is able to combine fluffy on-air program hosting with a relentless and steely determination consulting with lawyers, recording conversations with Ailes, looking for backup from other women’s testimonies. There are a great number of women working at Fox News and audiences may find it difficult to keep a tab on who each of them is, her role, her experience of Ailes, her willingness or unwillingness to point blame. And, as might be expected in such a conglomerate business, there are many who rush to Ailes defence.

Some characters are created, based on actual persons. The most telling of these is Margot Robbie as Kayla, an evangelical millennial, as she calls herself, highly ambitious, putting herself in Ailes’ harm’s way, ashamed, puzzled as what to do, admiring the women who expose him. Kate Mac Kinnon has an interesting role as a crypto-Democrat, working at Fox News, a lesbian who befriends and supports Kayla. Because Ailes is the target, eventually, and is a large, ungainly character (who says that some have called him Jabba the Hut), his sleazy behaviour being gradually dramatised, there are great demands made on the actor who portrays him. In this case, it is John Lithgow (Russell Crowe in the miniseries) who gives a convincing (and repelling) impersonation. So, this is an important story from 2016, opening in July during the election debates in the US, quite a number of images of Donald Trump, whom Ailes initially disliked, reminding audiences of sexual harassment accusations against Trump. Towards the end, Rupert Murdoch and his sons are called in to confront Ailes and to make the final decisions. Audiences will find Malcolm Mc Dowell’s portrait of Murdoch intriguing – and his relationship with his sons. The material itself is very dramatic – although, the screenplay which is frequently quite incisive, does not build up the momentum of the drama in quite the climactic way that could be expected. In one sense, the drama stops, mission accomplished. But, in real life, there are many, many such exposes in the offing. Harvey Weinstein, of course. (For a more ample portrait of Roger Ailes, see Russell Crowe in The Loudest Voice, which offers the history of Fox News, Ailes' conservative views and tactics as well as the sexual harrassment, with Naomi Watts as Gretchen Carlson.) A BOY CALLED SAILBOAT US, 2018, 92 minutes, Colour. Julian Atocani Sanchez, Keanu Wilson, Noel G, Elizabeth De Razzo, Jake Busey, J.K.Simmons. Directed by Cameron Nugent. While this is a very American story, focus on a Hispanic family living on the border, it was, in fact, written and directed by Australian actor, Cameron Nugent. Nugent began his media life as an actor in a great deal of Australian children’s television, so he can draw on the experience of telling children stories. And, this is what A Boy Called Sailboat is, the story of a little boy, Sailboat, age 6, living with his parents, his father working as a handyman at the local school, his mother at home, cooking ever more frequently meatballs. They live in a rather ramshackle house which, at first glance, looks lopsided. And, it is, held more or less upright by a long beam which the father continually hovers over in case of the collapse (spoiler alert: at one stage it does collapse), but making every effort to make the house upstanding again. In fact, given so many aspects of magic realism in the story and in the characters, this is a small family film which would could be called a fable. And, so much of it is seen from the perspective of

the six-year-old Sailboat. One day he finds a small discarded guitar, sets himself to learn to play it, encouraged by his parents, as well as the little girl at school. On a visit to his ailing grandmother in hospital, he decides that he must compose a song for her. And, over the weeks, he does. And, it seems to be the most charming and beguiling song ever written, melting all those who listen to it, fascinating the other children and their teacher, crowds gathering outside the house to hear Sailboat seen. And, with the beauty of the song, its message, its tears – the only people not to hear it of the film’s audience, the writer-director using the device of the soundtrack going silent, the audience watching the boy and the audience, not hearing any sound and so, having to supply whatever wonderful song, music and lyrics, that appeal to them. The audience is asked to supply its own beauty and message. The film has quite a lot of detail, the genial parents, both large and affectionate, always enjoying the meatballs and, increasingly cooking them to distribute to the ever-gathering larger crowds. Jake Busey will does an odd turn as the enthusiastic teacher who might not get employment in a school with demanding requirements. He is a nice man. He fosters the song and singing. Then there is the little boy, Peeti, not much older than Sailboat who spends his life kicking a football and putting drops in his eyes because he cannot blink. There is also an entrepreneur who wants to get Sailboat on the radio. The film has won a number of awards as a family film and, it might delight families, especially the youngsters who can identify with Sailboat and Peeti. The adult audience must let itself succumb to the magic realism of the story and characters - and supply the most beautiful song and message that they know. CATS UK, 2019, 110 minutes, Colour. Francesca Hayward, Judi Dench, and, Idris Elba, Ian Mc Kellen, Jason Derullo, Naoimh Morgan, Laurie Davidson, Robbie Fairchild, Danny Collins. Directed by Tom Hooper. For audiences who enjoyed Cats in the theatre, here is a great opportunity to see it all in close-up. The camera roams over the fantasy set, a blend of London’s Piccadilly Circus and Trafalgar Square, the interiors of the derelict Egyptian Theatre, an opportunity to appreciate the dancing skills, to enjoy the music, to delight in the songs, many familiar, but new interpretations by the performers. Poet TS Elliot, in whimsical mood, with his 1939 Old Possums Book of Practical Cats meets Andrew Lloyd Webber drawing on his range of musical versatility. This reviewer was not drawn in by Cats when seeing it in the theatre over 30 years ago. Then there was the jolt, some lyrics by Old Deuteronomy (this time rendered more forcefully by Judi Dench in the role): a reprimand to those who ‘have had the experience but missed the meaning’. (And followed by some poetic ruminations on the nature of experience, on the nature of memory, on the nature of meaning.)

For audiences not immediately drawn into the world of Cats, there would be some advice at least to give it a go. After accepting this world of felines, some performance and intrigue, it may be the visuals, the look, the music, some striking performances that entice the unwilling or the suspicious. Central to Cats is the stranger, Victoria, who comes across the group of Jellicle Cats on the night of the audition when the winner of the competition will get the prize of a new life. Victoria is played by newcomer Francesca Hayward, skilled dancing, pleasing singing, a charming look and presence. And she also gets the opportunity to sing Memories. While we are getting sorted with which cat is which, we are treated to some incivility with Macavity, sinister, plotting, mean-minded, easily able to disappear in a puff of pink smoke (Idris Elba). There is some humour with Rebel Wilson doing a variation on her Rebel Wilson thing and then James Corden very enjoyable as the large Bustopher Jones. But, there is the beginning of a wonderful performance by Jennifer Hudson as Grizabella, the exiled cat who had her day in the sun, went off with Macavity, abandoned, derelict in the street and hissed at by the cats. And, of course, Grizabella has her day and Jennifer Hudson’s rendition of Memories, twice, is a powerful showstopper. The good part of the enjoyment is recognising some of the stars, some unexpected, doing their turns, especially in Ian Mc Kellen has Gus, the theatre cat, giving an enjoyable interpretation of Elliot. The audience has to wait until towards the end we Taylor Swift appears. And, surprisingly, there is Ray Winstone well-known for tough roles and thugs, bringing his rough accent and tone to the villainous Growltiger. And, of course, there is the delight in seeing and listening to Judi Dench (aged 84 at the time), shuffling as Old Deuteronomy, encouraged by the other cats, the reigning queen of the cats in her wisdom, brought to life, moved by Grizabella, and, looking at us the audience, having the final lyrics of alert and warning. For lovers of words, there is the increasing number of words that rhyme with cat or cats, even cats with spats! The film was directed by Tom Hooper who won an Oscar for The King’s Speech, who had a long history in television series and went on to direct the film version of Les Miserables. This is certainly a way of bringing musical theatre to the screen. FARMAGEDDON: a SHAUN OF THE SHEEP MOVIE UK, 2019, 86 minutes, Colour. Voices of: Justin Fletcher, John Sparkes, Chris Morrell, Andy Nyman, Kate Harbour. Directed by Will Becher, Richard Phelan. Do you enjoy Shaun the Sheep? He is Aardman Studios gift to younger audiences – but not excluding older audiences. Shaun first appeared alongside those favourite Aardman Studios characters (Britain’s gift to the world of cinema animation), Wallace and Gromit. He then had his own television series and, several years ago, his first feature film. Here he is again.

Shaun lives at Mossy Bottom Farm along with the rest of the sheep. They seem to have a happy life although they frequently get up to mischief, especially Shaun, and are continually under the disciplinary scrutiny of the farm dog, Bitzer Bitzer is into restrictions, putting up forbidding signs all over the place. The farmer is preoccupied with his tractor. So, the setting is familiar. However, the Aardman writers must have a very soft spot for ET. So many of the younger audiences will have seen ET who, in fact, it is almost 40 years old) and will recognise the story of a spaceship arriving on earth (a mini Close Encounter) and an attractive little creature, Lu-La?, is stranded on earth, and, of course, wants to go home. Shaun discovers Lu-La?, who has a penchant for pizza, and so begins a whole lot of comic adventures. This is not a comedy of words but of situations, suggestions, hums and has, gestures. After some initial hesitation, Bitzer, of course, will do his bit to help things along. The farmer is more practical and pragmatic and decides to turn his property into a theme park, with the enjoyable title Farmageddon. It is, of course, not quite the end of the world. But, it could be for Lu-La?. A government agent, severe in appearance and attitude, Miss Red, with her assistant robot, is determined, more than determined, to hunt down the alien. It seemed she had some unpleasant experiences in her childhood with another close encounter a relentless mission. Comedy, adventures, dangers in the theme park, rescues, Lu-La’s? parents, plenty of ingredients to keep a young audience very happy – not to forget some mayhem in a supermarket. Some travel in space. But, what about the adults, especially those who have fond memories of Wallace and Gromit? There are enough sight gags throughout the film to make it enjoyable. There are plenty of references to other movies and science-fiction themes. While the children might be laughing out loud, many parents and grandparents will be having a gleeful chuckle. THE GENTLEMAN UK, 2019, 113 minutes. Matthew Mc Conaughey, Charlie Hunnam, Hugh Grant, Colin Farrell, Jeremy Strong, Henry Golding, Michelle Dockery, Eddie Marsan. Directed by Guy Ritchie. Some of them might look like gentleman – but they certainly don’t sound like gentleman (a surfeit of swearing which indicates that they are criminals, but might be a bit wearing for some of the potential audience). This is a story about British class. The film was written and directed by Guy Ritchie who in the late 1990s and early 2000s cornered some of the market in British gangster films, Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels, Snatch, Rock ‘n’ Rolla and then had success with Robert Downey Jr and Jude law as Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson. More latterly, he worked for Disney and directed the live-remake of Aladdin. But he is definitely back in England, back in the criminal world where many of the drug criminals

present themselves as gentlemen and even make contacts with the impoverished upper class to fund them by leasing out secret areas of their properties for growing marijuana. As with Ritchie’s other films, there are strong characters and characterisations combined with a great number of comic touches, playing with some of the conventions of the gangster film for exaggeration and laughs (and some plot twists that we definitely might not have seen coming). There is an explanation why the American Matthew Mc Conaughey has set up drug operations in London, sent to the University but finding his vocation in drug dealing, growing, and a sometimes suave, sometimes vicious, ability with standover tactics. However, the story is being told by Fletcher, like the rollout of a screenplay. He is a newshound with an eye to scandal and blackmail. As soon as Fletcher opens his mouth and we see that he is a bespectacled Hugh Grant in this different kind of role for him and not sounding at all like Hugh Grant, much lower class, Grant has already stolen the film and continues to do so right throughout. However, he has some solid competition from Colin Farrell in a supporting role as a sports coach who allows himself to be caught up in the shenanigans as well as the violence. Both Hugh Grant and Colin Farrell are well worth seeing – and hearing. There are also some very good performances from other members of the cast but they have to play the straight man and woman rolls. There is Charlie Hunnam as Mc Conaughey’s assistant, listening to Fletcher’s story, continually trying to outwit him, and the audience seeing him more active in some of the violent flashbacks. There is Jeremy Strong as an American rival to Mc Conaughey, wanting to buy him out but, at the same time, wanting to sabotage him so that the price will be lowered. There aren’t many women in The Gentleman, the main female character being Mc Conaughey’s wife, played in a tough step down from Lady Mary at Downton Abbey. There are also some Asians in London trying to get in on the act but they are doomed to failure. Henry Golding, remembered from Crazy Rich Asians and Last Christmas, is not so persuasive as an ambitious-to-be drug lord. The film is very cleverly put together, Fletcher’s story and the range of flashbacks, quite a few twists to save people from deaths, some ironic satire in the characterisations, in the upper and lower class behaviour, quite a literate script (making allowance for such a number of four-letter explosions), that make it all work. JOJO RABBIT UK, 2019, 108 minutes, Colour. Roman Griffin Davis, Thomasin Mc Kenzie, Scarlett Johansson, Taika Waititi, Sam Rockwell, Rebel Wilson, Alfie Allen, Stephen Merchant, Archie Yates. Directed by Taika Waititi. The title, Jo Jo Rabbit, would be intriguing whatever the story. However, this is a story of the Third Reich. And, with this picture of 1944-1945, there is no springtime for Hitler and Germany. Rather, another cinema reference would be Cabaret with the close-up of the enthusiastic, angelic looking boy singing so enthusiastically and the camera drawing back to reveal him as a member of the Hitler

Youth. Jo Jo is 10 years old, the Hitler Youth recruits being younger than before. Roman Griffin Davis, in his first film, is perfect as Jo Jo, acting his age, indoctrinated in Nazi ideology, sharing training with his young fat friend, Yorkie (Archie Yates). Jo Jo lives at home with his mother, Scarlett Johansson, unaware that she is shielding a young Jewish girl, Elsa, Thomasin McKenzie?. The small town they live in comes out of picture books of central Europe. We see the streets, military headquarters, homes – as well as excursions out in the countryside. Jo Jo is part of the training, supervised by an eccentric captain who has lost one eye, played by Sam Rockwell. He has some obsequious enthusiastic and sadistic young officers who demand that JoJo? kill a Rabbit, twist its neck. He can’t and gets the derogatory nickname. Jo Jo lives at home with his mother, his father allegedly fighting outside Germany, his sister dead. His mother seems rather eccentric in the town, the way she dresses, her hat, going bike riding with her son. We know that she has to be subversive. Which leads to one of the shocking sequences of the film. There is quite a lot of parody in the sequences of the military training of the boys – added to by an enthusiastic Rebel Wilson, urging her charges to go and burn some books. There is also comedy with a tall, gaunt Stephen Merchant, dressed in black, arriving with his henchmen, parody repetitions of Heil Hitler on first arrival, then on the arrival of the military captain, then with the emergence of Elsa into the room. Heil Hitlering has never looked so idiotic! While Jo Jo is only 10, and has no idea of what love is (although his mother talks about the experience of butterflies in the stomach – and this is later to be visualised), his initial suspicion of Elsa turns into an attraction, into care and protection, into love. But, we have seen the posters. We have seen the trailers. We know that Hitler makes an appearance – and, more than an appearance. And this is a touch of genius from New Zealand’s writer-director, Taika Waititi (who, for almost a decade, has made two fine films focusing on young boys experience, Boy, Hunt for the Wilderpeople, a parody of vampires living in flats in Wellington, What We Do in the Shadows, directing Thor Ragnorak and appearing as the Stone-creature Korg). Adapting a novel by Christine Leuning, Caged Skies, Waitit does Hitler. Many children have imaginary friends. Jo Jo has Hitler. And, in many ways, Hitler acts and speaks like a 10-year-old, sharing Jo Jo’s enthusiasm, having discussions about the girl in hiding, encouraging Jo Jo in his ideology – but, Jo Jo has to grow up and the imaginary friend, not keeping pace with Jo Jo, has to be kicked out the window: the defenestration of Hitler! For audiences prone to literal interpretations of what they hear and see, this comic parody might not appeal to their sense of humour. For those with a sense of humour, even for those who have memories of World War II, of the atrocities and racial persecutions, a bit of parody doesn’t do any harm, puts the pretensions of fascists into perspective. Mel Brooks can attest to this. Charlie Chaplin mimicked Hitler during the war itself in The Great Dictator. Now, 80 years on, mimicry and parody are still effective.

JUMANJI: THE NEXT LEVEL US, 2019, 123 minutes, Colour. Dwayne Johnson, Kevin Hart, Jack Black, Karen Gillan, Awkwafina, Danny De Vito, Danny Glover, Colin Hanks, Rory Mc Cann, Bebe Neuwirth, Alex Wolff, Nick Jonas, Rhys Darby.. Directed by Jake Kasdan. Way back in the 90s, Robin Williams invited the audience to go with him into the board game, Jumanji. After 20 years or so, the filmmakers decided it was time for a return, led by Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart. It was a very popular success. So now, on to The Next Level – which seems remarkably like the previous level in terms of the landscapes of Jumanji, the need for rescues, the adventures and the difficulties, the resolutions. However, with some tongue in cheek humour, the writers have moved to the next level in terms of which characters are in which avatars! Quite clearly, Dwayne Johnson has to be Dr Bravestone, the hero of the piece. There was always humour in Jack Black being the animal expert with Kevin Hart along for the dithering humour. And, Karen Gillan, was the archetypal active leading lady. So, this time, why not mix them up? And, for further complication, Spencer’s grandfather, Danny De Vito at his crotchety best, encountering his old partner in the restaurant business, Milo, Danny Glover, both of them caught up into the world of Jumanji. Which leads to quite a mixup – grandpa becomes a very crotchety Dr Bravestone. Ruby and the Professor get mixed up, Kevin Hart becomes Milo and, later, their friend Bethany arrives as a horse! At one moment, the professor and Ruby revert to what we expect. But that is short-lived. The humour of this part of the film is added to by Dwayne Johnson having to imitate Danny De Vito’s voice. And, then when they discover Spencer in the form of an Asian warrior, Awkwafina, they all go on the adventures to rescue a jewel stolen by an ultra--Viking looking villain, Jurgen. But, just as we wonder whether the group could achieve its mission, having been pursued by a huge flock of ostriches, being stranded in the desert, attacked by monkeys over a chasm with continually moving bridges, climbing mountains… The avatar roles are reversed and everything goes back to normal, Spencer is once again Dr Bravestone, Ruby and the professor are themselves as is Kevin Hart – but Awkwafiina is now grandpa’s avatar and then she has to imitate Danny De Vito’s voice while Milo becomes the horse. So, plenty to occupy the mind in mythical adventures in Jumanji land, plenty of excitement in the confrontations and battles – and always with some humour. PLAYING WITH FIRE US, 2019, 97 minutes, Colour. John Cena, Keegan- Michael Key, John Leguizamo, Brianna Hildebrand, Christian Convery, Finley Rose Slater, Judy Greer, Dennis Hayesbert. Directed by Andy Fickman. This is a film designed as holiday entertainment. In fact, it is very much like a contemporary

pantomime, obvious writing and situations, exaggerations of character, jokes and pratfalls, farce yet happy endings. It is, to say the least, unsophisticated entertainment. John Cena used to be a wrestler and, like Dwayne Johnson, moved into the movies, generally comedies – but, unlike Dwayne Johnson who can communicate an innate sense of humour, John Cena does deadpan performances, looking chiselled but beefy, stolid, big and tough, promoting the macho image which, of course, covers some sensitivity eventually be uncovered. He is the superintendent of a squad in Redding California, not of firefighters, but of “smoke jumpers” who are called in by the firefighters to let themselves down from helicopters, going into the fire to rescue those in need and bring them up to the helicopter and to safety. There are very strong on the fact that they are smoke jumpers not firefighters. The superintendent, Sup a short, has a squad of less than effective smoke jumpers whose mission in the film is very much to ham it up. There is Keegan- Michael Key, full of patter, a former accountant who has been rescued. There is John Leguizamo, Hispanic, more than hamming it up! And there is Tyler Mane, immensely tall, bearded and silent, always carry an axe – until he is able to burst forth in operatic singing style. Having established the group and the Sup’s ambition to be the regional director of the squads and succeed the ultra-dominating image of the chief, Dennis Haysbert, and beginning to write his application, it is time for the main action. And this will very much depend on your point of view and experience (and tolerance of childish behaviour). The squad rescues three children from a burning hut and bring them to the headquarters. For audiences who enjoy children as little monsters, running amok and causing mayhem, especially the young boy who cannot resist any kind of temptation that will lead to chaos, destruction, absolute mess, there seem to be no limits. On the other hand, the baby sister is sweetness and light except when she loudly bawls, and, pegs on noses, needs a nappy change. Then there is the older teenage sister who is in charge, nice at times, surly more of the time, protective of the children, and a penchant for stealing vehicles to help them escape. After a night of mayhem, Sup having to rescue the runaway kids and camp out with them, the tone of the film begins to switch: from monsters with mayhem to sweeties with sentiment. For audiences irritated no end by the antics of the children, this is the opportunity for forgive and forget! Of course, it is the little girl’s birthday and the smoke jumpers raid the local supermarket for an excess of presents. Then the chief turns up unexpectedly expecting an efficient squad only to find the mess – and his vehicle stolen as well, finishing up on the edge of a cliff and the need for further rescue. Oh, there is a lady scientist out in the woods, Judy Greer, studying toads, who has an eye on Sup but unwilling to show it, as is he unwilling to show his feelings, until he is persuaded to invite her to dinner.

The children have a secret of their own and it involves the Child Protection Office intervening – and, pantomime-like, all joining in a sudden and happy wedding ending. There was quite a lot of laughter at the broad comedy in the cinema during the show – which means that those that this kind of film appeals to really enjoyed it. (Others, especially adults will have to take refuge in their sophistication!) SORRY WE MISSED YOU UK, 2019, 101 minutes, Colour. Kris Hitchen, Debbie Honeywood, Rhys Stone, Katie Proctor, Ross Brewster. Directed by Ken Loach. Perhaps it is sufficient to say that this is a Ken Loach film. And to add, this is a very fine Ken Loach film (directed when he was in his early 80s). Ken Loach has immersed his audiences for over 50 years in the life of working-class Britons, mostly in England, sometimes in Scotland, occasionally in United States and Latin America. He has certainly been the champion of the working class from films, almost documentary -like, like Cathy Come Home and Kes in the 1960s and, finding a consistent pace in the early 1990s, a striking film almost every two years, winning the Palme D’ Or in Cannes twice, for his Irish Civil War drama, The Wind That Shakes the Barley and then for I, Daniel Blake. (He has also won the most awards for a director from Catholic and ecumenical juries around the world.) Tribute should also be given to his writer, Paul Laverty, who has written all the screenplays for Loach’s film since 1996. (Laverty trained to be a priest at the Scots College in Rome for several years but did not continue but has had what one might call a social justice ministry in writing the screenplays for the Loach films). This time we are in Newcastle-upon-Tyne?, introduced to Ricky Turner (Kris Hitchen), a driver, anxious to make ends meet, to buy a home for his family instead of renting, who becomes part of the franchise of seemingly-independent drivers in a highly organised co-op for parcel delivery. While it sounds good, he has to buy his own van, sell his wife’s car to cover the deposit, submit himself to a highly demanding regime, timetable, supervision, regulations that require him to find substitute drivers if he has family troubles – and, there are plenty with his 16-year-old son, Seb (Rhys Stone), who is skipping school, painting graffiti, sullen at home. His wife, Abbie (Debbie Honeywood), is admirable, a home carer who is wonderful with the elderly. There is also a young daughter at home. In the early part of the film, we travel in the van, encounter all kinds of people receiving their packages, some gruff, some genial, some demanding… We also travel in the bus with Abbie, encountering quite a number of home shut-ins who require patient attention, feeding, cleaning… There is one joyous day when the daughter accompanies her father delivering the parcels, even a kindly lady giving her some change to buy some lollies. But, Ricky is then informed that this is against the rules and someone has complained. In fact, the rules become more and more severe, relentless, the demanding letter of the law. The company boss calls himself the patron of “nasty bastards” and

has an extremely tin ear for any appeals of compassion over his unyielding regime rules. The narrative builds to some moments of high tension, the son suspended and arrested for shoplifting, Ricky assaulted on the Road, Abbie becoming more desperate, loving her husband and trying to mediate in the family. Loach and Laverty tell their story, straightforwardly but with higher dramatic tension in day-to-day lives, inviting the audience to share the life of the family, experience the problems, share the desperation. SPIES IN DISGUISE US, 2019, 102 minutes, Colour. Will Smith, Tom Holland, Ben Mendelssohn, Rashida Jones, Rachel Brosnahan, Karen Gillan. Directed by Nick Bruno, Troy Quade. The target audience is specially boys (of whatever age), an excuse for action-oriented fathers and grandfathers to offer to take their sons and grandsons to the movies! This is a story of the humanisation of America’s most successful solo spy. Well, not exactly. He has to be transformed into a pigeon, experience quite some shock discoveries of what it is like to be a pigeon, and then chang back into a better human spy. He is Sterling, absolutely full of self-confidence, voiced amusingly by Will Smith. At the beginning, we are introduced to a young boy, Walter, who loves science, is involved in all kinds of experiments, including glitter and the release of serrotin, their not always succeeding, his mother very tolerant even when he says that at school he is called weird. She supports him in his weirdness. Then, 14 years later, Walter (Tom Holland in a voice variation on Peter Parker) has a job in advanced experiments, his lab, his pigeon who is a soulmate, a lot of projects going but not having great success. Then he encounters Sterling. Sterling, in fact, is on the run because despite his self-promotion and his extraordinary action expertise, he has failed in his mission and the internal affairs authorities are after him. And, of course, this is where the pigeon comes in. If you were America’s best spy would you consent to be transformed into a pigeon? Well, all these difficulties have to be faced. Of course, there are some advantages, walking along a pool in Mexico past criminals who would not even notice a pigeon. Admittedly, there are some distinct disadvantages in being a small bird (even if he can still talk as Will Smith) only to lay an egg and suffers some toilet-going problems. But, there is a distinct advantage in Venice, particularly in St Mark’s Square, pursued by the master criminal but able to call on a squadron of pigeons who descend on him while Sterling makes his escape! Eventually, Sterling is back to himself, but has really depended on Water, who is a mixture of the ingenious and the ingenuous, always in hope for his experiments but continually coming to Sterling’s

rescue. And in case anyone was wondering about the villain wearing Will Smith’s face but with a robot hand, and especially about his accent, that is Ben Mendelssohn – villains can come from Australia! As it goes along, the film speeds up, lots of comic gags, lots of action. An alternative or an antidote to Frozen II! STAR WARS: THE RISE OF SKYWALKER US, 2019, 142 minutes, Colour. Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, Oscar Isaac, Adam Driver, Ian McDermid?, Billy Dee Williams, Richard E. Grant, Domnhall Gleason, Keri Russell. And, Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford. by J.J.Abrams. Peace at last in the galaxies. And, it has taken 42 years to achieve this, three trilogies, many spin-offs for cinema and television, and billions of souvenir merchandise! Fans of Star Wars should be happy, mission accomplished. World box office would seem to indicate that everyone is happy. However, checking the critics, digging into the opinions of the bloggers on the IMDb, apparently some of the fans in the over 5000 entries are not happy at all. Condemnations galore But, there was one writer who suggested that they all sit back, relax, watch the film instead of being on the edge of their seat to note every flaw, cataloguing every moment they disapproved of! This reviewer remembers well the press preview in 1977 of Star Wars, excitement, off into the galaxies, off into another universe. It was pop mythmaking, a blend of comic strip adventures and characters with an enthusiasm for creating this new world. And, of course, there was The Force – and, glad to say, it is still with this final film. This reviewer would probably fail a test if there were an examination on all the details of the three trilogies. But, that does not matter. This is a review of simply sitting in the cinema, watching what is put before us, surrendering to it, knowing it is not a perfect film (but what is!), accepting it for what it is rather than what obsessive loyalty might demand it to be. That said, we focus on the character of Rey, introduced in Episode VII, a heroic character who is destined for leadership and greatness. We have followed her exploits, accepted Daisy Ridley as a Jedi leader, watched her being trained by Princess, now General, Leia, inspired by Luke Skywalker when she discovers him in his hermitage exile. We have seen her as an outsider, a wandering scavenger, teaming up with a sometimes-reckless pilot, Poe Dameron (a smiling Oscar Isaac) and a former storm trooper, Finn, (an earnest John Boyega). And, Chewbacca enjoyably back in grunt and action. This time there are more problems, flights to different planets, friends and making friends of old enemies, technology to be discovered, expeditions, Chewbacca to be rescued, the group rounded up on the major starship, commanded by Richard E.Grant, aided by the obsequious spy (Domnhall Gleeson) and then off to find the wreckage of a vast spacecraft, immersed in a pounding sea and

beyond-giant waves. We are fortunate to have some stock film of Carrie Fisher so she is able to be worked into the plot, desperate, preparing to die, wanting to be reconciled to her son Ben, who in previous films surrendered to the Dark Side and became Kylo Ren (Adam Driver). He confronts Rey, plenty of laser sabre duels, Rey and her appeal to him, an invitation to emerge from the dark. And, of course, we are very pleased when who should appear to his son but old Han Solo, Harrison Ford pleading with his son. And, as Rey retreats from all the troubles, who should appear to her and urge her on but Luke Skywalker, Mark Hamill himself. And, emerging from the past, Billy Dee Williams as Lando Calrissian helping the cause. The revelation of the film, which practically everybody knew before they went in, is that Ian McDermid? is back as the Emperor Palpatine, devious dictator who has been manipulating the characters, determined that the Sith should defeat the Jedi, wanting Rey, now discovered as his granddaughter, to kill him, absorb his power, assume the throne. So, the final Star Wars are the battles against the Emperor and his followers, his defeat, Ben emerging into the light and self-sacrificing, the Allies all gathering and prepared to follow Rey – and an old woman at the end asks her for who she is. She pauses for a long time and claims for herself the name of Skywalker. QED. NETFLIX ALERT: NETFLIX FILMS FROM BRAZIL, PARODIES OF THE GOSPELS THE LAST HANGOVER. SE BEBER, NO CEIE Brazil, 2108, 48 minutes, Colour. Directed by Rodrigo van der Put. THE FIRST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST/ A PRIMEIRA TENTACAO DE CRISTO Brazil, 2019, 48 minutes, Colour. Directed by Rodrigo Van Der Put. Here is an alert concerning two 48 minute Brazilian films screening on Netflix, worldwide, since December 2019. Their titles are: The Last Hangover, The First Temptation of Christ. With the word “Hangover” instead of “Supper” in the title of the first film, it is clear that these films would be not straightforward Gospel films. And they are not. They can be described as parodies. Some angry bloggers, for example on the Internet Movie Database, have been using the word “blasphemy” and have been calling for action against Netflix. Bloggers have also been noting, critical of Netflix, that a parody of Islam or the Prophet, Mohamad, would not be streamed. We remember the violent consequences of Danish cartoons in the past as well as the shootings at Charlie Hebdo.

The Christian tradition, on the whole, has incorporated humorous interpretations of biblical episodes. Many contemporary political cartoons make their point with reference to biblical characters and biblical themes, especially for justice and for peace. And there have been some films which relied on audience knowledge of Gospel events to make their points by humour. Prominent was the 1979 The Life of Brian, and a Last Supper episode in Mel Brooks’ The History of the World Part I (1981). By and large, Christians and Catholics around the world saw the humour and recognised the Gospels while Christians of a more fundamentalist persuasion, with their adherence to literal interpretation without knowledge of literary forms, did not. It would be very surprising if many, even any, Christians found these Brazilian films truly humorous. They are exaggerated parodies. If looked at as comedies, that would be judged as exercises in the broadest type of comedy for which the adjectives raucous, course, crass, irreverent quickly come to mind. Slang would call them “ratbag” humour. And, it would seem, that they have been calculated to be offensive to a wide range of people, especially Christians. The writers of the films indicate in their screenplays that they are familiar with the Gospel texts and with the theological/spiritual meanings of the texts. But then they ‘go to town’ on them. The Last Hangover is basically a drunken binge, the effect of the supper felt the next day, the mystery of Jesus’ behaviour and his disappearance. The apostles are presented as a group of gross “boofheads”, not a spiritual thought in the heads, welcoming prostitutes to the meal, Peter particularly promiscuous, some Roman soldiers arriving, Jesus moody and erratic. The First Temptation of Christ (with title echoes of The Last Temptation) offers another party, presided over by a rather cautionary and a somewhat clownish Joseph. Jesus is returning from his 40 days in the desert and is being welcomed home but wanting to leave. Once again, a lot of the behaviour is boorish, raucous and coarse. And the characterisations seem particularly crass. There has been a lot of criticism of the presentation of Jesus, implications of a gay orientation, some camp behaviour. However, the gay character he met in the desert turns out to be Satan himself, initially camp but ultimately vicious and vindictive. One of the strong criticisms of the film’s screenplay would be the character of Uncle Victor who turns out to be an incarnation of God the Father, Mary and Joseph revealing to their son that Uncle Victor is truly his father. There is a grubby parody tone when Uncle Victor is made to have lascivious designs and desires towards Mary – and she seems something of a willing accomplice. Which raises the question of how to describe these films and whether they are blasphemous. Blasphemy implies explicit intent in mockery. Whether these films are blasphemous can be debated. Perhaps that was not the intention but rather the use of the usual explanation/ excuse: “just having a bit of fun”. At the least, the film-makers are quite profane in their interpretation of situations, creation of characters, crass dialogue (of the four-letter kind in the English subtitles), certainly an attempt to bring characters from sacred writings and traditions as far down to earth as possible. In general, there can be too kinds of responses to films like this – the crusading response, the educating response. Crusaders prefer a militant approach, an attack on Netflix, urging customers to boycott the streaming service. Some would argue that this approach gives too much air and publicity to the films which might be better ignored. On the other hand, educators prefer to explore the phenomenon, offer some analysis, enable viewers to look at the material with some informed critical judgement.

There will be more nuanced responses to these films according to different sensibilities and sensitivities, cultural differences. This response echoes an English-speaking world culture. The most telling commentaries would be from Brazil, commentaries both religious and secular, and other responses from Latin American countries. Eventually, after the controversies, the question would be raised whether these films are worth this kind of attention.

SIGNIS REVIEWS FEBRUARY 2020 BAD BOYS FOR LIFE BEAUTIFUL DAY IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIGGEST LITTLE FARM, The COLOUR OUT OF SPACE DOLITTLE FOR SAMA GO! HIDDEN LIFE, The JUST MERCY LIKE A BOSS MEETING GORBACHEV MY SPY PROFESSOR AND THE MADMAN, The SEBERG TRUE HISTORY OF THE KELLY GANG, The UNDERTOW UNDERWATER UNTOUCHABLE BAD BOYS FOR LIFE US, 2020, 124 minutes, Colour. Will Smith, Martin Lawrence, Vanessa Hudgens, Alexander Ludwick, Charles Melton, Paola Nunez, Kate del Castillo, Nicky Jam, Joe Pantoliano, Jacob Scipio, Theresa Randle. Directed by Abdil and Billal. Whew, talk about action! And that is only for the first 10 minutes!! Our heroes drive, seemingly at 100 mph, weaving in and out of the Miami traffic with reckless enthusiasm, only for the episode to finish up with a joke about babies. Will Smith and Martin Lawrence made such an impression in 1995 with Bad Boys that they have remained in the imagination of the cinema audience for so long, enjoying a sequel in 2003. It seems amazing that it has taken 17 years for this third film in the series to reach the screen.

The two films were directed by Michael Bay who has built up a reputation for non-stop action, non-stop loudness (and that is just for the Transformer movies). He is not at the helm of this film. But the two directors, from Belgium, must be his most ardent disciples because they have not spared any effort in outBaying Michael Bay in terms of fierce and fast action. Unless you have a heart condition and are cautious about over excitement, you can’t help but being caught up in two hours of sometimes breathless action. There are some dramatic pauses, giving more background to the characters and the situation created here, but, then off we go again. Mike and Marcus, Will Smith and Martin Lawrence, are still in Miami, but certainly not as young as they used to be. Marcus is certainly heavier and slower. He taunts Mike with dyeing his beard. However, they have their song about Bad Boys and declare that they are Bad Boys for life. This, of course, is sorely tested. The audience is transferred from Miami to Mexico City violently to a prison laundry and a criminal matriarch on the loose, with a son in his early 20s, born in prison, both remembering his father who died there, breathing vengeance (that’s a bit of an understatement) on all who were involved in the case. There is a series of assassinations, lawyers, judges, police – but, it is revealed, the most blamed is Mike, to be killed last so that he suffers most. However, the son jumps the gun, that is fires the gun, wounding Mike, upsetting his angry mother. Which brings us back into Miami police and action, Joe Pantoliano repeating his turn as Captain Howard, but setting up a new squad of experts for police investigation, Mike wanting to be part of it, his not being allowed, but permitted to go along. His interpretation of this permission of surveillance is to leap out of vehicles, confront suspects violently, going to action in a gaudy nightclub, exasperating the powers that be. But, the members of the squad are an interesting group with action expertise, strategies, computer skills, and a young man who can give the impression of being a swinger. After the attempt on his life, Mike confides in Marcus and the audience with an intriguing story about his action before the two Bad Boys met, explaining why he is the target of the Mexican vengeance. Will Marcus, who is now a grandfather and who is studying non-violence, help Mike when he goes to Mexico? A rhetorical question, of course! It all builds up to a huge confrontation in Mexico City, elaborate shootouts, rescuing Marcus as he hangs from a building, build up to a stand between Mike and the mother, some revelations for her son, and a huge apocalyptic conflagration. Who could ask for anything more? An exemplary archetype for a 21st century action film. And, there is a tantalising final moment to indicate the plotline for the next sequel. A BEAUTIFUL DAY IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD US, 2019, 109 minutes, Colour. Tom Hanks, Matthew Rhys, Chris Cooper, Susan Kelechi Watson, Maryann Plunkett, Enrico Colantoni, Wendy Makkena, Tammy Blanchard, Noah Harpster, Christine Lahti, Maddie Corman. Directed by Marielle Heller. Do you know Mr Rogers? Mr Fred Rogers? If you asked that question of Americans who grew up in

the 1980s and 1990s, they would be able to tell you immediately. He was that genial man who appeared on television, talking about all kinds of things, happy, serious, singing his songs, playing with his puppets, welcoming everyone to his neighbourhood. It is a pity that in these days, given the bad reputation on a number of television personalities in the United States, in Britain, in Australia, celebrities in jail, that an automatic reaction to the story of Mr Rogers is to be wary, wondering, even suspicious. When the documentary about him was released in 2018, Welcome to My Neighbourhood, and we didn’t know who Mr Rogers was, audiences may have been wondering whether this was an expose. It was definitely not. It was a portrait of Mr Rogers. A tribute to him. For those who have not seen the documentary, they may be bringing this kind of suspicion to what is a very nice and very humane film. After all, here is Tom Hanks and who is nicer on screen? His performance was nominated for awards. No suspicions, rather a welcome to Mr Rogers’ neighbourhood. However, there is a surprise for the audience. While Mr Rogers is central to the story, he is not the central character. This is a journalist, a critical writer who is asked to do a pleasant piece about Mr Rogers as an American hero. The journalist, Lloyd (played rather intensely by Matthew Rhys) is unwilling to meet Mr Rogers. However, conscientious, he does his job, goes to see Mr Rogers, discovers his niceness, watching him in the studio doing his television shows, having a series of interviews with him. Which don’t quite turn out the way that Lloyd expected. Rather, Mr Rogers has the pleasant knack of turning back the interview, Mr Rogers interviewing the interviewer, alert to problems, asking gently probing questions. Mr Rogers is able to do rather effective counselling, quietly challenging, on air as he talks so personally and intently to his audience, in his ability to interact with people. And this is important for Lloyd, married to a supportive wife (Susan Kelechi Watson), with a baby boy, but with a lifelong anger against the father who deserted the family when his wife was terminally ill. In fact, the key theme of the film is Lloyd and his hostility towards his father, the outbursts of anger, the gradual coming to terms with his anger, his father dying. A lot of the power of this drama comes from the performance by Chris Cooper as the father who acknowledges his past and wants some kind of reconciliation. One of the key sequences in the film is a silent minute. Mr Rogers challenges Lloyd to be quiet for a minute – and, the soundtrack goes silent, we sit watching the two men. And the challenge for us is what we ourselves are doing in the silence of that minute, what are we thinking, whom are we thinking of? As has been said, this is a nice film in the best sense. It does make us realise that, somehow or other, we are prone to be suspicious of niceness. A pity, because we need to recognise and acknowledge it. THE BIGGEST LITTLE FARM US, 2019, 91 minutes, Colour.

Directed by John Chester. This has proven to be a well-acclaimed documentary, especially for audiences interested in ecological and environmental themes. It has won a rather large cluster of award nominations and prizes, particularly in the United States. The film opens with Californian bushfires, huge fires, threatening the farm of John and Molly Chester. But, the film goes back to 2010, John Chester being a cinematographer especially for nature documentaries, his wife, Molly, being a personal chef. She has a dream of the best possible farm, cultivating a great number of crops, many fruit trees, animals on the farm as well. This is not a story of immediate success. In fact, while there are quite a number of successes, there are also quite a number of risks, failures, disappointments. The Chesters attribute their desire to buy land and develop the farm to the soulful eyes of the dog that touches their fancy and they buy. This is a recurring theme through 10 years of farming – but, after some years, the Chester’s have a boy and he becomes a powerful motivation for success. The Chesters are enthusiastic, initially mocked by friends and family, Molly being a particularly good enthuser and, gradually, many friends want to invest. They find some land, deserted, rather barren – and they buy it. One of Molly’s pre-requisites is to find an advisor who is an expert on natural farming and they find one in an eccentric character, Alan York, who guides them, somewhat nonchalantly even in the face of disappointments, to believe in the earth doing its job, and the principle of biodiversity where everything on the farm contributes to its development. The action of the film goes year by year for seven years, some years of plenty, some years of famine, and the death of Alan York. There is quite a lot of information in the screenplay, difficulties were not anticipated, beautiful fruit being pecked by birds, coyotes raiding the chickens, gophers upsetting the soil, owls preying on gophers, the appearance of snails and the discovery that ducks consume snails at a great rate. The Chesters and the many friends and volunteers who work with them, and the selling of produce at a local stall, remind us of how rich nature can be, the soil enriching plants and trees, the trees providing fruit, the animals contributing to compost, and so back to the earth. And, eventually we come back to the initial fire re but, spoiler alert, glad to say, the Chester’s farm is saved. The couple have learned a great deal about nature. So does the audience, more than can be absorbed in one sitting. And the question, of course, it can be raised – how many farms like that of the testers are in the United States, around the world, contributing to the creative and productive collaborations with nature. COLOR OUT OF SPACE US, 2019, 111 minutes, Colour. Nicolas Cage, Joely Richardson, Madeline Arthur, Elliott Knight, Tommy Chong, Brendan Maher, Julian Hillyard, Josh C.Waller, Q'orianka Kilcher. Directed by Richard Stanley.

At times more than spaced out! Here is an adaptation, 21st-century interpretation, of a short story by celebrated horror and supernatural writer, H.P.Lovecraft. Although Lovecraft died in 1937, his stories have been continually popular, some film versions in the late 1960s and an ever-increasing number of adaptations, especially of short stories, from the 1980s to the present, over 200. The Lovecraft story here has been adapted by South African director, Richard Stanley, who made an impact in 1990 with Hardware, made a few feature films but fell foul of Hollywood in being sacked from the 1996 The Island of Dr Moreau. This is his first feature film since then although he has been busy with documentaries. This might be described as an ever more-weirdening film. While we start with an American nuclear family living out in the woods, escaping from the city, managing their own farm (cultivating and milking llamas), there is something of an eerie voice-over introducing us to the remote woods where they live, suggesting something will threaten. We get something of an intimation of this when the teenage daughter, Lavinia (Madeline Arthur) is seen performing witchcraft-like rituals and incantations in the forest – but, concerned with the healing of her mother’s illness. She has a younger teenage brother, Benny, who smokes pot and gives the impression that he is generally unreliable. This contrasts with the little brother, Jack, bespectacled, reading, a little intellectual. But, Nicolas Cage has top billing. In recent years he has made almost 5 films per year, lots of thrillers, many of his characters manic, so that it is difficult to discern whether he is acting manically or his character is becoming ever more mad. He is the father, resenting his overbearing father from the past, yet beginning to repeat the patriarchal domination. His wife is played by Joely Richardson, working from home, a strong-minded character, devoted to her children, but with the terminal illness. That might seem enough to work on. However, there is more, much much more. Suddenly, in their yard, there is a close encounter of the whatever kind. A mysterious spaceship, a huge hole in the ground, bright lights, colours out of space. We never see the creatures who have descended to earth nor do we know what their mission is. However, they proceed to wreak a lot of havoc. At first, the family explores the mystery, dad even going on television though making a bit of a hash of his interview. Lavinia has also encountered a student who is doing investigations of the terrain and its water content, Ward (Elliott Knight). He is called in for some expertise by the Mayor and the sheriff. And, from there, everything goes downhill for the family. If we hadn’t realised before, this is a horror variation on the close encounter theme and the consequent madness and destruction of the family. If the arrival of the spacecraft seemed a touch apocalyptic, then the immediate consequences on the family are visualised as apocalypticer. And, not to be outdone, the film goes into full throttle of weirdness and madness, apocalypticest! There are quite a number of disturbing visuals, the ill mother on the couch gradually absorbing her little son, the llamas going berserk, and death and destruction all round.

After the press preview, some of the reviewers were discussing and condemning this film as if it were claiming to be high, intelligent drama. It is obviously not. It is for the horror-fest fans and made accordingly. A bit too much for mainstream audiences – but it should be very popular with the horror devotees. DOLITTLE US, 2020, 105 minutes, Colour. Robert Downey Jr, Antonio Banderas, Michael Sheen, Jim Broadbent, Jesse Buckley, Harry Collett, Kasia Smutniak, Carmel Laniado. Voices of: Emma Thompson, Remi Malek, John Cena, Kumail Nunjiani, Octavia Spencer, Tom Holland, Craig Robinson, Ralph Fiennes, Selena Gomez, Marion Cotillard, Frances de la Tour, Jason Mantzoukas. Is it Dr Dolittle? That Dr Dolittle, the doctor who talks to the animals? Yes it is – although Dolittle is, in fact, the name of Eliza Doolittle’s father. This one is definitely Dr Dolittle. Those not as young as they used to be may well remember Rex Harrison and his recitative songs and the Push Me-Pull-You?. More recently, Eddie Murphy was Dr Dolittle, twice. Hugh Lofting stories have always been popular. The target audience here is definitely the children’s audience, costumes and spectacle, Dr Dolittle’s castle for the animals, Queen Victoria‘s sick room, a voyage to the South Seas, a mysterious moat kingdom, caves and dragons. And, there are lots and lots of animals, talking animals, done with special effects but looking extremely realistic. (However, for British animals, there are a lot of American accents and anachronistic Americanisms.) There is not so much for the adults who will be accompanying the children, the comedy being very broad, flatulence and body jokes, comic villains, fights, and the confrontation with the Dragon. One very climactic moment to soothe the savage beast is the dock withdrawing from the Dragon’s stomach all the metal and armour, odd bits of garbage, from the Dragon in pain with the final relief of the withdrawal of a bagpipe! So, here is Robert Downey Jr as Dr Dolittle. At first he appears in animated form with Polly the Parrot narrating Dr Dolittle’s history, his healing the animals, his ability to talk to the animals, his meeting his soul-mate, Lily, her going on an expedition and disappearing from his life. Robert Downey is not so convincing as the doctor. This cartoon prologue is well done and sounds very good, expertly spoken by Emma Thompson. Polly is one of the most significant creatures in Dolittle’s life getting him back to heal the animals again. And, to match the special effects animals, there is a very wide range of star voices, Rami Malek as the huge but easily intimidated gorilla, Ralph Fiennes as the menacing tiger… The action involves a little boy, Stubbins (Harry Collett) son of a hunter who finds he cannot kill animals, especially the squirrel he accidentally hurts – but Polly to the rescue. She leads him to Dolittle’s home, only to find a dishevelled Dolittle unwilling to help. Needless to say, he is eventually

going to help, especially when summoned to the bedside of a mysteriously ill Queen Victoria (Jessie Buckley). The adventure gets rather wild when it seems she has been poisoned and the only remedy is in a far and inaccessible island. And, we find, it is ruled by a rather piratical looking Antonio Banderas. So, lots of adventures on the island, pursued by the jealous doctor played by Michael Sheen, all building up to that confrontation with the Dragon and relief from the bagpipe. As has been said, the appeal is definitely to the younger audiences, adults possibly finding it a bit hard going to keep up enthusiasm. A FALL FROM GRACE US, 2020, 122 minutes, Colour. Crystal Fox, Phylicia Rashad, Bresha Webb, Mehcad Brooks, Cicely Tyson, Tyler Perry, Matthew Law, Donovan Christie Jr, Adrian Pasdar. Directed by Tyler Perry. Tyler Perry has his own studios and is a prolific writer and director of films, noted for his Maedea series, very popular amongst African-American? audiences. While he works with African- American stories and characters, some of his dramas have had wider popularity, especially with his association with Netflix. In its way, this is a universal story, not dependent on race, but with a strong cast of African- American actors, Crystal Fox in the central role, and an opportunity to see Phylicia Rashad after her television success on the Cosby Show. Veteran actress, Cicely Tyson, age 94, has a strong cameo role. Tyler Perry is the head of a law firm. Bresha Webb is the aspiring lawyer who is asked to take on a case and persuade the defendant to plead guilty. Adrian Pasdar is the white prosecutor. The film opens with a suicide and the young lawyer’s husband as the negotiator. While this is a prologue, it recurs at the end with some force. The basic story is told in continuous time, the interviews by the lawyer with the defendant, and with her best friend (Phylicia Rashad). The defendant, Grace, tells her story in flashback, focusing on her divorce, her living alone, her work, encountering an artist photographer, his courting her, and their marriage, and then her complete disillusionment. The young lawyer fails at her attempt to defend her client, demands further interrogation of a witness, is charged with contempt of court by the judge. The solution takes place rather quickly at the end of the film, some twists, especially concerning the best friend, that audiences would not have anticipated. And this leads to further complications. Which means that this is an interesting murder investigation film and court case.

FOR SAMA UK/ Syria, 2019, 96 minutes, Colour. Directed by Waad Al- Kateab and David Watts. Sometimes a blogger will complain that a film was worthless and that that was 100 minutes of life that could never be recovered. On the other hand, there are some films that a reviewer should urge an audience to see, 100 minutes of life very well invested. This is a recommendation for For Sama. With so many wars during the last decade, especially in the Middle East, in Africa, audiences can be overwhelmed, news headlines, images for television, a media bombardment, then gaps of time when little is seen or heard from a particular area, audiences sometimes wondering what has happened. And then another bombardment, more graphic media images. And, we sometimes remember, that while we are not hearing any immediate news, wars go on, day by day, suffering, injuries, hunger, oppression – and thousands of refugees. And this is what For Sama is about. However, it is a film with a difference. A young Syrian student, Waad, goes to Aleppo for studies, gets caught up in the rebellion of 2010, becomes involved in the political action, takes her camera out into the streets and, over several years, films the people, the bombardments, the hospital work for those wounded, recording injuries and deaths. She has a great admiration for a local doctor, Hamza Al- Kateab (whose wife opts to leave as a refugee rather than stay with her husband). It is clear from the footage that Waad admires Hamza, so it is no surprise that, eventually, they marry. Their daughter, Sama, is born in 2015. Her mother makes this film for her, for her heritage, the story of her father and mother, the siege of Aleppo, the suffering of the people. Which gives the documentary an extra human touch, many sequences of Sama, baby, early months, beginning to walk, talk, become a child. On the one hand, there is the violence of the bombardments, especially so many from Russian planes. There is the ever-encroaching advance of the military forces of the regime. Hospitals are bombed. Hamza finds an old building and transforms it, surgery and hospital care continue, even with limited means. There is an unexpectedly powerful sequence when a baby is born, seems lifeless, the hospital staff making every effort to shake and beat life into the child, seemingly impossible, but… Finally, the military get closer to Aleppo, a family that we have got to know, whose life we have seen in detail, caring father, mother providing as much as she could, the children playing, getting a little education, yet referring to the grim details of the war and siege as ordinary parts of their conversation. The film was nominated for an Oscar for Best Documentary. Whether we are familiar with the civil war in Syria over many years or whether it has not made such an impact on us, this is a documentary to be seen, a documentary to challenge, to elicit some understanding, a great deal of compassion. This is very true of For Sama.

GO! Australia, 2020, 102 minutes, Colour. William Lodder, Richard Roxburgh, Frances O' Connor, Anastasia Bampos, Dan Wyllie, Cooper van Grootel, Damien de Montemas, Darius Amarfio Jefferson. Directed by Owen Trevor. Certainly an energetic title. And, in fact, this is quite an energetic film. It is a film designed for the family, youngsters enjoying the action, teenagers identifying with the central characters, some tough family situations, some valuable lessons in understanding oneself, the role of parents, the role of mentors. This is a film from Western Australia, very proud of its locations, promoting state and national Go-Kart? competitions. Starring as the mother is Frances O’Connor? whose family migrated to Western Australia where she grew up. The film is a kind of welcome home to her. The other adult star of the film is Richard Roxburgh, the veteran driver who is rather disillusioned, disappointed in life, running a Go-Kart? track and being challenged to become a mentor. But, it is the teenagers that we focus on. Jack (William Lodder, in his only role so far) arrives with his widowed mother and precious memories of time with his dead father, into the small town of Busselton where his mother intends to set up a shop as Well Is renovate a house for their home – which she does. In the meantime, she urges Jack to go to a party, a party for Mandy (Anastasia Bampos also her only role so far) at the track. He meets a young aboriginal friend, Colin Darius Amarfio Jefferson), who is bullied by Mandy’s brother and some of the locals. Jack immediately wants to participate in the race, full of exhilaration. And, this is his story, plenty of ups, plenty of downs, the kind of issues familiar from this kind of film where we know, ultimately, he will be successful. While Richard Roxburgh as Patrick acts in an expected way, he is still different, reluctant to help Jack, not wanting any backchat, getting him to do menial jobs and repaying him with rides around the track. Eventually, there are many scenes of training and wise advice for those contemplating a Go-Kart? amateur career or professional career! The trouble is that Mandy is the daughter of the local entrepreneur whose bullying son assumes that he will be champion. Father and son are chauvinist and ignore Mandy’s talents with machines. Jack doesn’t and she becomes part of the team. Meanwhile there is a pleasantly awkward romantic set up with the local policeman, inevitably named Barry (Daniel Wyllie) and Jake set setting him up for a date with his mother, much awkwardness and all. Some of the races don’t go as planned, Jack discovering how stubborn he can be, wanting to beat his rival at all costs – but Patrick explaining anger and “red mist” advising him to count backwards from five in order to clear his vision and motivation. In many ways, this is a formula film (whatever formula number Go-Kart? racing has) but, the plot and the performances are much better than usual, meaning that even elderly audiences might be

drawn in to enjoy a family outing. A HIDDEN LIFE US/Germany, 2019, 174 minutes, Colour. August Diehl, Valerie Pachner, Maria Simon, Karin Neuhauser, Tobias Moretti, Ulrich Mathes, Matthias Schoenaerts, Franz Rogowski, Karl Markovics, Bruno Ganz, Michael Nuqvist. Directed by Terrence Malick. The title comes from a quotation, George Elliot in Middlemarch. It highlights the power of small and hidden lives, their power for good and its effect. The quotation rightly applies to the Austrian conscientious objector to his country’s involvement in World War II, to the oath of loyalty that each soldier was required to make to Adolf Hitler himself. “..for the growing good of the world is partly dependent on unhistoric acts; and that things are not so ill with you and me as they might have been, is half owing to the number who lived faithfully a hidden life, and rest in unvisited tombs.” This is the story of Franz Jagerstatter, the Austrian farmer who was prepared to go to prison, prepared to die for his convictions, the conscientious objector against Hitler and the war. While the film shows his Austrian Catholicism, his life of faith and devotion, the advice he seeks from the parish priest as well as from the Bishop, the screenplay does not name his Catholicism so explicitly. And, at the end, there is no indication that, in fact, Franz Jagerstatter was beatified by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007, a strong witness to the injustices of the war. Jagerstatter is the Catholic stance while Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Lutheran pastor, is the Protestant witness to anti-Nazi defiance. This film, running five minute short of three hours (which some reviewers and audiences have found rather long, languorously long) has been directed by the celebrated Terrence Malick and so has received more extensive release. While A Hidden Life does tell its story in a continuous linear screenplay, Malick has never been a conventional storyteller. While he has a deep admiration for Jagerstatter and his stances and his faith motivations leading to ultimate self-sacrifice, Malick is something of a visual poet. With Italian mountain locations standing in for Austria and Jagerstatter’s village of St Radegund, so much of the film, with his using widescreen lenses, invites wonder and contemplation. Jagerstatter comes from a beautiful natural world, lives in harmony with it is a farmer, but is prepared to leave it because of principle and conviction. He is portrayed by German actor, August Diehl, who makes a convincing character. He is matched by Valerie Pachner as Fani, his wife,. We see their courtship, their marriage, having a child, the hard work in those beautifully-shot fields, with the mountain backgrounds. We see their life with other people in the village. We see them at church. Perhaps this should have been mentioned earlier, but the opening minutes of the film have substantial and disturbing footage from the 1930s, Hitler and his entourage, public rallies, his speeches, the adoring public, the spirit of Heil Hitler. Obviously, this creates an initial atmosphere for

this story. So, Franz goes to a neighbouring town for military training, bayonet practice, encountering a friend who is a conscientious objector. When Franz returns home, he is troubled, sharing this with Fani, but their becoming victims of derision by their fellows, being vilified, finding it difficult to sell their produce (though some sympathy from the few older women). Fani’s sister, unmarried, comes to live on the farm and help with the work but strong moral support. Frantz’s mother, hostile to Fani, also lives there. It is no surprise when Franz is called up, refuses the salute and the oath, is imprisoned, interrogated, mocked, treated badly. Fani tries to organise a visit to him but is baffled by bureaucratic manipulation. However, the screenplay relies on excerpts from their many letters, declarations of conviction, loving support, spoken in voice-over by the couple. A lot of the second part of the film is spent in prisons, especially with the transfer of Franz to Berlin, the range of prisoners there, the maltreatment, interrogations, torture, squalid cells, time in the yards, the witnessing of executions. There is the pathos of their not being allowed to touch when Fani, accompanied by her father, is eventually allowed to see her husband in Berlin. And, it is jolting for the prisoners to witness executions, a guillotine, and jolting for audiences to watch the men going to be killed. Martyrdom is demanding. Terrence Malick, making this film in his 70s, drawing on his expertise in filming even drastic circumstances with beauty, exploring the nobility of the human spirit, has given this 21st-century world a witness to faith and heroism, for which we can be grateful. Winner of the Ecumenical Award, Cannes, 2019. JUST MERCY US, 2019, 137 minutes, Colour. Michael B. Jordan, Brie Larson, Jamie Foxx, Tim Blake Nelson, Rafe Spall, Robert Morgan, O' Shea Jackson Jr. Directed by Destin Daniel Cretton. Justice and mercy have met, proclaims the Psalm. This is certainly not the case in Alabama in the late 1980s, early 1990s. In fact, instead of justice, there are many travesties of justice. This is especially the case for prisoners on Death Row. Just Mercy is a very interesting film, an exploration of the justice system, an expose of the injustices, campaigns for true justice – and a powerful argument against capital punishment. It is based on a true story, the life’s work of campaigner, Bryan Stevenson, a young African American from a poor family in Delaware, who experienced the unjust murder of his grandfather, was educated at Harvard and did an internship in Alabama in the mid-1980s, encountering men on Death Row. On graduation, he packed his bags, his mother very afraid of the dangers for a black man in the south, and drove to Monroeville, Alabama, the home of Harper Lee, the home of that most exemplary of American lawyers, Atticus Finch.

Bryan Stevenson was a man on a mission (and, it should be said about his dedication and success that he is still on that mission after 30 years). With the help of a local assistant, Eva (Brie Larson) is able to set up an office, initially rejected, and has the names of six prisoners whom he wants to interview, hostility interrogated by the guard at the prison, humiliatingly strip-searched, treated with some suspicion by the authorities. The principal focus of this story is on one of the inmates, Walter Mc Millian (a strong performance by Jamie Foxx) who was put on death row even before his trial, a man with solid alibis, held up on the road by hostile police, targeted by an even more hostile sheriff, found guilty on the most unreliable testimony of alleged witnesses. McMillian? is against any help but Bryan Stevenson goes to visit his family. He takes on the case, confronting the local DA (Rafe Spall) who is racist and under the influence of the sheriff (with the final credits informing us that the sheriff was re-elected for 30 years, until 2019).. Which makes the plot interesting in terms of detection, investigation, potential witnesses, the confrontation with the main witness (an excellent cameo from Tim Blake Nelson), hopes, judicial frustrations, appeals to good nature and true justice. There is a moving subplot with another prisoner, Herbert Richardson (Robert Morgan), a Vietnam veteran with PTSD who created and planted a bomb which killed a woman, is repentant, hopes for a stay of execution which is not granted. The film’s audience goes into the execution was Bryan Stevenson, a jolting experience to watch. Bryan Stevenson is played by Michael B.Jordan who has emerged as a strong heroic character in recent films (Fruitvale Station, the Creed films). Here he is required to be 100% sincere and heroic, which he is. As with so many films these days, there are photos of the main protagonists, further information about the characters, but a fine tribute to Bryan Stevenson and his dedication. There is an epilogue with Brian and Walter Mc Millian testifying to Congress. There is a fine phrase at the end of the film: there is a place for “Unmerited Grace” in our lives. LIKE A BOSS US, 2020, 83 minutes, Colour. Tiffany Haddish, Rose Byrne, Salma Hayek, Jennifer Coolidge, Billy Porter, Ari Graynor, Ryan Hansen, Karan Soni, Jimmy O.Yang.. Directed by Miguel Arteta. For more than a decade, raucous and raunchy American comedies have been very popular. Audiences seem to identify with the characters, enjoy the situations, the touch of the outrageous, elements of vulgarity, elements of explicit sexuality, even more elements of innuendo. And, Rose Byrne has been in quite a number of them, Bridesmaids, Neighbours, Neighbours 2… And then, in recent times, Tiffany Hadddish has specialised in them making quite a splash in the raucously popular and unrestrained, Girls Night.

This brief film is rather more low-key than usual, although Tiffany Haddish does her best to keep the action rolling and Rose Byrne has to act as a desperate character for so much of the time. This is very much a women’s film. There are only four male characters throughout, a boyfriend, and yes-man to his dominating boss, and two men who are inventors of cosmetics. They are in no way essential to the plot! So, we focus on two friends from their high school days, Mel (Rose Byrne) and Mia (Tiffany Haddish). They have built up a small company, developing cosmetics, manage a boutique store where Jennifer Coolidge and Billy Porter work, adding a touch of comedy. The main drama of this comedy is the ambition to take over the company by a most obnoxious boss, played with full flair by Salma Hayek. She has a cosmetics empire, has her eye on some of the women’s products, is unscrupulous in her manipulation, working on the principle of divide and conquer – which she does. However, the audience is on side when the two friends tell each of the truth about themselves, reconcile, get their employees to do some cosmetic inventing, take over a presentation and win over everybody as they upstage their boss, their boss no longer. All very slight, very short, a surprise from director Miguel Arteta who has made some more substantial films in the past like The Good Girl with Jennifer Aniston. MEETING GORBACHEV US/Germany, 2018, 95 minutes, Colour. Directed by Werner Herzog. At the time of the making of this documentary, Mikhail Gorbachev was turning 87. He had been in hospital, was diabetic (and receiving the gift of a sugarless chocolate birthday cake), was happy to be interviewed but, speaking only in Russian to Herzog’s questions in English, we see that he has slowed down a lot, taking his time to answer the questions, often being brief, but becoming more to life as the interview goes on and he is able to relive his time as president of the Soviet Union. This is a portrait of Gorbachev himself, of his political activity and its repercussions on the whole world in the latter part of the 1980s and the dismantling of the Soviet Union. Hertzog is quite an admirer (much more genial than might have been expected from some of his other documentaries). This is not a warts and all documentary. In fact, no warts at all to speak of. While there were many in the Soviet Union, collapsing, in the early 1990s, Russians staging a coup against all of while he was on holidays, Boris Yeltsin taking over, who considered Gorbachev a traitor to his Communist and Soviet heritage, he was something of a hero to the world. This portrait may be aimed at converting those who do not admire Gorbachev but it is definitely a documentary to remind those who do it by him of his achievements. One of the advantages that Herzog has is access to a whole range of visual sources, newsreel footage, photos… Which means that in his illustration of Gorbachev’s early life, born 1931, the landscapes of Russia, the fields and harvests, family photos, we are able to build up a picture of the

young Gorbachev, working on the farm, going to school, high grades, acceptance at University in Moscow, some law studies, the interest in politics, his becoming a student leader, going back to the provinces as a local organiser, even receiving a medal of acknowledgement from Brezhnev (alarming footage of the old man, senile, wheeled out for public occasions). We see very quickly, during the premierships of the elderly and drop of an Shenango, that Gorbachev had a wider range of interests, visited the West, learned how the Soviet Union was stagnating and how it needed to reform, glasnost and perestroika, and then assuming power and ushering in a new era which, within six years, led to the end of the Soviet Union. Gorbachev was quite a world figure during the last half of the 1980s and many audiences will be glad to be reminded of this. He was admired by Margaret Thatcher. He had dialogue meetings with Ronald Reagan in Iceland. He campaigned against nuclear weapons. The film includes testimony from the Hungarian Prime Minister of the time who opened up Gorbachev’s eyes to how small country could be prosperous, interviews with Reagan and Bush advisers, George Shultz and James Baker, German political advisers. Then the visuals of citizens of the Baltic countries forming a continuous line of personal protest, of the cutting of the barbed wire on the Austrian border then, of course, the demolishing of the Berlin Wall. So, admiration for corporate of and sharing his disappointment of how he was overturned by the coup, signed his resignation, lived to see a European world different from what he hoped for. And, we realise that this is not the kind of world we live in now, regrettably so. MY SPY US, 2020, 102 minutes, Colour. Dave Bautista, Chloe Coleman, Kristin Schaal, Ken Jeong, Greg Bryk, Parisa Fitz- Henley, Noah Danby, Devere Rogers. Directed by Peter Segal. Audiences might get a surprise should they stumble on this film and choose to see it. It is very enjoyable in a very popular kind of way. One of the chief aspects of the film is that it will remind us of films we have seen before, Dwayne Johnson dealing with kids, Jackie Chan as the spy next door, Vin Diesel as the Pacifier, Arnold Schwarzenegger as the Kindergarten Cop, John Cena playing with fire. Big strong man meets kids. Famous former wrestler becomes screen action hero – with the touch of comedy. This time the main character, J J, seems very unlikely, another former wrestler, Dave Bautista. He is not the most sympathetic of screen presences and this film relies on that, showing his abrasive side, his abilities as a top soldier but his inabilities in espionage. His boss, Ken Jeong, assigns him to a surveillance case, hoping that an international criminal will come to visit his sister-in-law and niece (which, of course, he does at the end, providing all kinds of action climaxes).

It is the niece who is key to the whole experience Sophie, Chloe Coleman. She has a cheeky screen presence, rather engaging them off-putting. In fact, she is smart and discovers the surveillance exercise very quickly, the spy and his offsider, Bobbi, who hero worships him but he tends to ignore her. She is played by comedian, Kristin Schaal. So, the setup. We see JJ initially demolish a squad of Eastern European criminals but that was not the aim of the mission. JJ is big, hulking, unable to relate to people despite Bobbi’s overtures. JJ and Bobby both react badly to being found out so soon – and, being continually blackmailed by Sophie who was thoughtful enough to film everything on her phone. What follows, of course, is the humanising of JJ, taking her to school, to an art show, to skating (where he has many pratfalls busy is able to one-up Sophie’s school bullies). Her mother is initially suspicious but, since movies are exercises in suspension of disbelief, there is romance in the air! There is also the comic routines of the gay couple across the corridor, one always silent on the other who prattles on incessantly, who are (and who are not) what they seem. Because Sophie is so upfront, because her mother is so nice, because JJ allows us to see him mellow, because Bobby can intervene no matter how awkwardly, because the villain is so sinister, everything works out very satisfactorily. Quite entertaining. THE PEANUT BUTTER FALCON US, 2019, 97 minutes, Colour. Shia La Boeuf, Zachary Gottesagen, Dakota Johnson, Thomas Haden Church, John Hawkes, Jon Bernthal, Wayne Dehart. Directed by Tyler Nilson, Michael Schwartz. What’s in the title? The explanation for this title emerges and is quite genial. Over the years they have been quite a number of films featuring children and adults with Down Syndrome. This time the young man with Down Syndrome is at the centre of the film. He is played by Zachary (Zach) Gottsagen. Zach is also the name of his character. He has a friendly on-screen presence and easily draws the audience into his story and into his journey. Zach has no family and lives in an institution, creating a bit of mischief sometimes, sharing a room with a gruff old man, a cameo by Bruce Dern, who sympathises with him and suggests that can oil his body and slip through the window bars and go on his way. The destination of his way, fostered by an old videocassette that he keeps watching, is the home of a wrestler, Salt Water Redneck. Zach wants to wrestle. In the meantime, Tyler, an angry young man, suggestions that he was responsible for his brother’s death, a brother whom he loved and admired, creates trouble, stealing catches from local fisherman, pursued by officials, threatened by the men for disrupting their living – and he, spitefully angry, sets fire to their gear. This means a pursuit. He is played as surly (but, eventually redeemable) by Shia La Boeuf who has played plenty of surly young men in his time.

Whatever the providence, Zach and Tyler find each other by accident. Tyler wants to be rid of Zach but experiences a moment of kindness and goes back to rescue him (literally, from a bigoted boy who dares Zach to dive into the water though he can’t swim). This is the prologue to what could be called a road film – although a lot of the travel is by foot, by boat, on a raft, by car. And audiences will appreciate the steps of friendship between the two, some dependence, but not a co-dependence, Tyler hearing Zach’s ambitions and taking on his training. The film’s drama is a series of events along the way, a vicious attack by the fishermen, an encounter with a blind preacher, Blind Jasper John (Wayne Dehart) who teaches kids, building a raft, meeting up with Zach’s carer, Eleanor (Dakota Johnson, sympathetic), who feels responsible for Zach’s running away. Decisions have to be made. We know that they will eventually get to meet the famed wrestler (Thomas Haden Church), now grizzled and retired – but ready to teach Zach some moves and arrange a contest with Zach fighting with the moniker, The Peanut Butter Falcon, Falcon his chosen name (and peanut butter the only thing available for some facial decoration!). So, a nice story development even with some tough moments. It fosters personal care for those need care, awareness and respect for the needs and hopes of the Down Syndrome man – but, probably, a number of professionals will be more concerned with how Zach will manage, his health, his emotional needs, relationships. Well worth considering both sides of this discussion, each learning from the other. THE PROFESSOR AND THE MADMAN Ireland, 2019, 122 minutes, Colour. Sean Penn, Mel Gibson, Eddie Marson, Natalie Dormer, Jennifer Ehle, Steve Coogan, Stephen Dillane, Ioan Gruffud, Jeremy Irvine, Laurence Fox, Anthony Andrews, David O' Hara, Aidan Mc Ardle, Bosco Hogan. Directed by Farhad Safinnia (as P.P.Shemran). A film about writing a dictionary? In fact, there was a fine 2013 Japanese film, The Great Passage, set in the 1990s where a company wanted to create a dictionary for the 21st-century, the story of a man involved, a story of a search for words and meaning, proofreading, highly enjoyable – but not for those who are eager for adrenaline-pumping stories, even the adrenaline-pumping at the discovery of a new word! The Professor and the Madman is also a story about compiling a dictionary, the work of Oxford University Press in the 1880s and beyond. Again, not so adrenaline-pumping, but a film for those who appreciate (and relish) words and their meanings, who value a human story. However, there is quite some adrenaline at times because of the story, not of the professor, but of the madman. Commentators on the film note that there were disputes between the makers’ company and the producer/distributor, court cases, private settlements, but the makers disappointed at the changes made by the distributors and disclaiming the film, expressing their disappointment. A number of the critics judged it accordingly, many quite dismissingly.

However, many of the public who have seen the film have been most impressed, many of the bloggers on the IMDb judging the film as very praiseworthy. This review concurs with them! And who is the Professor? He is a Scotsman, James Murray, not academically qualified but a man with an innate gift for languages who is possessed with the goal of compiling the dictionary. He is accepted but treated by many of the dons in their snobbishly dismissive way. He gets to work. He has a number of diligent assistants, very demanding that they trace the meanings of words over the centuries, check on how they were used, quotations, indicating changes… (This is not quite the adrenaline-pumping part.) The madman of the title is an American doctor, William Minor, active in the Civil War, having to brand a soldier and this experience haunting him (and shown in flashbacks several times), his imagining the soldier pursuing him, even to England, where, in a street, he obsessively shoots an innocent man mistaking him for the soldier. The man leaves a widow and many children. The casting for this film is very strong. Mel Gibson, bearded, with a Braveheart accent, reminds us of how strong an actor he can be. He brings the Professor to intense life. But the madman is expertly and movingly played by Sean Penn, gaunt, sometimes emaciated, insane, persecuted, ultimately diagnosed as schizophrenic, treated benignly in Broadmoor institution, but also subject to bizarre 19th-century medical tests. And the madman and the dictionary? The Doctor is a lover of words and the powers that be enable him to contribute to the dictionary. In fact, he contributed over 10,000 words during his time in the institution. While there are the episodes of dictionary, there is a fine story of reconciliation, forgiveness, love, as the doctor sends his pension for the support of the widow and her children, she initially sending it back, but her visiting, getting to know the Doctor, appreciating him and giving him support. She is played by Natalie Dormer. There is a supporting cast of fine British character actors including Steve Coogan, Stephen Dillane, Anthony Andrews, Ioan Gruffud, Laurence Fox and, especially Eddie Marson as the sympathetic prison guard. Jennifer Ehle plays the professor’s long-suffering but devoted wife. The film is not intended as popular entertainment. Rather it is a project that has fascinated Mel Gibson for many years and he has given his writer of his Apocalypto, Farhad Safinia, the opportunity to direct (but, with the controversy, using an alias, P.B.Shemran). Not knowing of the disputes until after seeing the film, this reviewer found it an impressive piece, re-creating its period, fine acting, stimulating drama. SEBERG US, 2019, 102 minutes, Colour. Kristin Stewart, Jack O' Connell, Anthony Mackie, Yvan Attal, Margaret Qualley, Vince Vaughn, Colm Meaney, Stephen Root. Directed by Benedict Andrews.

For the ordinary filmgoers making a selection for a film to see, the title will probably mean nothing. There will be a need for a bit of further investigation information. But, for the film buff and for those who remember films from the past, Seberg will instantly denote the actress, Jean Seberg. The film gives some very brief indications as to who Jean Seberg was, born in the midwest in 1938, an audition at 17 for her ambitions to be an actress, playing the part of Joan of Arc in Otto Preminger’s St Joan (and a glimpse of her seen of burning at the stake with the revelation that the flames got to her with some disfigurement). There is brief reference to her success in the first part of the 1960s in Paris, participating in the French Nouvelle Vague, especially with the film, Breathless. And that is it until the action for this film begins in 1968, her going to the United States to film Paint Your Wagon. Seberg is actually about Jean Seberg’s political activity, her sympathy for African-American? movements of the period, Malcolm X, Eldridge Cleaver, the Black Panthers. Which immediately put her under suspicion from J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI. The film focuses on the FBI agents, their surveillance on the actress and her contacts with the agitators, video surveillance in her home, when she went out, microphones everywhere, photographs and files, the creation of stories to undermine her and her reputation, to damage her career. If an expose of this kind of government agencies, their surveillance and its intrusion into people’s lives causes agitation and revulsion, this is a story to foster that antipathy. Whatever the alleged needs for security, the way that the FBI hounded public figures (think of Jane Fonda in the early 1970s in the Vietnam war, Hanoi Jane), was reprehensible of the time, even more in retrospect. This is especially true of the fabrications, the connivance of the media, the merciless hounding. The Jean Seberg presented here, with an arresting performance by Kristen Stewart, is a woman on edge, unhappy in her second marriage to the novelist, Romain Gary (Yvan Attal) and suspicious of his behaviour, with a son, living in Paris, invited to Hollywood. It is no wonder that she will become more and more paranoid with suspicions about the FBI, eventually depressed (with the final information of the mysterious aspects of her suicide in 1979). While the film indicates that she was making films, reference to Airport, a film in Mexico, the focus is on Jean Seberg herself, her suspicions, increasing information about what was happening to her. On the flight from Paris, she encounters an activist, Anthony Mackie, who stages an episode about African- Americans being excluded from first-class. She joins him on the tarmac for a provocative photo, is photographed by the FBI.She has an affair with him. Colm Meaney plays the head of the local FBI agency. Vince Vaughn is a seasoned agent, skilled in creating smears stories. By contrast, Jack O’ Connell plays a young agent who believes in the FBI mission, becomes more involved in the surveillance, more infatuated by the actress, even to warning her about the surveillance. A portrait of an actress at a difficult stage in her life which may not appeal to a wide public. For those who remember Jean Seberg, there may be some disappointment in not seeing much about her film career but an opportunity to focus on her being victimised by the FBI. THE TRUE STORY OF THE KELLY GANG

Australia/UK/France, 2019, Colour. George Mac Kay, Essie Davis, Nicholas Hoult, Charlie Hunnam, Russell Crowe, Orlando Schwerdt, Thomasin Mc Kenzie, Sean Keenan, Earl Cave, Marlon Williams, Louis Hewison, Josephine Blazier. Directed by Justin Kurzel. The tagline on the posters for this film is: Rewrite History. And there you have it. Fantasy or Reality? Then, as the title goes on screen, the word ‘true’ is highlighted, ironically. The screenplay is based on the Booker-prize-winning novel (2001) by Peter Carey, so this is his point of view and interpretation of the Kellys via director Justin Kurzel (Snowtown, Macbeth, Assassins’ Creed). And Peter Carey is one of the producers of this film. It could be said that most audiences would not say that they liked this film. None of the characters is likeable, even Ned himself, although there will be some sympathy for him when he was a boy (Orlando Schwerdt), a devotion to his father who was dismissed by his slatternly and possessive mother, all scrounging out a living on a selection where the landscape look like fired land and skeletal tree limbs. Then, he is patronised by a self-satisfied bushranger, Harry Power (Russell Crowe larger-than-life) who tries to corrupt Ned, buying him from his unscrupulous mother (a convincingly horrid portrait by Essie Davis). Mrs Kelly takes lovers, especially a police trooper played by Charlie Hunnam and who is violently ousted by Harry Power. By this stage, many in the audience will be thinking that they have to go home and check out the history of Ned Kelly and the Kelly family to find out whether what they have been seeing is accurate or not (not!). And, this continues the latter part of the film where Ned, now a young adult and played by George Mac Kay, has been trained as a boxer, fights in the presence of the Governor of Victoria, is patronised by a British trooper, Fitzpatrick, seemingly friendly, but manipulating Ned to his own purposes and played by Nicolas Hoult. He introduces Ned, seemingly a touch Puritan in his life so far despite the violence, to the world of brothels, Ned discovering the friendly Mary Hearn (Thomasin Mc Kenzie) and further complications with his mother who intends to marry a younger American and go to America. It is the British trooper, his breaking his promises, his double dealing with Kate Kelly, that turn Ned into a violent rebel. He re-discovers his brother, Dan, and Dan’s friend, Steve Hart. Ned has his own friend, Joe Byrne, and some homoerotic moments between them. But, speaking of homoerotic, much is made of the propensity of the bushrangers and gangs dressing in women’s clothes to put off the police riding through the countryside, the dresses as equivalent of masks. It is surprising for Ned Kelly traditionalists to see the gang all wearing dresses, Ned included, as they prepare for the coming of the train with the police to Glenrowan, Ned sitting at a desk in his dress, writing his memoirs for his unborn daughter, hostage Thomas Curnow wanting to advise him about his writing and literature, and going out to warm the train. Yes, there are the helmets, based on the Civil War impregnable submarine, a very stylised picturing of the troops lined up and firing at Ned and the gang, expressionistic rather than realistic.

And, just as we were feeling deprived of Ned’s last words, “Such is life”, Curnow gives a speech to a large and applauding public denouncing the outlaw. As has been said, this may not be the true story of the Kelly gang and we need to go back to check some sources to verify what we have seen – or find that it was not so. An argument could be made for Ned Kelly being something of a local hero in his uprising against authorities – or, he could simply seem to be, as those opposed to his legend declare, an Irish-Australian? killer. Since there have been so many films of the Kellys over the decades, think Mick Jagger and Heath Ledger, there are plenty of film versions of Ned and the Kelly gang for comparisons. UNDERWATER US, 2020, 95 minutes, Colour. Kristin Stewart, Vincent Cassel, T.J.Miller, Jessica Henrwick, John Gallagher Jr, Mamoudou Athie. Directed by William Eubank. This action show, with touches of horror, certainly lives up to its name. The underwater is in the depths of the Marianna Trench where energy companies have set up extraordinary plants and processes for searching the ocean floor. The action is somewhat similar to those films with a group of characters, isolated in space, films like Life, Passengers, but this time in the ocean. If no one can hear you cry in space, what about in the ocean depths! In one sense, this is familiar material, but it is presented with quite some pace in just over an hour and a half running time. We are introduced immediately to Norah, Kristin Stewart, shaved head, committed to her work, but very quickly experiencing vast explosions, deaths, and a remnant of survivors, a motley lot, with different areas of expertise. And there is the captain, Vincent Cassel playing a straightforward hero type rather than anything sinister. There are some comic touches by T.J. Miller (sometimes a little tiresome given the drastic life and death situation). And there is Jessica Henwick, initially intimidated, but finding the courage to survive. Just as one can be stranded in space, one can be stranded at the bottom of the Marianna Trench. What to do? What is possible? The film raises the issue of remaining in place and accepting one’s fate, one’s death or venturing on dangerous paths which will lead to death, sometimes self-sacrificing death, and a remnant surviving. This surviving group has to make its way along passages on the ocean floor, trying to reach a pod which, if the technology is still functioning (and a lot of the technology is functioning in this story), could propel some survivors to the surface. However, the writers of the screenplay seem to have a penchant for those old stories of “monsters of the deep”. Who knows what creatures lurk down there, more than 6 miles below the surface? When they gradually appear here, they are, of course, giant. And the question is whether audiences prefer to imagine the monsters or what we actually see, as here, tentacles and teeth and

suggestions of some human characteristics. Of its kind, this is quite entertaining, Kristin Stewart a strong character and presence, dangers, human nobility, fears and terror, and, especially with the final credits, a strong critique of the big business ethos of exploiting nature for financial gain in the name of energy needs. The screenplay is B-budget about A-budget technology. UNDERTOW Australia, 2018, 96 minutes, Colour. Laura Gordon, Rob Collins, Olivia DeJonge?, Josh Hellman, Josh Hayes. Directed by Miranda Nation. An Australian drama, the ebbs and flows in personal relationships, and the deceiving undertows. It is not often that we see a film photographed in Geelong and on Corio Bay – with quite an extensive coverage, the city, factories, homes, clubs, beaches and quite a commitment to the AFL club! The film is principally a portrait of Claire (Laura Gordon), married to Dan (Rob Collins. Claire is a photographer who likes to wander the beaches and capture on camera the remains of dead creatures washed up onto the sand and rocks. She is pregnant, starts to bleed, hurries to the hospital, a miscarriage. This is in the first few minutes. We are invited to empathise with Claire, her sadness and disappointment, touches of melancholy on the beach, a chance sighting of her husband accompanying a teenage girl into a motel room, wary of his account of what happened, love but growing suspicions. The film also focuses on the young girl, Angie (Olivia DeJong), an aspiring model, but a girl around town with the men, especially a relationship with local football player, Dan’s best friend. Claire is suspicious, follows Angie, stalks her – but Angie is keen on Claire doing a photo shoot. As the film progresses, we are more and more involved with each of the characters, especially when Claire discovers that Angie is pregnant, moves into mothering mode, compensating mode, further tangling the relationships. And the screenplay reminds us that we all make mistakes, sometimes devastating mistakes, which have their consequences and their catastrophes. While the film narrative is presented in terms of realism, there are quite a number of dream and fantasy sequences, especially on Claire’s part, which offer some complexity as to her character and motivations. Undertow has a women’s perspective, with the screenplay and direction by Miranda Nation.

UNTOUCHABLE US, 2019, 98 minutes, Colour. Directed by Ursula Mac Farlane. An ironic title for a film about film producer, Harvey Weinstein, and the cases against him, the testimony of many women who claim rape, attempted rape, molestation and harassment. It was released in September 2019 – and its Australian television release coincided with the jury choice for Weinstein’s trial, a week before the trial opened. The case against Harvey Weinstein is perhaps the most high-profile case against a celebrity for sexual abuse of women. It led to the Me#Too Movement, an increasing awareness of sexual violence against women, a great number of exposes and prominent men losing their jobs in business, in the media. This can be seen in the television treatment of Roger Ailes Fox News, the Loudest Voice and the film, Bombshell. For those who know a great deal of detail, have read the various articles, especially by Ronan Farrow in the New Yorker, the material will be familiar. However, for those who have only a general awareness, this documentary could be most telling. A number of women are given substantial screen time to tell their story, explain their experience and the reactions, make their case against Weinstein. A number of them are aspiring actresses, eager for a career, many feeling themselves trapped by Weinstein’s impositions and demands. A number of the interviewees are women who worked for Weinstein or for his Miramax company. The film gives the opportunity not only to listen to the women but to appreciate their pauses, hesitations, some reluctance to speak, but the courage for response to the opportunity to speak out. The interviews seem very credible. On the other hand, there is a portrait of Harvey Weinstein himself along with his producer brother, Bob Weinstein. There is his background in Brooklyn, his ambitions, moving to Buffalo and being a concert promoter, even some registering of complaints from Buffalo, 1978. He moved to New York City and, during the 1980s, learnt the business of independent production and distribution, having great success in 1989. The documentary also shows the success during the 1990s of the films that Miramax produced and distributed, Harvey Weinstein becoming more and more involved in promotion, high-profile socialisiing with his eye on Oscars, and Miramax films winning the Oscars for best film for 10 years. The film then gives a profile of Weinstein himself, his self-consciousness about his appearance, his business skills, his growing demands on the women who work for him or who sought his help or to whom he offered help. What emerges is the portrait of a monstrous man not only in his dealings with women but in his angers and demands on those who work for him. There is a climax moment when two reporters try to interview him at a party and tape his angry remarks and his arrogant claim of being the sheriff in New York City. There is interview material from Ronan Farrow and from other journalists. Most audiences will not be familiar with the women who are interviewed except with the actress,

Rosanna Arquette. There have been a number of well-known actresses who also made accusations but they are not included in this film. Perhaps the film is stronger by having women interviewed who are not so much in the public eye. On the evidence of the testimonies in this film and the profiling of Weinstein himself from the media and from interviews, the case against him in the courts is very strong.

BERLINALE 2020 ASSISTANT, The BAD TALES CHARLATAN COMMON CRIME, A CURVEBALL DEATH OF NINTENDO DELETE HISTORY FIRST COW HIDDEN LIFE, A HIGH GROUND H IS FOR HAPPINESS HOPE/HAP IRRADIANTES MINYAN MINIMATA MY SALINGER YEAR NEVER RARELY SOMETIMES ALWAYS PERSIAN LESSONS PINOCCHIO POLICE RIZI ROADS NOT TAKEN SCHWESTERLEIN SIBERIA SUK SUK THERE IS NO EVEIL… UNDINE WELCOME TO CHECHNYA WOMAN ON THE RUN THE ASSISTANT US, 2019, 87 minutes, Colour. Julia Garner, Matthew Macfadyen, Mackenzie Leigh.

Directed by Kitty Green. This film is one day in the life of an assistant who works in corporate business, especially in the entertainment world. She is played by Julia Garner, effective as the young woman who sees this job as an opportunity (encouraged by her parents) who eventually wants to work in production. The film opens in the dark, the assistant waking, preparing to go to work, with her papers, chauffeur driven, entering into the offices and turning on the lights, getting everything ready for the arrival of the other members of staff – who soon do. It is worth noting that there is a background of sexual harassment to the film and that it was released at the time of the prosecution of entrepreneur, Harvey Weinstein. The film as a contribution to the atmosphere and thrusts of the Me# Too Movement. What the audience is shown is the detailed routine required of the assistant as well as her capacity for improvisation. The boss is absent but we hear his voice on the phone. There are quite a number of other staff, men and women, working on the same floor. The women tend to be dominant. The men work but are prone to gossip and are aware of the behaviour of the boss. In many ways, the assistant is run off her feet. She has phone calls to make, appointments to establish and to confirm. She has to type. She has to make copies of documents and distribute them. She also has to go out and get the lunches. She is particularly upset when the boss brings a waitress from Idaho with promise of establishing her in a job. In the afternoon, she goes to one of the company officials who receives complaints (Matthew Macfadyen). She is both confident and lacking in confidence in making the complaint about the boss and his treatment. The official lends something of a sympathetic ear but then turns the matters back on the assistant, reminding her of the good shop she has and the opportunities it offers. She returns to her own office without achieving anything. She works late into the night, is expected to attend to all the detail and close up the office – and to appear early the next morning continue her work. This is a picture of women in the workplace in the United States, the contribution, but their being imposed on as well as being exploited by their bosses and the need for some kind of redress. BAD TALES Italy, 2020, 98 minutes, Colour. Elio Germano, Barbara Chichiarelli, Gabriel Montesi, Max Malatesta, Lino Musella, Tommaso Di Cola. Directed by Damiano D’Innocenzo?, Fabio D’Innocenzo?. This is a story of ordinary people in an ordinary Italian town. It is also the story of the chaos in their lives – and it has no happy ending. Rather, it is the equivalent of “Enter the Void”. It may appeal to an Italian audience but audiences from other cultures may find it very trying even if there is some stimulation to reflection in some of the characters and situations.

The voice-over tells a story about a girl’s diary and in the voice-over man’s intention to finish it. He also tells us that he could have told an alternate story (and, perhaps, audiences might have preferred that). He says it is a mixture of truth and lies. There is an odd range of characters which indicates the kind of daily chaos in which many people live – and some of the dire consequences. Two men are introduced, two brothers, having a meal with their families, one complaining that he is continually looking for work. Eventually we see that he has a daughter, rather morose, who swims in her uncle’s pool and develops head lice which means her hair has to be cut of and she wears wigs. The other brother is ambitious, highly emotional, frequently angry at his children, a young boy and a young girl, who buys the pool for the backyard and makes it available to the citizens, he very proud of it. His brother goes for a swim, in a jealous rage, cuts the outside of the pool container and all the water gushes out. There is also a single father, continually brash, with a son who generally does not say anything. However, they seem to have a good bond. The silent boy is attracted to the girl who has had her hair cut. Eventually, the father and son move to another town to stay with an uncle. Other episodes include a teacher who gives classes on chemicals and their effectiveness which leads to the young boy building his own bomb at home, the school upset, the teacher fired, the parents angry. When there is any fuss, especially at the table when the young boy begins to choke, the little girl bursts into tears leading to the father weeping and then angrily abusing them. In another episode, little boy is attracted to a girl in the neighbourhood, she having a look at the porn sites on her father’s phone, the two talking very frankly about sex, going off to have it in the countryside, the girl very complacent, the boy having all the talk but, after stripping, he runs away. And, as if that were not enough, after the incident with the bomb, the parents discover that their young son and young daughter have killed themselves. Enter the void. CHARLATAN Czech Republic/Poland, 2020. 125 minutes, Colour. Ivan Trojan, Joseph Trojan, Juraj Loj. Directed by Agnieszka Holland. It is a wonder that there have not been more films with this title. Whether the subject of the film actually deserved it is over for the audience to become involved in his life, his career, his behaviour. This is an arresting and complex film from Poland and the Czech Republic. It has been directed by the veteran Agnieszka Holland, who has made many striking films over four decades and more, sometimes in Poland and in Europe, as this one, quite a number in the United States ranging from The Secret Garden to. The Third Miracle Her film prior to this one was Mr Jones with James Norton, set in the 1930s, a Briton visiting the Soviet Union, critical of it, the complexities of the Stalinist

government, sympathetic American connections and the fate of Mr Jones after he has visited Moscow as Well Is the Ukraine and exposed some of the cover lies from the government about famine. This film is also broad in scope and focuses on a significant man in Czech history, Jan Mikolasek. The film opens with the death of the President of the Republic in 1958 and moves to the office of Mikosalek, noting the vast number of people queued outside his office, each with a bottle of urine which will be examined for diagnoses indications and treatment suggested. Mikolasek has a powerful reputation with crowds coming for consultation. It soon emerges that government officials, despite his treating a number of them, not only have suspicions of him but also want to get rid of him. As he proclaims, he is not a doctor. However, in the 1930s he passed examinations so that he can operate as a consultant for healing. In fact, he is a herbalist who has a strong faith, who has developed a talent for diagnosis through urine examination. We notice that the colour photography is exceedingly muted, emphasis on dark and shadow, highlighting the drabness of life in the Republic during the Communist regime of the 1950s. But when the film goes into numerous flashbacks, the colour is bright, from war sequences in World War I with the young Jan ordered to be part of an execution squad, is sprayed with the blood of a man who refuses, who tries to kill himself but only wounds his shoulder. The colour is there in the postwar world where he works for his father in a garden, appreciating his knowledge of herbs, and visiting a woman who is considered a faith-healer who tests him, approves of his capacities, trains him. There is also colour in the flashbacks to the 1930s, a period of success in clients and healing, and also, perhaps surprisingly, colour in the sequences of the Nazi occupation of Czechoslovakia. He is under suspicion, especially after the massacre at Lidice. He is also tested by Nazi officials who approve of his capacities. There is also another level in the storytelling, his advertising in the 1930s for an assistant, a rather brash young man applying and asserting himself and getting the job, having to learn on the job. Perhaps the audience is rather surprised when it emerges that Mikolasek has a homosexual orientation and, the young assistant at first unwillingly, begins a very long affair, professional assistant and companion. However, the last part of the film shows the government officials arresting both men, incarceration, interrogations, court proceedings. The portrait of Jan Mikolasek is quite complex, a good man in terms of his faith in himself and his gifts for healing, but who bears some malice, faithful to his assistant – until some personal complications during the final trials. Well worth seeing.

UN CRIMEN COMMUN/ A COMMON CRIME Argentina, 2020, 96 minutes, Colour. Elisa Caricajo, Mecha Martinez, Ciro Coien Pardo, Eliot Otazo. Directed by Francisco Marquez. In one sense, this is a rather low-key film from Argentina, a portrait of a woman caught up in an unexpected event, its aftermath haunting her, the questions of moral decision she made and should have made. Cecilia is separated from her husband, has an energetic little son, is a lecturer at college in economic theory, is demanding on her students. She also has a housekeeper coming in with whom she is very friendly. The housekeeper has a teenage son who calls into the house at various times. In terms of the crime, the young man is killed by the police and his body thrown in the river. The neighbourhood is aghast. Lectures at the college are suspended. There are protests against the police. There is a complication in the investigation because the young man had woken Cecilia during the night, banging on her door. She has been cautious and then afraid, seeing him but not opening the door. So, the question is, should she help in the investigation, should she tell the truth to her housekeeper friend. The film becomes very focused on Cecilia, the way that her decision and its consequences prey on her mind, communication with her friend – and, some elaboration at the end, a party for her son at a fairground and her riding on the rollercoaster, the dipping, the rising, the wind in her face, some primal screaming which may give her some liberation. CURVEBALL Germany, 2020, 110 minutes. Sebastian Blombert, Dar Salim, Virginia Kull. Directed By Johannes Naber. One wonders about a German film of the title Curveball. In fact, this was the code name given to the Iraqi whistleblower who gave information to the German government who passed it on to the US government which led to the false declarations that Iraqi and Saddam Hussain had weapons of mass destruction. And Iraq was invaded by Pres George Bush and his allies. There are some criticism of this film that entreated its themes too lightly. In fact, there are a number of farcical situations in the film and some commentators used, actually, the word draw to describe the treatment. Some of this criticism came from German critics who did not quite approve of the tone and wanted much more serious considerations. We are introduced to 2 chemical weapons experts in Afghanistan in the late 1990s. They have been close while on mission but he, Dr Wolf, returns to Germany, she, Leslie, returning to the United States. He continues with his scientific research, an illustration being made for the audience about.

Leslie becomes part of the CIA. There seems to be a breakthrough in information about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq with the defection of someone who worked in the plants, Rafid Alwan. He is interrogated by German authorities who call in Dr Wolf who is initially sceptical but comes to believe some of the evidence presented. One is very keen to get a German passport, get away from your arc and settle peaceably. Audiences may be aware that he is the source of the information, which she later renamed on, that was used by American authorities to justify the invasion of Iraq, that Saddam Hussein did have weapons of mass destruction, using sketchy diagrams that R1 had offered, elaborating them with colour and better design which proved persuasive. There are further complications with Dr Wolf who is sacrificed by the German authorities. R1 fears he is pursued by Iraqi Secret Service but, in fact, is abducted from Dr Wolf’s house by CIA agents, including Leslie, who sets up on one to make a video confirming his initial information. He has promised all kinds of benefits by the Americans. The film includes: Powell’s speech at the United Nations, quoting the source identifying the information about the weapons. This is all false and power later admitted that it was. Yet, as the film shows at the end, German authorities concurred in the invasion, Dr Wolf is faced with issues of truth and expediency, and there are scenes of the night bombardment of Baghdad. A reminder of the seriousness of the false information and its consequences – and the fact that so much was made of information from one man, justifying the touch of the farcical. DEATH OF NINTENDO Philippines, 2020, 89 minutes, Colour. Noel Comia Jr, Kim Oquendo, John Vincent Servillo, Jiggerfelip Sementilla, Elijah Alejo. Directed by Raya Martin. A Filipino film about rites of passage, from young childhood to puberty, a theme, of course, that is universal. And this is symbolised by the title, the boys in this film loving computer games but moving on towards more adult issues, right of circumcision, issues of sexuality, developing relationships. The film is set in the provincial town, the families there not poor, comfortable homes, modern, and plenty of computer games. The film begins with an earthquake and the central boy, Paolo, terrified but reassured by his mother. Paolo has plenty of computer games and shares them with his friends. Then, they all go out together, lots of sex talk, no action, and a preoccupation with being circumcised. In fact, they go to a guru who can perform the cutting and go through with it. There are other adults, parents and the film who discuss their children. But the focus is on Paolo and his friends, the boys and a sympathetic girl.

They also caught up in some of the Filipino myths of the area and decide to go on a quest to explore these myths. An interesting culturally different story about adolescent rites of passage. DELETE HISTORY France, 2020, France, 2020, 108 minutes, Colour. Blanche Gardin, Dennis Podalydes, Corinne Maeiro, Vincent Lacoste. Directed by Benoit Delepine, Gustave Kervero. This is a French satire on contemporary technology, how it is consumed, how it consumes everyone. It is a French comedy – and its style is directed towards a French audience and its sense of humour. For many it was a laugh out loud. For those who do not have a French sensitivity, it does not seem so funny in the hilarious sense but rather in the sense of its jokes about technology, its parody of human behaviour, some stand-up comic moments. The film focuses on three central characters and their misadventures. First is Marie, with a teenage son, trying to sell goods online but failing. She is also prone to pratfalls and mishaps. She also drinks. She encounters a young man in a bar who seems to know something about her, goes home with him and, when he turns up again, and she not remembering anything, he tells her he has a compromising sexual video and asks for €10,000 in blackmail. She tries various ways to find ways of recovering the video or, at least, of deleting it. She goes to several companies but fails. Eventually, she travels to the United States to central holding companies of videos. She is treated well by an executive – but he also makes sex videos and compromises her. She retreats angrily and finally decides that it is not worth the trouble, especially after she has the opportunity to warn her son against looking at the Internet. Marie is friendly with Bertrand, recently widowed, concerned about his daughter. He becomes the target of a phone voice, Miranda from Mauritius, who tries to persuade him to purchase goods online. He falls in love with the voice, sexual behaviour, and finally decides to fly to Mauritius to find her. He has pretended to fly to Ireland to solve some of his other problems. When in Mauritius, he shocked to find that Miranda is merely a machine, recorded insinuating voice. Thirdly, there is Christine, who belongs to a company supplying drivers. She is friendly with both Marie and Bertrand. She is also addicted to television series and there are some funny lines about this, audiences perhaps recognising that they too are somewhat addicted. She is also disappointed with some of her clients who do not give her star ratings at the company. She is determined to find an agency which will add stars – and, there is a funny joke, where she contacted a company in India and the camera draws back to show hundreds of people at computers adding stars to driver reports. The three get some advice and go to a hacker who has his office in a wind machine and who calls himself God. He does his best – but finds that God is not in control of quite a number of aspects of the cyber world. The actors are persuasive in their roles. While there is a narrative, it is rather the individual gags,

something like stand-up comedy, which work the best. FIRST COW US, 2020, 121 minutes, Colour. John Magaro, Orion Lee, Toby Jones, Ewan Bremner, Scott Shepherd, Gary Farmer, Lily Gladstone, Alia Shawkat, René Auberjonois. Directed by Kelly Reichardt. Certainly a striking title – and, perhaps, one that would not entice audiences into the cinema. Kelly Reichardt has been making arresting independent films, small budget, since the early 2000s, Wendy and Lucy, Night Moves with its environmental campaign theme. She has also been into the American West, with the pioneers to Oregon, in her award-winning Meek’s Cut-off. Most of her films have featured women in central roles. This time, not. But, again, it is a view of the American West, of pioneers and settlers. The setting is Oregon. However, the film opens in the 21st-century, a young woman beside a river, huge ships passing by, her fossicking in the land with her dog and the discovery of two skeletons. The film does not have 21st-century investigation but, rather, goes back to the 19th century in flashback. There are two men involved in this tale. The first introduced is Cookie, John Magaro, coming from Boston but moving west, on the hunt for meagre local food for an expedition. But what he does find hiding in the forest is a naked Chinese man, King Liu (Orion Lee). Cookie feeds him and King goes his own way. Cookie returns to the camp and the arguments among the members of the expedition are reminders of the rugged life in the American West in those times. However, the main action concerns life in the outpost town, Cookie and his survival and work, encountering King who has his own hut. The two become friends. And, by this time, audiences may be wondering about not only the first cow any other cow. There has been a glimpse but then the cow disappeared. However, she is the property of an official, an Englishman, whose house and lifestyle is very much in the English manner. He is waiting for an opportunity for a bull to arrive. Not so much drama for a catchy synopsis, but Cookie decides that he could make some scones if he had some milk. The result, he takes his stool to the owner’s property, milks the cow while King climbs up a tree as lookout. The scones are an immediate success, the men lining up to buy them, tasting them on the spot and eager for more. So, more are provided, more milk being taken from the cow – and we realise afterwards that the owner just assumed that she did not have much milk. So entranced is he with scones and biscuits that he commissions a cake to be made for the arrival of a visiting ship’s captain. Great success with the cake.

However, there is retribution in every story and, of course, the milk stealers are discovered, chased by the owners personal militia as well as the ship’s captain. And so, it is for the audience to wonder about what will happen to Cookie and King – because most of us know in our heart of hearts that they are the men who will become the two skeletons found at the opening of the film. The two central characters are well acted and are engaging – and, as with the title, the film and its narrative are more than a little offbeat. HIDDEN AWAY/ VOLEVO NASCONDERMI Italy, 2020, 120 minutes, Colour. Elio Germano. Directed by Giorgio Diritti. Already in 1978, Italian television RAI had produced a docudrama on the life and work of the Italian artist of the early 20th century, Antonio Ligabue. RAI has now collaborated with this feature biography of the artist, a strange man with an unusual talent, recognised in his own time and a celebrity in later times. At first glance, and afterwards, Ligabue seems an unlikely artist and celebrity. In early years he lived in Switzerland, in difficult conditions, harshly dealt with by authorities and family. He grows up somewhat disfigured, especially in his face, and with mental limitations. He spends some time being interrogated and in institutions. On his return to Italy, he lives on the fringes but eventually does some sketches, moulds some clay into toys, is befriended by some children, rescued by a sculptor who makes gravestones and cared for by his mother. Surprisingly, from an outside point of view, Ligabue becomes more and more accepted, with his sketches, with the clay toys, with his beginning to paint, simple pictures, more elaborate pictures, murals… And there is wide interest, buyers and investors – with the result that he becomes much more accepted in his town, has money and is able to indulge a desire for motor bikes, eventually cars with chauffeurs. He becomes a celebrity, very conscious that he is an artist. Which means that this film is an exploration, portrait and tribute. HIGH GROUND Australia, 2020, 110 minutes, Colour.

Jacob Junior Nayinggui, Sean Mununggur, Guruwuk Munungurr, Simon Baker, Jack Thompson, Callum Mulvey, Caren Pistorius, Ryan Corr, Aaron Pedersen, David Field, John Brumpton. Directed by Stephen Maxwell Johnson. A number of years ago, 2001, director Stephen Maxwell Johnson made a film with an aboriginal theme, Yolngu Boy. High Ground or ambitious film. It continues the challenge, dramatised in a number of films, especially Sweet Country, for honestly examining the life of the indigenous people of Australia after 1788, acknowledging the oppression, the massacres, the exploitation. The first part of this film is set in 1919, the aftermath of World War I, where aboriginal soldiers served. The action, however, is in Arnhem Land, and the scenery of Arnhem Land is sweepingly beautiful, along with the flora and fauna, many birds, reminding audiences of the links between the aborigines and the land, the various totems. We are introduced to a group of aboriginal people, rituals, paint and dancing, preparations and execution of the hunt. However, we are also introduced to white trackers who are pursuing the group. With the attack, a number of the pursuers are speared, many of the aborigines are shot – and a young boy, nephew of the leader, is cared for by the women and hidden under water with a reed for him to breathe. One of the pursuers is Travis, played by Simon Baker, a crack sniper from the war who has an overview of the attack but is not immediate party to the killings. In fact, he rescues the boy from the water and takes him back to the local mission where he is cared for by the pastor and his sister (Ryan Corr and Karen Pistorius), the pastor invited to come with the attacking party and dismayed by the events. The massacre is covered up by the authorities. The transition in the narrative moves to 1931. The mission continues. The young boy has grown up and is now called Tommy (Jacob Junior Nayinggui). It seems inevitable that he will be caught up in further tracking and police action. The white group, presided over by the chief, Moran, played by Jack Thompson, is led by a man, consumed with anger, some guilt, racist, who participated in the 1919 attack, Eddy (Callan Mulvey). Also present is Moran’s brash and inexperienced nephew. News has come that there has been at attack by an aboriginal gang and a white woman has been killed. Travis is also present. There are quite some emotional complexities amongst the white people. Tommy is to go with Travis and to find the group and help call some kind of meeting for justice if not for reconciliation. Tommy is using Travis. Travis is using Tommy for bait. There is some bonding between the two but Travis is taken prisoner, the grandfather and some of the warriors come to the mission and a meeting is held – ultimately to little avail. Once again, there is confrontation, spears and bullets, many deaths. The effect of this dramatising of the conflicts between white and black, the experiences of injustice, harshness of racism and vengeance, continue to be a challenge for a contemporary audience – and an invitation to honesty, retrospective acceptance of the facts of racism and violence.

H IS FOR HAPPINESS Australia, 2019, 98 minutes, Colour. Daisy Axon, Richard Roxburgh, Miriam Margolyes, Emma Booth, Joel Jackson, Deborah Mailman, Wesley Patten, Alessandra Tognini, George Shevtsov. Directed by John Sheedy. While searching for a word to give an indication of how H is for Happiness affects the audience, a fellow critic remarked that it was “whimsical”. And that is definitely the word. The question does arise as to who is the intended target audience. With a 12 year old boy and girl at the centre, definitely for that age group, lower secondary, older primary. Maybe not older teenagers who think they might be beyond that stage of life. However, many a parent will enjoy it making allowances for the whimsy, then entering into it. Audiences don’t often see a film made in Albany, Western Australia. Here is an excellent opportunity, the town, the sea and the islands, the surrounding forest, the old buildings from the 19th century, and life in the 21st-century. At the centre of the film, and responsible for a lot of the whimsy, is a 12-year-old girl called Candice, redhead, an extraordinary number of freckles on her face, ultra-studious, extensive vocabulary in her voice-over, telling her story, of her parents, of her sister who died in cot death, more than conscientious in her responses in class (to the irritation of fellow classmates, including a couple of bullies), wanting to fix everything, especially with her parents, her grieving mother, her father who has clashed in business with his brother, reconciliation all round. She is played with conviction a and a great deal of self-assurance by Daisy Axon. A persuasive performance. In fact, there is a very strong supporting cast including Richard Roxburgh as Candice’s father, Emma Booth as her mother, Joel Jackson as (Candice always referring to him as this) Rich Uncle Brian. And there is Miriam Margolyes as the class teacher (with an extraordinary rolling eye) and Deborah Mailman as the mother of the little boy, Douglas (quite a charming performance from Wesley Patten), who has had a fall from a tree with the consequence that he thinks he is from another planet (from among many) who is devoted to Candice (even proposing) and whom she always refers to as Douglas Benson from Another Dimension! So, plenty of plot details. All the story of Candice’s attempts to encourage her mother in her grief, to reconcile her father with her Rich Uncle Brian. Plot details with the school work, the task of preparing for presentations to the parents, urged by Miriam Margolyes Miss Bamford, each of the children taking a letter of the alphabet for their presentation. Needless to say, the conscientious Candice enlightens the audience with all kinds of possibilities for each letter of the alphabet. There are many unexpected complications but audiences will be delighted in Candice’s and Douglas’s final presentation, a tribute to win over her parents, remembering her mother’s love for Nashville, Candice and Douglas, with Dolly Parton and Kenny Rogers wigs, lip-syncing Islands in the Stream.

How else could there be anything else but happy ending! IRRADIES France, 2020, 88 minutes, Colour. Directed by Rithy Panh. The director of this film comes from Cambodia and has made films there. He also has the collaboration of French actors who serve as narrators. The focus is especially on Asia and on Japan which gave support to this project. The intention of the film is to reflect on war and its consequences, the effect on human beings, suffering, illness, death. The intention is to have audiences alert, even shocked, invited to meditate, encouraging their sense of hope – or reinforce a sense of despair. The film is really a cinema essay, lasting almost 90 minutes which require some attention from the audience, something of an endurance. It chooses and highlight the themes of violence, war, the effect on people, man’s inhumanity to man. The audience is invited to observe, share the perspective of the filmmakers, empathise with the victims, share the pain of torture and death. And there is constant emphasis on weapons and their power for destruction, especially nuclear weapons, the focus on Hiroshima principally as well as on Nagasaki. Visuals of the atomic bomb and its aftermath? Because it is a cinema poem, with commentary, it is a series of selected images, edited for pace and effect, thematic links, interrupted, recurring? And, at times, the film goes cosmic in its images. So, memories of war, Europe in World War II, the concentration camps, memories of Vietnam, the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, the focus of the atomic bomb and Japan’s surrender. This is a film and a cinema poem and essay of revelation and contemplation. HAP/ HOPE Norway/Sweden, 2019, 126 minutes, Colour. Andrea Braein Hovig, Stellan Skarsgaard. Directed by Maria Sodahl. The action of this film, hopefully titled Hope, takes place from Christmas Eve to New Year’s Day. We are introduced to Anja, a talented theatre director, who returns home to her family, to her partner and their children. While there is obviously some tension between the couple, there is great joy in her return to her children. However, despite the title, it is very quickly revealed that Anja has been diagnosed with cancer. So, this theme pervades the time of celebration, gives much edge to it, and challenges the couple to re-examine the relationship.

With the festive celebrations, many guests are invited for Christmas dinner which puts a strain on Anja. Then there is the announcement about the diagnosis, the reactions of the children, the mixed reaction of Tomas (who tries to be cheerful in offering Anja an overseas trip, something of a pipedream). Anja celebrates her birthday on New Year’s Eve so there is a mixture of joy and pathos as she faces the coming year. However, she is able to confide in a good friend, Vera. There is a further complication which rouses audience interest and feelings, the fact that the couple have never been married. Tomas suggests that they do have a wedding ceremony, Anja initially hesitant and wondering, and the decision made so that the partnership might be strengthened, especially in this dire cancer time. Since the action takes place over the one-week, the audience is invited, especially in the close ups at the end, to reflect on what the coming weeks and months will mean to Anja and Tomas, and how Anja physically and emotionally. That seems to be something of the meaning of the title. The publicity notes indicate that the story is based on the experience of the director, Maria Sodahl. It is an expertly dramatised in the writing and also in the performances by Andrea Braein Hovig and Stellan Skarsgaard as Tomas and Anja. MINYAN US, 2020, 118 minutes, Colour. Samuel H. Levine, Ron Rifkin, Christopher Mc Cann, Mark Margolis, Zane Pais, Brooke Bloom, Alex Hurt, Richard Topol. Directed by Eric Steel. Minyan is a Hebrew word in the setting for this story is a New York Jewish community. There is a striking opening image as the members of the family are framed standing, praying together. The meaning of Minyan is that prayer in community binds people together, that community office the context of faith. Israeli Director, Eric’s Steel, spent a great deal of time in the United States and so is able to bring the community to life. He also creates the atmosphere of the synagogue, of the religious schools with their students examining sacred texts and asking questions. By contrast, he also shows the central character, David (Samuel H.Levine) studying literature at a secular college, examining texts by James Baldwin. David’s parents are originally from Russia. They live separately, his mother rather dominating, trained as a dentist but acting as a receptionist in doing dental work after hours. David is very close to his recently widowed grandfather (Ron Rifkin) and would like to move into his apartment. There is a background of difficulties in getting apartments in New York, a Rabbi having a mediating role in finding apartments for applicants, although the list is long. In a subplot, David meets an elderly couple, the ill Itsak (Mark Margolis) and Herschel (Christopher McCann), impoverished, in need of accommodation. He is kind and sympathetic to them both.

David is 17 (though looking older) mixes with a group of student-friends but has no girlfriend. The narrative then moves to some exploration of David’s homosexual orientation. He visits a gay bar, encounters an older man and goes to his apartment. He has begun sexual exploration before he truly understands himself. The film serves rather as a glimpse of life rather than a detailed drama. MY SALINGER YEAR Canada, 2020, 101 minutes, Colour. Margaret Qualley, Sigourney Weaver, Douglas Booth, Seana Kerslake, Jonathan Dubskyy, Colm Feore, Theodore Pelleriin. Directed by Philippe Falardeau. Most Americans may know the name, Salinger, the tradition of reading and studying J.G.Salinger’s famous novel Catcher in the Rye (and also Franny and Zoe). In the past he would have had a great following outside the United States but it is many decades since he published his novels and he has lived as something of a recluse. Which means that someone considering watching the film may well be puzzled by what a Salinger Year could possibly mean. The setting is in fact the mid-90s, New York City. It is based on a book of reminiscences by Joanna Smith Rakoff, her Salinger year. This is one of those films that may delight quite a wide audience, light in touch, serious implications. But it is also thinkable that audiences may dismiss it as too light, even trite. It is that kind of film for which there are two camps – which was rather evident in responses when it was the opening film for the Berlinale 2020. Joanna is played by the up-and-coming actress, Margaret Qualley (who appeared in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Seberg, Native Son, Adam, and as Ann Reinking in Fosse/Verdon during 1919). At times, she speaks directly to the audience, a likeable presence. She applies for a job at an agency, leaving her boyfriend in Berkeley, staying with friends in New York City, encountering a would-be rather socialist writer (Douglas Booth) and they move in together. She is not exactly equipped to do the job at the agency, even typing (the boss having a huge suspicion of computers and their temporary popularity). Margaret Qualley doesn’t have the opportunity to dominate the film. That is left to Sigourney Weaver as Margaret, the longtime head of the agency with a strong reputation amongst authors, although it is clear that she operates from the head and is not empathetic to authors who operate from the heart. It is an impressive performance by Sigourney Weaver. And Salinger? It emerges that he is one of the clients of the agency, phoning now and again, responding rather well to Joanna. But one of the main jobs in the office is to send out formula replies to Salinger fans that he does not respond to their letters. In the office, there is a whole lot of shredding going on, a vast amount of letters coming in addressed to the author. Part of Joanna’s

Salinger year is her decision to answer some of the letters – half a dozen of the characters visualised, their stories, the motives for writing to Salinger. Joanna goes against policy and sometimes makes big mistakes. However, this is the year that Salinger has decided to republish a piece from The New Yorker, engaging the agency, with Joanna able to persuade Margaret that she should go to Washington DC to oversee a meeting between Salinger and the intended publisher. Only glimpses of Salinger. Towards the end of the film there are some emotional challenges, especially for Margaret and the suicide of a genial presence around the office, bi-polar, (Colm Feore). Margaret is touched by Joanna’s concern – and happy if Joanna were to continue working in the agency. But, Joanna has further ambitions, especially writing – including the story that is the basis of this film. MINAMATA US/Serbia, 2020, 115 minutes, Colour. Johnny Depp, Bill Nighy, Hiroyuki Sanada, Minami. Directed by Andrew Levitas. A contribution to the increasing number of feature films (and, as always, impassioned documentaries) which highlight abuses by corporations and their contamination of environments. Even going back to the 1980s, there was Silkwood, later there was Erin Brockovich, John Travolta in A Civil Action, numerous television movies, especially as regards disasters in the United States, and, at the same time as this film, a very powerful and persuasive drama on a similar theme, Dark Waters. This time the setting is Japan and a story from the 1970s. A true story. We are introduced to celebrated World War II photographer, Eugene Smith, who Can Find his telling photographs to black and white. He is played with some passion by Johnny Depp. By the end of the 1960s, he was on hard times, divorced, alienated from his children, alcoholic. He was dependent on the editor of Life Magazine for financial support and commissions for photo stories. However, by this stage, Life Magazine was in decline with its subscriptions and loss of advertising revenue, to finish publication within a year, managed by its editor, played unexpectedly by Bill Nighy with an American accent. Gene Smith is approached by Japanese campaigners to come to Japan and do a story on the contamination on a coastal town, the disaster for fishing, the quite serious ailments of many of the inhabitants. Rather desperate, and promising his best to the editor of Life Magazine, he goes to Japan. As might be expected, the company leaders are initially welcoming him for interviews but then turning against him, even to his being physically assaulted, his hand stomped on, during the local protests. He has been offered a bribe – and wonders whether he should have accepted it to be able to support his children. Smith then is a mixture of depressed realist and heartfelt enthusiast. However, he turns back to drink, disappoints his Japanese supporters, accessible rates his editor.

It may have been a moment of grace, but encountering some of the sick people, and despite his hand injury, he goes to the village and takes a number of photos which had a profound effect on the readers of Life Magazine – and on the corporate managers and their decisions. Challenged in public, they decide to offer compensation – but, not much not as much was done as promised (in this way, the film has great similarities with Dark Waters, even to the and needing of their commitment by DuPont? chemicals). There is some aftermath information that Smith did not further his photography career but that he married Aileen, the campaigner who first asked him to take up the Japanese cause. In comparison with some of the other films on similar themes, this one moves into high emotions as well as preaching and propaganda stances which audiences may interpret as trying to manipulate them rather than challenging them by the drama. To that extent, while the subject is worthy, some moments have less impact because of some rather heavy moralising. A lot of emotion has been put into the film with Johnny Depp and Bill Nighy acting as producers. NEVER RARELY SOMETIMES ALWAYS US, 2020, 101 minutes, Colour. Sidney Flanigan, Talia Ryder, Theodore Pellerin, Ryan Eggold. Directed by Eliza Hittman. The list in the title comes from a questionnaire presented to a young client by a counsellor wanting to gauge whether the client has experienced sexual violence. It certainly draws attention to issues of sexuality, violence, relationships, emotional damage. In many ways this is a very plain film, some commentators calling it a return to neo-realism. It does not draw attention to itself in flashy style, rather presenting the characters, their situations, their dilemmas, their challenges, decisions and action. We are introduced to Autumn, a 17-year-old from Pennsylvania, participating in a talent show. She is not particularly good and there are some hackles from the audience, applause from her family. At the celebration afterwards, she is very moody. The young man at another table taunts her with some lewd gestures. She throws a glass of water over him. So, this is Autumn. Autumn works as a checkout assisted in the supermarket, along with her cousin, Skylar. At home, Autumn gets on well with the rest of the family as can be except for the taunts from her father. Skylar notices something wrong – and the theme of the film emerges. Autumn is pregnant. Which leads the film into considerations of abortion, Autumn going to local help centres, having a pregnancy test, ask questions for and against abortion. She decides her, however, to go to New York City to a more professional centre and is accompanied by Skylar who has taken a wad of money from the supermarket takings she was handing in. The film is very matter-of-fact in its presentation of the situation, not taking any particular moral

stances, perhaps a reflection of the secular society in which the Western world lives. Autumn is treated well by the women who interview her, counsel her, explain the procedures, offer the chance to her to withdraw from the process. The process actually requires the couple to stay overnight in New York City and they try to find ways of surviving of getting some money. Nor does the film dramatises the abortion experience in any sensational way. Whether people approve or not, this is a process, this is the experience, these are the consequences, these are the effects. Which means that the film, which supports abortion, can be viewed by audiences who approve of or disapprove of abortion, an opportunity to look at the human experience side as well as the moral principle side. PERSIAN LESSONS Russia/Germany/Belarus, 2020, 126 minutes, Colour. Nahuel Peres Biscayart, Lars Eidinger. Directed by Vadim Perelman. Persian Lessons is an unusual or unexpected title for a film about Nazis, Jews, concentration camps during World War II. It states that it is based on a true story. While the story is intriguing in itself, the film is very strong on showing the callousness of the ordinary German soldiers, men and women, doing their duty with loyalty to Hitler, killing without any strong sense of destroying another human being, going off to be entertained as they dominate the prisoners. Argentinian actor, Nahuel Peres Biscayart, plays Gilles, son of a rabbi, imprisoned in Belgium, allegedly to be transported but actually to be shot. In the back of the truck, he encounters another prisoner who is starving who begs him for his sandwich. He does give it and receives in return a book in Farsi that the other prisoner had picked up after a Persian family had been taken. Gilles is shrewd and is able to survive for some time in the camp, producing the book, claiming that it was his, and that he had Persian ancestry. As happens, one of the officers commanding (a mixture of the cruel and the foolish), Koch (Lars Eidinger), remembers his brother who refused joining the Nazi party and went to open a restaurant in Teheran. He now wants to learn Farsi in order to be ready to go to Teheran after the war. Gilles offers a wonderful opportunity for him to learn the language. On the one hand, there is a lot of farce as Gilles, sometimes with difficulty, especially in remembering the language and words he is creating, agrees to teach Koch Farsi, a few words at a time, then many words. Koch has sacked the female officer who was copying the names of prisoners into the register and Gilles gets the job, working part-time in the kitchen as well, living in the barracks. This means that the audience sees the range of life in the concentration camp from the point of view of the officials, from the point of view of the workers, life in the barracks as well as in the quarries and the hardships of rock breaking.

Needless to say, there are some close moments at times but Gilles devises a clever way of inventing words by taking the first part of the surname of the prisoners and nominating a meaning! With ups and downs, this continues for several years until the allies advance on the camp, Gilles finally taking on his Jewish identity and marching away with the condemned, Koch disguising himself and there are some very funny sequences, as might be anticipated, as he tries to talk to Allied officials with his years of learning Farsi vocabulary! There must always be stories of World War II, of the Holocaust – this one is certainly arresting and rather different. PINOCCHIO Italy, 2020, 124 minutes, Colour. Roberto Benigni. Directed by Matteo Garrone. For older audiences and for younger audiences who watch television or DVD is, Pinocchio is the character from Disney’s 1940s celebrated animation film (with its key song, When you wish upon a star, playing behind the beginning of every Disney program and its logo). Pinocchio is the wooden puppet, created by the carpenter, Gepetto, who encounters all kinds of adventures as he wants to become a human boy, famous for his nose getting longer every time he tells a lie. And, there is his advisor, Jiminy Cricket. Italian audiences may be well familiar with the Disney version but, in the early 2000’s, there was a version with Roberto Benigni – which was not received well. However, here is Roberto Benigni again, with a chance to show his comic talents as well as his capacity for pathos, playing the role of Ge[etto. While that makes a lot of sense, it is a surprise, especially for serious film buffs and critics, that this version has been directed by Matteo Garrone, best known for his serious dramas and exposes of the Mafia, Gomorrah and, more recently, Dogman. In many ways, this is a lavish production. It recreates an atmosphere of the 19th century, elaborate sets for a local village, homes, shops and a visiting circus of marionettes. It goes out into the countryside, explores a mansion, rounds up the lost boys and takes them to an island where they become donkeys, takes us to a farm, takes us into the sea. No question that a lot of detailed attention has been giving to sets, costumes and décor. What needs to be said is that it is very, very Italian in its style, emotions, and more emotions. While an Italian sensibility will respond well, it may well be too much for audiences which with more restrained sensibilities who may feel it goes over the top many times in its action, in its dialogue and humour. The main ingredients of the traditional story are certainly present – though the cricket advisor is rather more serious, no Jiminy Cricket from Disney. There is the young Princess who befriends

Pinocchio. There are the comic villains of the piece, Fox and Cat, con artists with smooth tongues and no moral values. The master of the marionette circus is sympathetic as is a farmer later in the film where Pinocchio works the waterwheel to burn his living. The man who rounds up the boys with the pretense that they will find a land where they can play forever but who turns them into donkeys and sells them in the market is a dastardly type. And, there are strange creatures, the other marionettes who come to life, the dowager who is also a large snail, the friendly tuna trapped in the shark. So, in this context, what is Gepetto like? His rather like Roberto Benigni, poor, trying to persuade the locals to hire him for wood repairs, entranced by the idea of creating a puppet, of becoming a father figure, searching for his lost puppet. And, main question, what is Pinocchio himself like. As regards the visuals, his wooden face, his limbs (carelessly burning of his legs with his feet in the fire), his clothes, he is believable given the context. But, he is continually wilful, easily led, truant going to the circus, on his adventures, deceived by Fox and Cat, charmed by the Princess but still walking away, with the lost boys, discovering how to earn his living on the farm, wanting some coins to recompense Gepetto, finally realising that Gepetto is a father figure. One hopes that a wide audience will enjoy this re-telling of the story – but, there is the reserve of wondering how the Italian sensibility will travel worldwide. POLICE France, 2020, 100 minutes, Colour. Omar Sy, Virginie Elfire, Gregory Gadebois, Payman Maadi. Directed by Anne Fontaine. A French film with the title Police might expect to be a tough action show – and there have been many. This one is rather different insofar as it is set in a local Paris precinct, rather low-key compared with officers, charged with dealing with a lesser, investigating terrorism… And the central character is female, Virginie a married officer played by Virginie Elfira, mother of a child, tensions with her husband, different tensions with the various men in the precinct. And, with this emphasis, it is significant that the film was directed by Anne Fontaine, not a director known for action films but rather studies of relationships and a portrait of Coco Chanel. The two supporting characters are male. The ever-genial Omar Sy gives the appearance of being self-assured but is also self-conscious about his origins in Senegal. And has taken advantage of his relationship with Virginie. The other supporting character is Eric, a veteran of 20 years, straight up-and-down, letter of the law, but feeling the pressure and also alienated from his wife despite his best efforts. We are shown the three involved in three cases, one of domestic violence, a wife still loving her husband but treated brutally by him – and his brutally treating Virginie when she comes with the investigating team. The group also has to go out to quell a city riot.

The main task is to accompany a refugee held in a detention centre who is to be deported. The three take him to the airport and questions are raised as to the justice of his deportation, an attempt to help him even escape but he cowers in the back of the car thinking the police are going to kill him. There is an extreme of the ultimate solution – symbolising a protest against harsh detention regulations. At the back of all this action is an abortion issue. A police film with a difference. IL PROFUGO/THE INTRUDER Argentina, 2020, 91 minutes, Colour. Erica Rivas, Daniel Hendler, Cecilia Roth, Nahuel Peres Biscayart, Agustin Rittano. Directed by Natalia Meta. A drama with touches of horror from Argentina. The film focuses on a middle-aged woman, Ines, involved in dubbing horror films into Spanish, in a testy relationship with her mother, teaming up with a boyfriend. But, we discover she has many dreams. Is apprehensive. Dreams that a flight attendant on the plane is offering to murder her boyfriend. And when they explore deep caves, she is terrified, over-terrified by the bats. The title refers to, as an expert explains, sounds which can invade a person’s consciousness and being. Ines also sings in a choir with intruder repercussions for her voice. It also affects her as she goes through her dubbing. It also has some dire violent consequences with her boyfriend and a mystery with the organ tuner who falls in love with her. She seeks psychological help. Is both helped and criticised by her mother. Another actress explains her situation. And the dubbing expert also becomes involved in helping her to return to normal. This review, perhaps, is clearer in its explanation of some of the events and characters than in the actual film itself. RIZI/ DAYS Taiwan, 2020, 127 minutes, Colour. Kang-sheng Lee, Anong Houngheuangsy. Directed byTsai Ming Liang At the beginning of the film it is stated that there are no subtitles, intentionally. As the film progresses, they are not needed. The director has made a number of films but is also interested in virtual reality. This is a very evident

in the cinematic style, the succession of takes, the length of the takes, the equivalent of either paintings in an art gallery or visual sequences for an installation. To that extent, the film is for connoisseurs of art, for those interested in extending the bounds of cinema. It can be said that with this kind of film, the director has control of the audience if they are willing to stay. With an art gallery or with a museum and installations, how much time and attention is given to each picture or sequence is the choice of the audience, to stay, to move on, to exit. This is not possible with a film like Days when the audience opts to stay. The director had established a reputation in the 1990s, winning awards with the l’Amour and Goodbye, Dragon In. There was more sexual emphasis in consequent films, pornography in The Wayward Cloud, 2005, and I Don’t Want to Sleep Alone, filmed in Malaysia, 2007. The film opens with long takes focusing on two men. There are some glimpses of outside scenery throughout the film but most of the segments are interiors or local streets. There is long sequence, for instance, of the preparation and making of a meal. The director has always been interested in sexuality, in sexual orientation, in gay encounters between men. Days has what may be the longest sequence of erotic massage, an intensity of focus. To the extent that there is a focus on the two men, there is some kind of narrative – but with the final images, there is a long close-up of the older man sleeping and then on his face, awake. Whereas the masseur Since on a bench in the street and, eventually, moves on. Significant it is a gift that the older man makes to the younger, a small music box which contains Charles Chaplin’s theme from Limelight – I’ll be loving you eternally, repeated over and over. The word eternally reminds the audience that watching a film like this over two hours is also an experiment in the observation of time, time passing, the effect of time. Literally an arthouse film experience. THE ROADS NOT TAKEN UK/US, 2020, 85 minutes, Colour. Javier Bardem, Elle Fanning, Branka Katic, Salma Hayek, Laura Linney. Directed by Sally Potter. Sally Potter has written and directed some striking independent films, often small-budget, for over 30 years. (She also writes the musical score and performs on the keyboard.) Usually her films are set in England. This one has a New York setting (although British backing, including BBC films). The cast is also international. The action takes place over one day, focusing on Leo (Javier Bardem) who lives in a somewhat dingy apartment, close to the overhead subway, the passing trains seeming almost to enter into his room. It appears also that he is confused. And that theme is continued strongly throughout the day. To that extent it is a sad day for him. But it will be even sadder.

On the one hand, his daughter Molly (Elle Fanning) is taking time off work to take him to the dentist and to the optometrist. Those visits ‘n in disaster for the bewildered Leo, afraid of the dentist and wetting himself, the need to go to a shop to get new trousers, but his habit of wandering off on his own causing all kinds of problems. And, when he suddenly gets out of the car driving along the New York Street, he finishes up in Emergency. Details of his life gradually emerge, especially a visit in the hospital from his ex-wife, played by Laura Linney. But, the drama is complex because of the flashbacks. It is hard to gauge whether the flashbacks show what actually happened or are a part of his confused memories. The memories go back to Mexico, to his relationship with Dolores (Selma Hayek) and a story of a little boy killed in a car accident, sad memories, guilt memories. On the other hand, there are flashbacks to Leo’s life as a writer, in Greece, meeting a group of young tourists, asking them about happy and sad ending a s, rowing boat towards the yacht… And so the question is: is this real or part of his literary fantasy. And so, the title is a challenge, the roads taken, the opportunities avoided, lost, missed. Molly has been devoted to her father even though he has been a very little part of her life. At the end, she has to make a decision, a road taken, a road not taken.4 LITTLE SISTER/ SCHWESTERLEIN Germany, 2020, 99 minutes, Colour. Nina Hoss, Lars Eidinger, Marthe Keller, Jens Albinus. Directed by Stephanie Chuat, Veronique Remond. Nina Hoss is one of the foremost acting talents in Germany over the last decade or more (Barbara, Phoenix, Gold). Lars Eidinger is also a strong emerging talent (appearing as the concentration camp officer in Persian Lessons). The two appear as brother and sister, twins, two minutes difference between them, Lisa been two minutes younger than Sven, and she is the Little Sister. On the one hand, this is a very interesting drama and highlighting the relationship between brother and sister, the nature of the bonds, each experiencing the others joys and, here, especially their pain and suffering. It also highlights that each twin can become obsessive about the other. But, this is also a film about terminal cancer. On that level, the film has many moving moments, the physical pain, the need for transplants, the little sister wanting to help her brother and becoming more and more preoccupied with his health, at the expense of her relationship with her husband and children. There are many scenes in hospital, in darkened rooms, in doctor’s offices. At one stage, Sven comes out of hospital and is taken to stay with their mother, a woman of moods who is not willing to take responsibility for her sick son (Marthe Keller). Sven, however, is allowed to stay with his sister and her family. They are based in Switzerland where the husband is a teacher with strong responsibilities who is being offered tenure of his position for

the next five years. This is a challenge, of course, for Lisa. Does she want to stay in Switzerland for another five years? Is she at home there? Her husband and children at home there? And what of Sven and his illness and the future? There is a dramatic moment when Sven wants to go hang gliding and does so with his brother-in-law only to have a panic attack, a physical collapse and return to hospital, and a return to Berlin. So, while the film traces the development of the disease, Sven’s decline, Lisa continues to hope that a theatre director with whom Sven worked for many years, especially in the production of Hamlet, will restage the play. In the meantime, she begins to write a monologue for her brother based on Hansel and Gretel. There is a further complication for Sven as he is a gay man, frequents gay bars. The challenge to the audience is how much they identify with Sven and his cancer experience, how much they identify with Lisa and her obsessive loving bond with her brother and her compulsion for care. SIBERIA Italy/Germany, 2019, 92 minutes, Colour. Willem Dafoe, Simon Mc Burney, Directed by Abel Ferrara. Abel Ferrara has been directing offbeat films for 40 years. He started in exploitation. He also had his own personal problems, addictions, religious searching. By the 1990s, he made some interesting dramas, especially Bad Lieutenant, and The Funeral which won the OCIC award at Venice in 1996. He has had five collaborations with Willem Dafoe, especially his Pasolini, with Dafoe as the celebrated director at the end of his life. Siberia is, one might say, at the physical and psychological back of beyond. During the opening credits, Dafoe’s character, Clint, gives a long story about his relationship with his father and hunting. As the film opens, he is in Siberia at a wooden framed cabin, bar, encountering locals in their language, a pregnant woman with her chattering grandmother – with the possibility that Clint is the father of the child. In extraordinary snow and forest country, the screenplay has Clint going out on something of a personal quest by literally falling down the cliff face which leads to a number of encounters which are surreal rather than real, some hallucinations. He encounters another presence of himself, naked. He has images of his former wife and their clashes. He sees people in a cave looking for salvation, naked people in some kind of collective camp, a strange seeming mystic (Simon McBurney) along with sequences in burning sand desert, member of his father, some dancing to the song, Runaway, achievable and colourful dancing around a maypole.

Is he looking for the meaning of life, the essence of existence? Is in plagued by guilt and the need for redemption? Why does he have these kinds of hallucinations? Ferrara doesn’t offer many answers or even clues to answers, just presenting the characters, images, symbols for the audience to contemplate. Which may be far more than most audiences are prepared to contemplate or value. Screened in Berlinale, 2020. Some of the reviewers were far more eloquent than this particular review, relishing their opportunities for creative language and their comments. Guy Lodge, Variety: “Siberia, a beautiful and unhinged, sometimes hilarious trek into geographical and psychological wilderness that will delight some and mystify many others.… … Situating view was firmly inside Clint’s already detached headspace. Those who require a standard A-to-B narrative would be best advised to check out at an early stage. … Give way to disconnected sites of memory, fantasy and nightmare: phases of actual forgotten dreams, caramel expanses of distinctly un-Siberian desert, an abandoned Russian death camp, a spring garden adorned by a pastel maypole Deborah Young, Screen: Abel Ferrara’s stream of consciousness experiment. The screenplay pinball’s between oblique grotesque shock tactics and incoherent indulgence. Pursuing a cinema of sensation agenda is all very well, there should be a kernel of honesty and meaning in the film, or it just looks like the Instagram feed of a well-travelled psychopath. “Your reason is an obstacle”, announces the magician, which sounds a lot like Ferrara giving himself licensed to do whatever he feels like doing, while plundering his central character’s subconscious the images that are arresting, frequently unsettling, but mean very little when strung together. SUK SUK Kong, 2019, 92 minutes, Colour. Tai-Bo?, Ben Yuen. Directed by Rey Seung. Suk Suk is an elderly man meticulously washing and cleaning his car. He is a taxi driver in Hong Kong. He is 70, married with son and daughter, appreciating but often off-hand with his wife, delighting in his granddaughter. But, there is much more to his character and personality. This is a Hong Kong story about gay men who had to conceal their orientation for many decades, marry, have families, survive and give the impression of ordinariness in their lives. The audience may be surprised to discover the taxi driver’s real life, so well is it initially concealed in the film. But he sees an older man in the park, cruises the park, tries to ingratiate himself – but the other man, who we discover has also married and concealed his orientation, wants friendship before sexual encounters. The main story then is of the relationship between these two men, their talking about their past and its effect on them, their visits to gay saunas, the beginning of friendship and sexual companionship. In the background are the complications of the next generation, the taxi driver’s daughter getting married, her fiance not being able to afford the wedding banquet (to the disgust of his mother in law), the father not only paying for the celebration but also giving him the lease of the taxi. The

other man’s son is rather prim and proper, demandingly politically correct for himself, his wife and daughter, with a Christian background, shared by his father. And the point for telling this story, politically and socially, is a movement to establish a home for the elderly, full gay elderly men, run by gay staff who respect the men who are able to emerge from their secrecy. We see several meetings and panels with political pleas for establishing the homes. A sympathetic story of gay men, memories of social treatment in the past, secrecy and cover, the emergence of recognition and acknowledgement in more recent times. THERE IS NO EVIL Iran, 2020, 150 minutes, Colour. Directed by Mohammad Rasoulof. A long film but it involves four stories. It won the Golden Bear at the Berlinale, 2020, and also won the prize of the Ecumenical Jury. It is a film well worth seeing. The title is tantalising. There is certainly plenty of evil in the background – and, at the end of the first story, after about 30 minutes of ordinary domestic life, there is a sudden edit cut which surprises and shocks us – but introduces the theme of the death penalty, the barbaric aspects of executions. Each story is interesting and well told in itself – and there are some links, especially with the theme of the death penalty. That first story focuses on an ordinary man, his night shift, coming home, picking up his wife, a teacher who gets irritated with almost everyone, then picking up their little daughter, something of a brat, but their helping the wife’s mother with a meal, cleaning the house, and then they have a trip to the local pizza restaurant. This story settles us into ordinary life in Iran – and then the jolt. The second story is much more serious, a group of men on military service, stationed in prison, asked to participate in the executions. While some accept this is part of the routine, another one is very law-abiding in his attitudes and accepts what is asked of him as necessary in society. The other young man is rather frantic, not wanting to participate, trying to engineer an escape from the service. There is some tension here as he dangerously makes his way out of the prison. Then quite a change of atmosphere for the third story, in the rural countryside, but a green countryside, water flowing, a country house, the celebration of a birthday and another young man – on a three day leave from military service, having participated, somewhat reluctantly but accepting it, in an execution. What was to be a happy event turns into a very sad one because of the implications of the execution. And, finally, for the fourth story, out into the deserts of Iran, mountains and barren countryside. A young woman visits from Germany and an older couple welcome her. But, in the background is a story of secrets and lies, revelations and disappointments, and one of those endings where decisions have to be made, the camera focuses on a car on a desert road, halted. What decision is being made? It is over to us.

In terms of reputation, Iranian films have a solid reputation for dramatising human values. This is certainly one of them. UNDINE Germany, 2019, 92 minutes, Colour. Paula Beer, Franz Ragowski. Directed by Christian Petzold. Hans Christian Andersen created the myth of Ondine, a water spirit. Neil Jordan made an Irish version in 2010, Ondine. This version is set in Germany with the title, Undine. The director is a prominent German director with such interesting films as Barbara, Phoenix, Transit,.. However, this is not quite in the same league, although its leading actress, Paula Beer, won the Silver Bear as Best Actress at the Berlinale, 2020. At first meeting, we find that Undine is a rather wilful, even capricious, woman, not only angry at the boyfriend who is breaking up with her but even threatening to kill him. And then she transforms as she goes to her work, at a Museum in Berlin, a historical guide, dealing with an enormous three-dimensional map layout of the city. Berlin is to the fore of the film in many ways, locations, history, spirit. There is a strange accident in the cafe, an accident with water. Undine encounters an industrial diver, Christophe (Frantz Ragowski) who is very taken with her talks, bumps a large fish tank in the restaurant which breaks and they are overcome with the water. This is a literal breakthrough for Undine and she Christophe enter a relationship which seems to be beneficial for each of them. Christophe and his partners go to various dams and do underwater repairs. At one stage, Christophe imagines Undine under the water with him. He also finds her name carved on a wall in the water depths. The film moves into the mythical while keeping to the realist situations. Undine encounters her former boyfriend again, Christophe seeming upset, but is this the case? Is Undine imagining the situation, how does she react when she finds that Christophe has had an accident is in hospital, and then walking into the water. But, there are further emotional complications for Christophe, for his partner, for his obsession with Undine… The plot is quite strong but, somehow rather, it is not as compelling as it might have been. WELCOME TO CHECHNYA US, 2020, 107 minutes, Colour. Directed by David France. This is a documentary distributed by HBO. It is a topical documentary, especially for the latter years

of the 2010s. Chechnya is not on the beaten track for most travellers. It is situated in South Russia, is a Muslim community rather than Christian. It was involved in revolt against Russia and involved in some terrorism. This is a film about a different kind of terrorism. In the mid-2000s, the president of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, ho gives an impression of cheerful buffoonery in his public appearances, but is a solid friend of Vladimir Putin, supported by him, started a campaign against homosexuals. The film highlights that this is in the tradition of Stalin and the Third Reich and their persecution of gay men and women. Homosexuals were sought out, their families urged to denounce them or, even worse, to exercise of violence or kill them. Many were rounded up and subjected to dire torture. The film was introduced by David Isteev who is in charge of an organisation that helps gay people who approach them, find alternate accommodation which is secret, arrange for them to leave the country and settle elsewhere, many in Canada. He recurs throughout the film, commenting, in action with various men and women, also a social advocate with human rights groups in Moscow. He is aided by Olga Baranova, a sympathetic collaborator who is highly involved in all the activities. The film naturally focuses on a few people to make the points about the range of men and women who suffer. The central character is aged 30, is supported by his family, has a partner who is giving up prospects for further studies and degrees by coming to live in the commune and, if possible, the pair will migrate. On the other hand, and Olga are contacted by young lesbian 21-year-old who fears for her life with her family, is threatened sexually by her uncle, comes to stay in the commune, is helped but takes the opportunity eventually to disappear. Inserted into the film are some graphic interludes, scenes of actual torture. Inserted also are meetings between the president and Vladimir Putin, their exercising a common policy. Finally, the central young man decides to take his issues to court, first of all appearing and giving testimony so that he can file a complaint against the authorities. This of course has some pressure on his family members as well as his partner. Ultimately, his request to file a complaint is briefly and brusquely rejected. This is a film about human dignity, civil rights, no matter the issues of sexual orientation. THE WOMAN WHO RAN 2020, 77 minutes, Colour. Kim Minhee. Directed by Hong Sangsoo. Director Hong Sangsoo has won many awards. His films are described as minimalist. He made such films as Woman is the Future of Man (2004).

There is minimalist plot here but some complexities in the characters and their encounters. A middle-aged divorcee is seen tending her garden, a friend who is doing a job interview visiting, then the central character who has a long conversation (comparatively speaking for a short film) with the gardening woman. They have known each other in the past and the conversation leads to reminiscences, especially about the visiting woman’s husband, they never having been apart for five years but his having gone on a business trip. The second part is another conversation with the visiting woman, further discussions about the past, and the visit of a man who is rejected and labelled as a stalker. Then there is a third conversation, the visiting woman clashing with the woman she is visiting in her office, and again, suggestions made about relationships in the past. The visiting woman goes to watch a film in the complex, comes out for a cup of something, encounters the husband of the woman she has visited, who specialises in symbolic performances, and then goes back in to watch the film again – scenes of the ocean. In one sense straightforward with the conversations. In other senses, rather complex with the underlying issues of the women and their conversations.

SIGNIS REVIEWS MARCH 2020 BIRDS OF PREY CALL OF THE WILD CITIZEN K EMMA ESCAPE AND EVASION FANTASY ISLAND GUNS AKIMBO GRUDGE, The H IS FOR HAPPINESS HONEY BOY HONEYLAND LA BELLE EPOQUE LIGHTHOUSE, The MIDWAY RICHARD JEWELL SONIC THE HEDGEHOG BIRDS OF PREY: AND THE FANTABULOUS EMANCIPATION OF ONE HARLEY QUINN US, 2020, 109 minutes, Colour. Margot Robbie, Rosie Pérez, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Junee Smollett Bell, Ella, Jay Basco, Ewan Mc Gregor, Chris Messina.

Directed by Cathy Yan. Not a fan of The Suicide Squad. Not a fan of Birds of Prey. Becoming less of a fan of film versions of DC Comics. And Harley Quinn is definitely an oddball, to say the least. While everybody will refer to the title as Birds of Prey, there is also the addition of the subtitle, especially with its emphasis on fantabulous – and this is a reasonable word to describe some of the bizarre adventures – as well as the emphasis on emancipation, implying that Harley Quinn was subjugated in some way and is now free. And, that is true. Audiences need (if they must) go back to Suicide Squad and see Harley Quinn’s relationship with Joker. There is an animation prologue to this story, a pop and humorous account of Harley Quinn’s origins, her parents, her schooling, becoming a psychologist, working in a mental institution, a co-dependence on one of the inmates, in fact, Joker, leaving with him and falling in love with him. Since 2019 had a far different story about Joker, he is absent from this account except for his influence, his criminality, his madness, and this being absorbed by Harley. She wants to embark on a criminal career, looking like a young adult schoolgirl, with her short overalls, with her plaits, with her bright colours, with her tendency to giggle. She also supplies the voice-over with some explanations/rationale of who she is, what she is doing. Actually, there is not all that much plot in her story. She establishes herself as a bad girl. She encounters the local Gotham City kingpin (looking rather shoddy) in his club. This is a Roman, the local sociopath/psychopath/narcissist villain of the piece, ultimately putting on a Black Mask which relates him to the DC comics. His played, surprisingly, with a mixture of the effete and the violent, erratic moods, conscienceless, by Ewan Mc Gregor. Chris Messina is his dislikeable offsider, always kowtowing to him. In one sense, these men are superfluous. This is a women’s film, produced, written and directed by women, heroics by women, men fairly negligible except as adversaries (and there is an army of brute-looking types to fulfil these roles). The main story concerns a young girl on the street, Cassandra (Ella Jay Basco), a fairly expert pickpocket who steals Roman’s diamond from his assistant’s pocket. Needless to say, Roman is not happy and posts a half million dollar reward for the recovery of the diamond. However, he has encountered Harley who has befriended Cassandra (and takes her to extensive supermarket shopping, no, not shopping, but shoplifting) to buy all kinds of laxatives because Cassandra has swallowed the diamond. The other leading women in this story are Rosie Perez as Detective Montoya, obsessed with getting Roman and finding herself fired. There is the young woman, Black Canary (Junee Smollett Bell) who is hired by Roman as his chauffeur. Then, suddenly, there is an extensive back story about a little girl surviving a Mafia massacring of her family, going into training, emerging as a crossbow expert, Huntress (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). It is not really giving away anything to say that there is a huge confrontation between the group of women and Roman and his thugs and indicating that the women win. Lots of fights, slow motion, choreographed moves, quite a lot of rough and tumble in a violent kind of way.

Rather oddball, but a tribute to Margot Robbie who, in 2019, played such diverse roles as an unglamorous Queen Elizabeth in Mary, Queen of Scots, Sharon Tate in Tarantino’s Once Upon a Time…, the fictitious target of Fox News boss in Bombshell as well as Harley Quinn. She is certainly a screen presence as well as a capable producer behind the scenes. So, fan of Margot Robbie. Not fan of Harley Quinn. THE CALL OF THE WILD US, 2020, 100 minutes, Colour. Harrison Ford, Omar Sy, Dan Stevens, Karen Gillan. Cara Gee, Karen Gillan, Bradley Whitford. Directed by Chris Sanders. Once again, a screen version of Jack London’s very popular novel of 1903, set in the Yukon, Call of the Wild. There have been at least five film and television versions of this novel. (But, also in the Yukon and the goldfields of the Klondike, 12 listings of films based on London’s White Fang). This version is geared for a family audience. It is also larger than life. And that is in reference to the special effects to create not only the central dog, hero of the story, Buck, but also a number of other dogs, especially in the team for pulling the sled that carries the mail over the snow fields and mountains. Buck is certainly a very big dog. Some reviewers (who perhaps left their sense of entertainment outside the cinema) have disapproved of dogs who have been digitally created. They condemn them as fake animals. On the other hand, there is the ordinary cinemagoers, especially the young, who enjoy what is up there on the screen, the big affable hound, the snarly villainous dog, leader of the pack, the strange array of the sled pullers, and, especially at the end, a number of wolves. While Buck might seem bigger than he should be, he causes mayhem down in California at the turn of the 20th century, in a mansion owned by a judge, but creating mess and upsets all over the place. While the judge might be contemplating what he must do with Buck, dog thieves from the goldfields abduct Buck and take him northwards. At one stage, he meets a grizzled old traveller, John, played by Harrison Ford who also does the voice-over and commentary. So, where will Buck finish up? He is first bought by a sympathetic owner, Perreault (the always engaging Omar Sy) and his wife Françoise, not succeeding at first in getting Buck to pull the sled with the team but, eventually, Buck excelling himself, helping the other dogs, confronting the snarling leader who is humiliated and walks away into the forest. Perreault appoints another leader but they all defer to Buck. And, of course, as hasn’t happened before, Buck gets the mail to their destinations on time. When the mail service is closed, the dogs are bought by a brash would-be gold-prospector (Dan Stevens) who really knows nothing about it, is motivated by greed, dragging his friends along for the prospecting, but at the wrong season. He buys the dogs, whips them, but John, who has renewed a friendship with Buck, goes after the group and rescues Buck. The beginning of a beautiful friendship, the beginning of a grand adventure. They go out into the wilderness, discover a remote hut, do some prospecting. But there is the call of the wild and Buck

runs with the wolves and is attracted by a white wolf who is certainly attracted to him. There is a bit more action, of course, as the vengeful prospector tracks down John and Buck and it builds up to a dramatic climax, not so happy for the humans, but Buck fulfilling his destiny in a call to the wild. While the animals are larger than life, digitally fabricated, the whole story is for most audiences, and entertaining yarn. CITIZEN K US, 2019, 126 minutes, Colour. Directed by Alex Gibney. The information: Directed by Alex Gibney, is certainly a strong recommendation to look at any film with his name attached. Since 2005 with his expose of the Enron executives, Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, he has directed over 40 documentaries, winning an Oscar for his examination of interrogation and torture in Afghanistan, Taxi to the Darkside, and examinations of lands Armstrong, a documentary about WikiLeaks?, clerical sexual abuse, Silence in the Church of God, Scientology… Mikhail Khodorkovsky make not be a name on everybody’s lips (though from the evidence here, it is a name on millions of Russian lips). He was one of the famous Russian oligarchs of the 1990s, perhaps the most successful. He established a bank, developed an energy company, built up a fortune. But, he fell foul of Vladimir Putin, charges brought against him, sentences Siberia for nine years, and then more. So, why is he the subject of Alex Gibney’s current documentary? After his release from Siberia, part of the special amnesty extended by Putin at the time of the Olympic Winter games at Sochi in 2014, he was exiled from Russia and is currently based in London – and, something which many of us realise with stories about deaths of significant Russians in the UK, not necessarily a safe place for him. Ackley’s Alex Gibney did an extensive interview with him, quite a sympathetic interview, especially given his stances about contemporary Russia, about Vladimir Putin himself and his continued moves towards dictatorship, establishing an international movement “open Russia”. Some commentators on the documentary think that Gibney was to favourable towards Cortical ski, acknowledging that many Russians think that he was responsible for the murder of a mayor in the late 1990s who confronted him about the energy company. And, there are the questions of how he made his money during the Yeltsin years – and, even with his years in prison, he is still a very wealthy man, but channelling much of his money into his Open Russia movement. In his interview in London, he comes across very sympathetically, talking about having the courage of convictions and integrity in going to prison, the effect of the long years in his self-examination, his ambitions to be a better and contributing person. With a great deal of footage, especially from television news, Gibney builds up the story of the

collapse of the Soviet Union, the Yeltsin years, the emergence of Putin, the domination of the oligarchs, their being taken down, Yeltsin’s career as president, Prime Minister, Pres and the showcase of the 2018 elections (which she won!). In fact, this film is also a portrait of Putin, a very critical portrait, with a great number of close-ups, excerpts from speeches, his use of television for self-promotion (the hunting, the bare chest fishing…). In fact, in the opening credits, there is a picture of the key players in this story and it uses the device in many feature films to highlight a significant member of the cast, “… And Vladimir Putin”). He also gets a credit for his rendition of blueberry Hill, not the greatest singer in Russia. Which means that this is a film of great interest for those looking at the development of society and Russia over the last 30 years, the transition from Communism to Capitalism, with a reference to the behaviour of the oligarchs, cronies, Putin and those who surround him, as “gangster capitalism”. These characters and events may not be foremost in the consciousness of many of the audience of this film – but, it is an excellent opportunity to experience the characters, reflect on what has happened – and where we are in the world, the Putin world and the East and the trump world and the West. EMMA UK, 2020, 125 minutes, Colour. Anya Taylor- Joy, Johnny Flynn, Mia Goth, Bill Nighy, Miranda Hart, Josh O' Connor, Tanya Reynolds, Gemma Whelan, Rupert Graves, Amber Anderson. Directed by Autumn de Wilde. With this entertaining revisit to England at the time of the Regency, just over 200 years ago, we become very conscious that life in that era was so very different in style and manners from our own. What does a young, contemporary audience make of this immersion in the world of Emma Woodhouse, her father, her friends, the contained society of the village she lived in? With that said, Emma could be very helpful introduction to the world created by Jane Austen as well as to Jane Austen’s insights into human nature and the edge of her wit and humour. Watching this film, a thought comes to mind: a subtitle for the story, An Expose of Self- Deception. Perhaps expose is too much a 21st-century word, but that is what Jane Austen did in her 19th century writing, creating characters who are self-absorbed, deceiving themselves, assuming that they were better than others, interfering in others’ relationships. Of course, that’s what Emma has been famous for 200 years. It is not so long ago since the previous version of Emma, with Gwyneth Paltrow and with Toni Collette wonderful as Harriet Smith. That was 1996. The year before, moviegoers may well remember how the basic plot and characters were taken from Jane Austen and incorporated into a contemporary American high school situation, Alicia Silverstone presuming to control everyone

else’s lives. Rather 20th century condemnation of Emma’s behaviour: Clueless. But, back to this 2020 version. As with any recreation of the Regency period, costumes and decor are generally exquisite. And the outside sequences, the hills and open green space, the facades of the mansions (with sheep grazing), the local church, the hall for the dance, the haberdashery shop, all create this particular world. And everything happens in the village. There is no reference to what was happening in British politics. There is no reference to Napoleon and the wars that took place during Jane Austen’s writing career. This is a self-contained world. Emma is played by Anya Taylor Joy, the opening quotation mentioning that nothing so far in her life had caused any vexation for her. While her mother has died, and her older sister has married, Emma stays at home with her reserved and eccentric father – and, since he is played by Bill Nighy, something most of us enjoy, with all his tics, jerks, facial mannerisms, he is quite eccentric. The wealthy Emma decides to take on educating one of the young ladies at the local refined school. She is Harriet Smith, played with the right blend of innocence and shrewdness by Mia Goth. Emma thinks Harriet should marry the local parson played by Josh, (as if, seeing him in action, piety and pretension, anybody should marry him but he does get his comeuppance in a very hoity-toity dominating wife). More interesting is the local landowner, longtime friend of Emma Johnny Flynn’s Mr Knightly who continually corrects her, monitors her, which will eventually have to evaporate true love. There is quite a collection of Jane Austen characters, wealthy, poor, farmers. Miss Bates is a Jane Austen ‘character’ character, impoverished, ungainly, something of a chatterbox, assuming everyone is nice and shattered when Emma, in a key sequence at a picnic, is unthinkingly rude to her. She is played by the excellent English comic, Miranda Hart. So, Jane Austen’s world was one of the quirks of human nature, funny and irritating on the surface, but Jane Austen often slyly suggesting, even tongue in cheek, that we need to go deeper, that we can identify with the characters – and that this expose of self-deception also targets us, the audience. ESCAPE AND EVASION Australia, 2019, 92 minutes, Colour. Josh Mc Conville, Rena Owen, Hugh Sheridan, Juwan Sykes, Bonnie Sveen, Steve Le Marquand, Firass Dirani, Jessi Robertson, Directed by Storm Ashwood. A rather challenging title. This film is topical in many ways. While the main setting is the Gold Coast and suburbia, the many action sequences (filmed in Queensland) are situated in Myanmar. An Australian Special Ops Squad is sent to track down a renegade officer, which brings them into contact with Rohingya refugees, the military forces, massacres of the locals, military arrests and torture. This serves as a significant

reminder to audiences, and Australian audiences, of the persecution of the Rohingya and the migrations of hundreds of thousands to Bangladesh. The film is even more topical with its presentation of PTSD – with an appeal before the final credits for more services to the military who have served but have experienced so much trauma. The experience of the special squad, a strictly secret mission, violent conflict with the local military, seeing the massacre of helpless, arrest and harsh torture, is shown graphically and enables the audience to understand and appreciate the trauma. The focus of the story is on the leader of the squad, Seth (Josh Mc Conville) who has been brought back to Australia in a severe state of depression, moments of hallucination, terrifying dreams. His liaison officer (Rena Owen) is military demanding, reminding him that the Army did not train members to be losers. We first see this officer arriving at a house delivering one of those letters concerning death. The recipient is Rebecca (Bonnie Sveen) the twin sister of one of the men in the squad. She is also a journalist, has visited Myanmar, confronts Seth. She is angry, demanding answers. He is in the middle of his trauma, being advised to seek psychological help, shunned by his angry wife, trying to establish a relationship with his young daughter. Gradually, the nature of the mission, the experience, is revealed to Rebecca and to the audience. She still has demands to know the truth about her brother who is listed as missing in action. As we watch the story of the mission, the squad sent secretly to track down a renegade officer who has become involved in drug dealing in the area as well as a great deal of violence, we may be reminded of the core basic plot of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness which was at the centre of Coppola’s Apocalypse Now. The post-traumatic stress experiences of Seth are severe and demanding – and have something of this kind of effect on the audience, forced to participate in the trauma, watching, puzzling, feeling, even tormented. This is the second feature of the writer-director, Storm Ashwood (his previous film being the horror story, The School). It is an effective feature – and we can look forward to his further films probing contemporary issues. FANTASY ISLAND US, 2020, 110 minutes, Colour. Michael Peña, Lucy Hale, Austin Stowell, Jimmy O.Yang, Ryan Hansen, Maggie Q, Charlotte Mc Kinney, Evan Evagora, Portia Doubleday, Kim Coates, Michael Rooker Parisa Fitz- Henley. Directed by Jeff Wadlow. On hearing of Fantasy Island, some older audiences might be delighted. It was a favourite golden oldie television series making a comeback?. Well, not exactly! In recent years the Blumhouse Company has been very successful in producing smaller budget

horror stories, drawing on all kinds of conventions and eagerly exploiting them. Audience response, younger rather than older, has been very positive. Some of their films have been Truth or Dare, Happy Death Day, Us. But what has happened here is that the basic idea, created by Gene Levitt in the 1970s into the 1980s, has been appropriated for an island where the fantasies lead not just to a self-revelation, but to some horror experiences. Once upon a time, there was the Hispanic Ricardo Montalban as Mr Rourke. Now there is the Hispanic Michael Peña as the 21st-century Mr Rourke. At the beginning, he has an assistant, Julia, a woman of mystery. But, at the end, as he calls out “the plane, the plane”, there is a brand-new Tattoo! As expected, there is a motley group of guests each on their own quest. There is Gwen (Maggie Q) who regrets she did not accept a marriage proposal five years earlier. There is the young and brash Melanie (Lucy Hale) who is still resentful about a school bully and wants to see some justice done. Patrick (Austin Stowell) is an upright character with military ambitions, remembering his hero father. And then there is a kind of brash 21st-century Abbott and Costello type of partnership, stepbrothers, one tall and very white American, the other short and Asian (Ryan Hansen and Jimmy O.Yang). The stepbrothers have a very easy fantasy, some indulgence in the kind of Spring Break cavortings, drinking, sex… There is some further complications on the island, a private detective who has been sent to investigate what on earth is going on. There are also some mercenaries, in link with the drug dealer who previously owned the island. Clearly there are going to be threats, guns (and several grenades). As the film goes on, as we might have expected, people start to enter into other people’s fantasies, pursued also by the baddies, so that the plot becomes, to say the least, overly-convoluted. One must agree with one reviewer who remarked that in the middle of the filmmaking, they tossed all the pages into the air and decided to film whatever landed first. Which rather undermines the credibility, especially the revelation of the final villain. GUNS AKIMBO New Zealand, UK, Germany, 2019, 92 minutes, Colour. Daniel Radcliffe, Samara Weaving, Ned Dennehy, Natasha Liu Bordizzo, Grant Bowler. Directed by Jason Lei Howden. You don’t see the word akimbo in a film title every day – nor every year. In fact, in this violent action drama, guns are akimbo all the time. However, this relates especially to the central character, re Miles (Daniel Radcliffe), a rather nerdish type who is attacked by a media vigilante group and guns are brutally fixed to his wrists so that in all his actions, his hands are guns akimbo. This is a film about social media reality shows. They are presented as grim, humans relentlessly pursuing humans, competitions, bets made, the number of on-line hits and likes ever-increasing. From that perspective, guns akimbo is critical of such programs let alone the reality of the hunts in real life.

From another perspective, the film is actually relishing in presenting ever-mounting violence. It is something of a situation, as with many such films, of the having one’s cake and eating it syndrome. The film was made by New Zealand director, Jason Lei Howden, is set in a contemporary city that looks more American than any New Zealand city. And, Daniel Radcliffe performs with a New Zealand accent. But, there are some supporting characters, especially a genial drug addict in the streets, who definitely speaks with a local tone. Miles works in an office, is the victim of jokes from the boss, a quiet nerd (a nerdish derivative, one might say, of Harry Potter). He is knowledgeable computer games, and tunes into the particular program where assassins pursue their victims, Skism. The leader of the program, a former prisoner, shaved head, gaunt, continually sinister, is in charge of the logistics. On the one hand, he is absolutely brutal, murderous in intent. On the other, he has his driving ambition for the best online program, cameras, equipment, drones, angles for pursuit… The film builds up to a final chase, a young assassin released from jail, played by Samara Weaving, intense, angry, set up to pursue Radcliffe. Obviously, there are lots of comic moments as Radcliffe tries to do ordinary things but with his hands tied to the akimbo guns – how can he dress? How can he eat? And if he goes out in public how will the public respond, what will the police make of his guns…? He does get some help and encouragement from the genial drug addict who has been mentioned. The effect of the pursuit, the dangers, the continued threats, the drones, have an effect on Miles so that he becomes something of a radicalised shooter himself. He encounters the young woman many times – but, fortunately, there are some plot twists, especially about her father, that bring them together. In the meantime, we are shown so many of the fans, old and young, mainly male, all happily watching and cheering, many of them even salivating about the violence. This is a film for those who enjoy the variations on the old Most Dangerous Game narrative, human pursuit. Others may find it too much even if they identify with the criticisms of this kind of reality social media. THE GRUDGE US, 2020, 94 minutes, Colour. Andrea Riseborough, Demian Bechir, John Cho, Betty Gilpin, Lin Shaye, Frankie Faison, William Sadler, Jackie Weaver, Tara Westwood, Zoe Fish, David Lawrence Brown. Directed by Nicholas Pesce. It is surprising to discover how many versions of The Grudge that have been over the last 20 years. The first film was made in Japan, at the end of the 1990s, a period when there was a great popularity of mysterious stories, ghost stories, mysteries beyond the natural. This is also the period of The Ring

which led to a series both in Japan and in the United States. When The Grudge was remade in the US, it led to a number of sequels. This particular version harks back to the original story, mysterious events in a house in Japan, and then brings a mystery to the US. It is made clear at the beginning of the film that there is rage and anger involved in the experience of the grudge, that the anger enters into the house and to people within the house. It can be described as a curse. So, this film opens with an American woman leaving a Japanese house, a great sense of unease, movement in garbage bags outside the house… She then returns home to a loving husband and daughter. The setting is 2004. The plot then moves to 2006 with a recently widowed detective, Muldoon, played by Andrea Riseborough, moving to a Pennsylvania town with her young son who was about to go to school. Her first job in the town is to accompany one of the detectives, Goodman, Demian Bichir, to the scene of a crash in the forest, a skeleton concealed off a service road that was closed during the winter. Detective Muldoon is puzzled by the situation and finds connections with the house described in various police reports which she studies. Goodman warns her against becoming involved. The story then veers back into 2005 and even back into 2004, two seemingly different stories but involving the same house, the house where the woman returning from Japan reunited with her family. One story involves an elderly couple, the Mathesons, Lin Shaye and Frankie Faison, she with terminal cancer, he concerned about her health, bringing in an expert in assisting the dying, Lorna Moody, played by Jackie Weaver. It seems that Mrs Matheson has an imaginary friend, the little girl of the original family. Obviously, ghosts in the house, Mrs Matheson’s mind deteriorating, danger to Mr Matheson – and fear to Lorna Moody who rushes, highly agitated, from the house in fear and crashes in the forest. Another story involves a real estate agent, Peter Spencer, John Cho and his pregnant wife, Betty Gilpin. They are concerned about the health of their unborn child, experience tension, but ultimately, before the ghostly disaster falls on them, to cherish the child. Peter is in the house of the original couple, sees the daughter – which leads to mysterious deaths. The cast in these stories is quite strong and so they bring some impact, building up the sinister atmosphere. This is compounded by the strange behaviour of a detective previously involved in the case, Detective Wilson, William Sadler, who was so ineffective that he wants to kill himself and finishes in a mental institution, visited by detective Muldoon. Detective Goodman, has a strong religious sense, and avoids visiting the house in question. So, where else can the screenplay go but to a final confrontation between detective Muldoon and the mysterious presence in in the house and her determination to destroy it and to protect her child. As with all this kind of ghost story telling, while it seems to move to a satisfying and happy ending, there is always alarm before the final credits that all is not well. It is worth putting out of mind and the experiences of the previous versions of The Grudge, and

accept this one on its own terms. H IS FOR HAPPINESS Australia, 2019, 98 minutes, Colour. Daisy Axon, Richard Roxburgh, Miriam Margolyes, Emma Booth, Joel Jackson, Deborah Mailman, Wesley Patten, Alessandra Tognini, George Shevtsov. Directed by John Sheedy. While searching for a word to give an indication of how H is for Happiness affects the audience, a fellow critic remarked that it was “whimsical”. And that is definitely the word. The question does arise as to who is the intended target audience. With a 12 year old boy and girl at the centre, definitely for that age group, lower secondary, older primary. Maybe not older teenagers who think they might be beyond that stage of life. However, many a parent will enjoy it making allowances for the whimsy, then entering into it. Audiences don’t often see a film made in Albany, Western Australia. Here is an excellent opportunity, the town, the sea and the islands, the surrounding forest, the old buildings from the 19th century, and life in the 21st-century. At the centre of the film, and responsible for a lot of the whimsy, is a 12-year-old girl called Candice, redhead, an extraordinary number of freckles on her face, ultra-studious, extensive vocabulary in her voice-over, telling her story, of her parents, of her sister who died in cot death, more than conscientious in her responses in class (to the irritation of fellow classmates, including a couple of bullies), wanting to fix everything, especially with her parents, her grieving mother, her father who has clashed in business with his brother, reconciliation all round. She is played with conviction a and a great deal of self-assurance by Daisy Axon. A persuasive performance. In fact, there is a very strong supporting cast including Richard Roxburgh as Candice’s father, Emma Booth as her mother, Joel Jackson as (Candice always referring to him as this) Rich Uncle Brian. And there is Miriam Margolyes as the class teacher (with an extraordinary rolling eye) and Deborah Mailman as the mother of the little boy, Douglas (quite a charming performance from Wesley Patten), who has had a fall from a tree with the consequence that he thinks he is from another planet (from among many) who is devoted to Candice (even proposing) and whom she always refers to as Douglas Benson from Another Dimension! So, plenty of plot details. All the story of Candice’s attempts to encourage her mother in her grief, to reconcile her father with her Rich Uncle Brian. Plot details with the school work, the task of preparing for presentations to the parents, urged by Miriam Marglyes Miss Bamford, each of the children taking a letter of the alphabet for their presentation. Needless to say, the conscientious Candice enlightens the audience with all kinds of possibilities for each letter of the alphabet. There are many unexpected complications but audiences will be delighted in Candice’s and Douglas’s final presentation, a tribute to win over her parents, remembering her mother’s love for

Nashville, Candice and Douglas, with Dolly Parton and Kenny Rogers wigs, lip-syncing Islands in the Stream. How else could there be anything else but happy ending! HONEY BOY US, 2019, 94 minutes, Colour. Shia La Boeuf, Lucas Hedges, Noah Jupe, Laura San Giacomo, FKA Twigs, Byron Bowers, Natasha Lyonne, Maika Monroe, Clifton Collins Jr, Martin Starr. Directed by Alma Har'el. This reviewer was very taken with Honey Boy. It may not be the case for every audience but for those wanting something interesting, something different, something involving, some glimpses into human nature not necessarily seen every day, they may be very taken by Honey Boy as well. Shis La Boeuf was a child actor, especially on television, then moving into the cinema, almost becoming an instant star with his presence in The Transformers series and a number of character films including Disturbia. But, he also hit the headlines with erratic behaviour, driving under the influence, evading police interrogation after another incident, going into rehab. He has more recently come back into acting with such films as The Peanut Butter Falcon and, now, with Honey Boy. Many audiences who go to see this film will be aware of this background of Shia La Boeuf’s career and will be curious to see this interpretation of it. And this is especially the case since he wrote the screenplay himself, a fictionalised, non-fictionalised, memory of himself at age 12 and his relationship with his father. Actually, the film opens with his character at age 22, involved in a great deal of stunt work in demanding movies, but drinking, crashing, going into rehab. The episodes at age 12 and age 22 are very well dramatically intercut so that we understand better the life of the young actor, here called Otis, and the love-hate relationship with his father. One hopes that the film has served as a kind of exorcism for Shia La Boeuf, an opportunity to acknowledge his father, but also to dramatise his harsh and erratic behaviour and some of the dire effects he had on his son, even his cruelty to the boy at age 12, going to AA meetings, four years sober, but an extraordinary resentful man, with an angry hatred for his wife (who is explicitly acknowledged in this film’s credits), violent anger at the man who serves as his sons Big Brother, acting as chaperone and guide to his son who is extremely busy and popular in films and television, and being on the payroll for his work for his son. In the past, he had been a Rodeo clown, and still draws on this past in order to have some self-respect. Which means that there is great curiosity in watching Shia LaBoeuf? play his own father, with an unrelenting intensity, rarely eliciting compassion from the film’s audience, showing himself to be a difficult and even impossible man, wanting to be a father but continually failing, even brutally. While this is a performance that demands attention, it is extraordinarily well complemented by the two actors who portray Otis. Lucas Hedges is Otis at age 22, a film star, but alcoholic, taught to smoke, even marijuana, by his father when he was 12, now reluctantly in rehab, reliving his past,

talking to his therapist (Laura San Giacomo,), urged to go out into the forest for some primal screaming, sharing a room and experiences with a friendly African-American? in rehab, wondering what his life is going to be while remembering the mixture of mess and success that his life has been up till now. Young actor, Noah Jupe, who has given striking performances in such films as Ford vs Ferrari, Wonder, Suburbicon, exhibits great talent as a knowing 12 year old who is also an uncertain 12-year-old, longing for some parental affection, forced to be judgemental about his father. During the final credits, the audience has the opportunity to see pictures of both father and son. While this is a showbiz film, it reminds us of the demanding nature in filmmaking, acting, and whether a young actor really has the possibility for making something of his own life. With this film, Shia LaBoeuf? has dealt with his own life and his father’s influence in a most telling way. HONEYLAND Macedonia, 2019, 85 minutes, Colour. Directed by Tamara Kotevska and Ljubomir Stefanov. Macedonia is probably not on the beaten track of many travellers around Europe. Here is an opportunity for a visit, mainly to the striking and sometimes barren countryside, an excursion into the city of Skopje, looking modern, avenues, shops… This terrain is not exactly what one might immediately identify as Honey land. Yet, the background of this story is the production of honey, the work of a peasant woman in her mid-50s who stays at home looking after her enfeebled 85-year-old mother. This is a film with the main appeal to those who love documentaries. It has won many awards and was Oscar-nominated not only for Best Documentary but also for Best International Film. On the one hand, there are scenes of Hatidze, the honey producer, in the mountains, discovering hives in the Cliff rocks, cultivating them, at home with the bees. But, there are even more scenes of her at home, single with no children, tending her mother, feeding her, washing her, rousing on her at times but continually devoted to her. While the mother is alert, she has memory lapses at times and gets confused. The continued dedication of daughter to mother is moving and admirable. As the story goes on, we see much more of Haditze. She is comfortable bargaining with the honey sellers in the city. And she buys some hair dye, wanting to look nice – although her facial bone outlines look rugged, she has had no dental help, generally appearing as stern. However, a family turn up in a caravan, driving cows – which provides a striking scene of a calf being born, one of the children almost drowning, all kinds of domestic sequences and farm sequences, the mother exasperated and firmly believing in capital punishment for unruly children. Yet, Haditze befriends them all, shows a delightful maternal side in playing with the children. But, the father of the family, is an opportunist, listening to all the discussions about the honey, the

production of the honey, the high quality, the income. He tries to do a deal with Haditze agreeable but, with the help of his family and some associates, he takes over the whole honey producing business. And Haditze’s mother dies. So, there is a certain moroseness about the story, the effect on Haditze, losing her business, the family moving on, alone in the mountains. While there will be a certain appeal to beekeepers, this is really a story of a culture that is unfamiliar to most audiences, an interesting example of ethnographic documentaries. LA BELLE EPOQUE France, 2019, 112 minutes, Colour. Daniel Auteuil, Fanny Ardant, Guillaume Canet, Doris Tillier, Pierre Arditi. Directed by Nicolas Bedos. The seems a rather grandiose title – and, it is misleading. The period referred generally to with this title extends from the end of the Franco-Prussian? War, 1871, to the outbreak of World War II, 1914. A beautiful era for France. In fact, this film has a contemporary setting, very much the 21st-century. It does, however, begin with a sequence that looks like that beautiful Epoque. Costumed guests sit around the dinner table, talking, uttering racist statements, and guest with a roving gay eye on a black waiter – and a sudden violent eruption. It is not a spoiler to say that this is a contrived sequence, the work of a company, headed by an entrepreneur (Guillaume Canet) who have their own studios, production offices, a large group of aspiring actors to draw on, re-creating scenes from the past. Their business is to have clients who provide them with information, desires and hopes, so the particular period of their life can be staged and they can be involved in it. It seems something like a reverse experience of The Truman Show, Truman living his life under the cameras, in studio setups, and the director intervening in his life as Truman discovers it. This time the director is hired, creates the situation, gives the cast storylines that they have to develop, so that the client can go back and rediscover the past and what it had meant. This is quite an ingenious idea for the screenplay – and, we the audience, willingly share the experience with the client, share the experience in the present with its regrets, participate in the experience of the past, looking forward to some outcomes for the better. Daniel Auteuil and Fanny Ardant (Victor and Marianne) play a couple who have been married for over 40 years. He has lost his job, a sketch artist, and is depressed, railing against younger generations and the dependence on technology and social media. She is a strong-minded woman, disappointed in her husband, in her marriage, seeking solace elsewhere. Their son is a good friend of the producer-directir and offers his father the opportunity to relive his past. There is a fascination all the time in watching the director and his control, manipulation, the cast and their improvisations in developments of the storylines, glimpses of other stories and people coping

with their past. There is also the complication that the young actress, Margot (Doris Tillier) taking the role of Victor’s wife, also becomes the object of fascination and attractive for Victor. But, she has the complications of her own life, especially in her relationship with Antwoine. We uses to go back to 1974, to the restaurant where he first encountered Marianne. The recreation is meticulous, the characters bringing the past to life, Victor relishing his reliving of the experience. Of course, the experience of going into the past, of living the happiness again and realising that the happiness had collapsed, could make for some grim introspection. And there are these moments. However, while the themes are serious, the screenplay is often quite funny (and the writer-director, Nicolas Bedos was born as late as 1980). This leads to an effect for both Victor and Marianne, rediscovering the hopes and love of the past, and that they need not necessarily be lost forever. The film received a standing ovation at the Khan film Festival in 2019 – tres francais! THE LIGHTHOUSE US, 2019, 109 minutes, Colour. Robert Pattinson, Willem Dafoe, Valeriia Karaman. Directed by Robert Eggers. Quite a lot of critical admiration for this grim film. For many of those who admire the film, it still could be something of an endurance to sit through, a hard film. Which means that the average audience may not have the patience or stamina to stay with it. There have been a number of stories about isolation on lighthouses, especially a film which was not entirely different although it involved crimes and criminals, Keepers/The Vanishing, with Gerard Butler and Peter Mullan. Audiences anticipated something different from writer-director, working with his brother, Robert Eggers, because of his striking horror film, The Witch. The director continues in this mysterious vein. The choice was made to film in black and white and this was rewarded by an Oscar cinematography nomination. To say that the film is bleak is an understatement. Two keepers arrive on an island, expecting to be relieved a month later. One is a young man, played effectively by Robert Pattinson (though with a varying accent) who is allotted the hard work, the menial tasks, continuous hard labour. The other is an older man, the regular light keeper, also played effectively by Willem Dafoe. He proves himself a hard taskmaster, who also restricts visit to the light at the top of the tower to himself where he behaves very strangely, glimpsed naked by the young man. On the one hand, the narrative plays directly, the work on the island, the days passing, the interactions between the two men, sometimes friendly, sometimes severe, the young man wanting to go up to the light, the older man forbidding it, also writing in his log which he locks in his desk, tantalising for the younger man.

On the other hand, the narrative has a range of fantasy and imagination, the young man’s discovery of a carved mermaid statue in his bed, imagining seeing the mermaid, her becoming the object of his sexual fantasies and activity. There are quite a number of dreams, at one time his seeing the old man as a kind of sea beast, at another time hauling in a lobster container with a mysterious body… Eventually, back stories are revealed, the older man not keen on the younger “spilling the beans”. There is a lot of fiction in the old man’s logbook which challenges the younger – but he has quite a back story himself, from working in timber in the North, witnessing an accidental death and its consequences. And, of course, the relief boat does not come. There is a vast storm, extraordinarily high and swelling waves, cutting the lighthouse off from any venturing ship. And, of course, there is quite a descent into madness, real, violent imagination, spilling over into vicious and violent action. This review is to give indications why an audience might want to watch the film – as well as indications as to why they might not. MIDWAY US, 2019, 138 minutes, Colour. Ed Skrein, Patrick Wilson, Woody Harrelson, Luke Evans, Mandy Moore, Luke Kleintank, Dennis Quaid, Aaron Eckhart, Keean. Johnson, Nick Jonas, Etaushi Toyokawa. Directed by Roland Emmerich. 2020 sees the 75th anniversary of the end of World War II, the collapse of the ambitions of the Nazis and the Third Reich, the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the surrender of the Japanese. It may be a year in which audiences will be seeing World War II films. And this immediately the case with Midway. At some moments during the action of this film, Oscar-winning film director, John Ford, is seen with his cameras filming an air clash, under fire – the result of which was his 18 minute documentary, Battle of Midway, Ford was billed as Lt Commodore John Ford U.S.N.R, and the footage was edited, narrated by his Grapes of Wrath stars, Henry Fonda and Jane Darwell. Interestingly, over 30 years later, Henry Fonda played Adml Nimitz in the 1976 Midway. Ford’s film won the Oscar for Best Documentary, 1943. The incident in this present film is a pleasing tribute to him. This film has been directed by German director, Roland Emmerich, who has had a very successful career in the United States, especially with big budget spectacles from Godzilla to The Day After Tomorrow and two Independence Day films. He brings his skills to bear with the spectacle of both Pearl Harbour and Midway. And, he has vast resources for special effects to immerse his audience in the experience and the action, the air, on the sea, under the sea. In fact, at the beginning of the film, he has a vivid re-creation of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the suddenness, the intensity, the incessant bombardment, the sinking of the fleet, the many

deaths. This sets the tone for the rest of the film and American action against the Japanese in the first six months of 1942. (When one looks at Japanese attacks from India down to Australia across to the Philippines the first half of 1942, it is amazing to see how rapid was the Japanese action at this time.) While there are some fictitious aspects to the story, and some rather ordinary and expected sequences and dialogue, it is the background and the war action that is important. The film uses real-life characters, intelligence agents, admirals, sailors and pilots. And, at the end, there are photos of each of the central characters and some information about their war activity and in the aftermath of the war. Which means then that we see Admiral Chester Nimitz, in charge of operations in the Pacific, Admiral Halsey commander of ships in active service, James Doolittle and his mission of dropping bombs on Tokyo as early as 1942 and his crash landing in China, Edwin Layton, Naval attache in prewar Japan, warning about a possible attack at Pearl Harbor and this being bypassed, his skills in determining that there would be a confrontation at Midway. There is also his assistant, a decoding genius, Rochefort. These characters are played by, respectively, Woody Harrelson (disconcerting to see him with thick white hair but realising at the end this was exactly Admiral Nimitz), Dennis Quaid, Aaron Eckhart, Patrick Wilson, Brennan Brown. There are also some portraits of lower ranks, especially Dick Best, over-cocky in his young days, having to take on responsibilities when he was put in command, the only pilot during World War II who sank two ships on the one day. His played by Ed Skrein. Luke Evans, Keean and Nick Jonas (heroically dragging a large bomb to prevent it exploding on the carrier) as well as Mandy Moore as Dick Best’s wife, round out the cast. While the film gives great deal of attention to the Americans, there is also a great deal of attention given to the Japanese, quite a large Japanese acting cast, to Admiral Yamamoto, to the other Naval leaders, their skills, their mistakes, their kamikaze daring, their shock at losing at Midway. It is no bad thing to revisit some of the key battles and encounters of World War II. RICHARD JEWELL US, 2019, 131 minutes, Colour. Paul Walter Hauser, Sam Rockwell, Kathy Bates, Jon Hamm, Olivia Wilde. Directed by Clint Eastwood. Another interesting and moving film from Clint Eastwood. It was in production when he turned 89. And, it received worldwide release in 2020, half a century after he directed his first film, Play Misty for Me. He has had an extraordinary career as director and producer, a great number of fine films. The main events in this film take place in 1996 which means that it will be less remembered by the new generations of Americans. And, the story is not well-known in countries outside the United States. However, it proved an interesting test case about FBI action and investigations. They have the wrong man.

Richard Jewell was an American in his 30s, rather large and overweight in build, living at home with his mother, completely devoted to law and order, a great admiration for law enforcement organisations. He was genial to meet – but he also took his various jobs in campus police work, security, extremely seriously. He was a hunter, a collector of guns. He had not paid his taxes for years. These things were all held against him when he was investigated, targeted, by the FBI. Most of the film is about his investigation, his work with his lawyer, Watson Bryant, response to the media and its intrusiveness, concern about the effect of the investigation and intrusion on his mother. The first part of the film establishes him as a larger than life character. Paul Walter Hauser gives a strongly credible and creditable performance as Richard Jewell. We believe Paul Walter Hauser is Richard Jewell. Kathy Bates, Oscar nominated for this role, plays his mother. Sam Rockwell plays the lawyer who takes a shine to Richard and his small kindnesses and consideration. So, when Richard is charged by the FBI, he contacts Watson Bryant for his defence. The central episode, also presented vividly, is a series of concerts in Centennial Gardens, Atlanta, Georgia, at the time of the 1996 Olympic Games. A bomb is placed under a bench. An anonymous phone call is made. Richard is part of the security group, discovering the bag, warning bystanders and others, helping in moving the crowds to safer positions, although many were wounded and two were killed when the bomb goes off. He is immediately hailed as a hero, feted by the media, on shows like the Today Show. However, a campus administrator has let the FBI know about his past over-conscientiousness with students. Profilers then suggest that he fits perfectly the outsider, with ideas about himself, planting the bomb so that he can take all the credit for being the hero in the public eye. And this, reported in the local papers, took off so that Richard and his mother were hounded, their belongings transferred by the FBI, the FBI also pretending to Richard that they were making a training video and using this to cross-examine him. We are all on side with Sam Rockwell as the lawyer, defending Richard, exasperated and his proneness to embroider all his responses with praise of authorities, confronting the FBI. Jon Hamm is the agent on duty at the time of the explosion, responding to the profile of Richard wanting to be hero, leaking information to a hard-as-enables reporter, Olivia Wilde. The audience is definitely not on side with the agent or the reporter. The exoneration scene, where Richard does speak for himself confronting the agents, takes place 88 days after the investigation, a pressure on his life and he died of a heart attack in 2007 at the age of 44. Very interesting piece of Americana, of ordinary characters, of the role of the authorities making mistakes, the pressure of the media, and its toll on the target and his mother. SONIC THE HEDGEHOG US, 2020, 99 minutes, Colour. James Marsden, Jim Carrey, Tika Sumpter, Natasha Rothwell, voice of Ben Schwartz. Directed by Jeff Fowler.

This is definitely a film which is best reviewed by a younger member of the audience, possibly 12 and under. Older audiences may not realise who Sonic Is, and what is a talking hedgehog doing with all the humans. If their children and grandchildren have not played the Sega video game, they will experience a dead loss. So, it is probably best to be at a screening with a younger audience who are responding to this unusual blend of animation and live-action. Sonic the Hedgehog has the capacity for moving faster than sound and light (well-illustrated in an early stage of the film where he plays baseball with himself, quite competitive as he throws, hits, runs, catches…). Actually, there have been Sonic movies since the early 90s. But, here Hollywood has its turn. It may not move as rapidly as Sonic does, but it is very fast-paced. It opens with a fantasy sequence where Sonic is pursued by strange creatures in another world, is protected by a wise old owl who gives him some rings, gold rings, which can serve as portals for escape from dangers. Off he goes through the first one and, if you were to choose a place to go in the United States, would it be Montana? Well, that is where he ends up. It is where he lives his lonely life over the years, and plays the baseball game with himself. Enter the humans, especially in the form of a friendly policeman, Tom (James Marsden) who can’t believe Sonic’s speed, gets tangled with police and military, decides to take Sonic to complete his mission in San Francisco. Not as easy as hoped for. When Tom arrives in San Francisco, he teams up with his wife from whom he is estranged and he (and certainly we the audience) are verbally over-browbeaten by his wife’s sister, loud and definitely definite. But, that is not the main worry. This story has a villain, the sinister Dr Robotnik, a mad inventor, who has created his own subservient servant to bring him coffee and some daily praise, who is into weapons and power. He is played by Jim Carrey, returning to his manic behaviour, expressions, intensity that made his career in the 1990s. Of course, this builds up to confrontations between the mad scientist and Sonic, especially when fast vehicles and elaborate explosives are involved. Lots of action, vehicle chases, crashes, some mayhem. And it comes to a head in San Francisco, on the top of the Transamerica building, multiple bombs, multiple explosions, threats to Tom and his wife – the defeat of Dr Robotnik and leaping through golden rings and landing, of course, back in Montana. Tom and his wife are reunited. The whole experience is American top-secret. Sonic now has a nice room in the house with all his souvenirs. A nice ending. But, on a strange planet, Dr Robotic shaves his head, talks to himself manically, obviously auditioning for the next film of Sonic’s Adventures.

SIGNIS REVIEWS JULY 2020 BURDEN DOGS DON’T WEAR PANTS HEARTS AND BONES IN MY BLOOD IT RUNS IT MUST BE HEAVEN LOVE SARAH MONOS ROMANTIC ROAD TAVERNA, The WHITE, WHITE DAY, A WRETCHED, The NETFLIX BLANCHE COMME NEIGE/ PURE AS SNOW DA 5 BLOODS WASP NETWORK BURDEN US, 2019, 117 minutes, Colour. Garrett Hedlund, Forest Whitaker, Andrea Riseborough, Tom Wilkinson, Tess Harper, Crystal Fox, Usher Raymond. Directed by Andrew Heckler. The setting for this film is 1996, a small town in South Carolina. The film was produced in 2018 but had limited release – unfortunately. In the context of the upheaval in the United States with the death of George Floyd, the brutality of the police in Minneapolis, the consequent protest and riots throughout the United States – and protest beyond, mean that Burden’s release at this time is more than topical, extremely challenging. The film is based on actual events. The main characters involved collaborated with the making of the film – even seeing it as an appeal for collaboration and contribution to in New Beginnings Ministry in the Laurens County.

For the outsider to the United States, it is something of a surprise to find that in 1996, citizens of this town are active members, proud members of the Ku Klux Klan. And, they are refurbishing an old cinema to become the Redneck Ku Klux Klan Museum, replete with all kinds of robes, instruments, weapons and Klan activity memorabilia. At the centre of the demolition and rebuilding is a rather serious young man, not the brightest, past Army service and wounds, brought up in this town by a demanding father, expected to be a member of the Klan, participate in the activities, believe religiously, quoting the Scriptures and God’s will asserting the supremacy of the white race, despising the blacks, automatically using the derogatory “nigger”. And, there have been lynchings in the recent past, especially the uncle of the local Baptist pastor. We might wonder where this is all leading. Much of the early part of the film shows the clan members, led by the local owner of a repossession business, Tom Griffin, played by British actor, Tom Wilkinson. He sees the young man, whose name is Michael Burden, as a surrogate son. As the screenplay develops, it is comparatively low key, a small-town story, focusing on persons, personal relationships. Michael encounters a young single mother, Judy (British actress Andrea Riseborough), with a son. Michael is attracted, setting up an emotional conflict as well as a conflict of loyalties to the Klan, to Judy and the care of her son. As the museum opens, the Minister, David Kennedy (Forest Whitaker) and the black citizens demonstrate outside, chanting, singing. While some of the young men of the town are eager to protest, the resort to violence, the Reverend Kennedy is very strong on non-violence and peace. At one stage, Tom Griffin urges Michael to go on to the roof of a store and shoot the Reverend Kennedy. Garrett Hedlund’s performance as Michael Burden is well worth seeing, a nuanced performance. There are some examples of outbreaks of violence, but the emphasis of this story is on redemption, the power of love, acknowledgement and confession, atonement, reconciliation. It is a challenge to Reverend Kennedy’s family, helping Michael in his dilemma, giving refuge to Judy and her son, practising what he preaches. So, in fact, this is a faith film, an inspirational film, with pictures of Michael Burden and David Kennedy interspersed amongst the final credits. This is a challenge reminder of deep-seated prejudices, extreme racism endorsed by an exclusivist interpretation of Christianity, the conflict between the supremacist theology and the Christian gospel of love and forgiveness. DOGS DON'T WEAR PANTS Finland, 2019, 105 minutes, Colour. Pekka Strang, Krista Kosonen, Ilona Huhta. Directed by J. -P. Valkeapaa.

Two alerts before the review of this film. Firstly, the subject is sado-masochism, the role of a dominatrix and her client, a subject that a number of audiences would prefer not to watch. Secondly, this is an intelligently made film, well-acted and directed, exploring a difficult subject, relationships between the experience of pain and sexuality, offering much to reflect on. This is a Finnish film, set in Helsinki, a surgeon working in a hospital, living at home with his school-aged teenage daughter. There is a prologue, something of a nightmare, with the surgeon unable to save his wife who drowns. Her death recurs in his nightmares, in his imagination, in his regrets and judgement on himself. Some years later, he takes his daughter to have her tongue pierced for her birthday. While he waits, he encounters a sado-masochist chamber, and is attacked by the dominatrix, Mona. This stirs something in him. He is not in any personal relationship with a partner, and he returns to an appointment with Mona. She treats him as a dog, on all fours, and he willingly concurs and acts out this game. On the one hand, the surgeon becomes obsessed with Mona, returning for visits, for humiliation, the beatings, for pain. He becomes more remote with his daughter, not turning up at her band recital, her questioning him. At work, his colleagues are concerned and the authorities asking for a psychological assessment. On the other hand, the film shows something of the personality of the young woman who is a dominatrix, a graphic scene with another client with candles burning on his bare back, his pain and her having to extinguish them. She allows the surgeon to return, but we see that it has something of a personal effect on her, some emotional response. She indulges the surgeon, especially with scenes of asphyxiation – where he blacks out, is taken to hospital, his daughter coming to visit him, reviving, having to wear a neck brace. He becomes so obsessive that he waits outside the premises, follows Mona, tries to get into a sadomasochist club but is refused. He follows Mona home, asks her for more pain, and there follows, audiences probably grimacing, some pain with the prolonged extraction of a tooth with pliers. This seems to bring the surgeon to some kind of decision, to return to hospital, to take his daughter to a Museum. However, he returns to the club – and is absorbed into lights, its music, gyrating dancing, smiling, it would seem, for the first time in the film, seeing Mona and her beginning to smile. This is not a psychological analysis of sadomasochistic behaviour, rather a portrait, storytelling, for audiences to identify with characters, will be repelled by them, assess their behaviour, needs, motivations. This kind of film could be seen as a cry for help, an out of the depths kind of cry. However, it is also an ‘enter the void’ kind of film, little hope, no way out – and the surgeon, ultimately surrendering to the void. HEARTS AND BONES Australia, 2019, 111 minutes, Colour. Hugo Weaving, Andrew Luri, Hayley Mc Elhinney, Bolude Watson, Alan Dukes.

Directed by Ben Lawrence. Heart and Bones is a very impressive film in many ways. It offers its audience, in Australia and worldwide, a 21st-century Australian story, growing Australian consciousness, a challenge to the Australian conscience. The film opens strikingly with an overseas ambush, war photographer Dan Fisher seeing a crashed car, dead occupants, his taking photos, frightening a little girl on the other side of the car, her running away, Dan pursuing and falling, his associate warning that there were landmines, Dan photographing the little girl, her running away, an explosion. In fact, this is the main part of the film, at least visually, which focuses on the title theme of bones. There will be other photographs. There were the other very sad stories, especially from uprisings and massacres in South Sudan. The rest of the film concentrates on the title theme of hearts, emotional stories, probing of the past and coming to terms with it. Australian audiences who watch films and documentary television programs on refugees and asylum seekers know more about those who have fled from Asia and the Middle East. There is not such a concentration on refugees from Africa, from countries like South Sudan. (In cities like Melbourne, federal politicians and some media have tended to demonise and overstate the activities of young Sudanese members of gangs – and, in a sequence where Dan Fisher is interviewed by Fran Kelly on Radio National Breakfast, she asks him, quoting the Minister for Border Control, whether he thinks his photos are ‘misery-porn’). Hugo weaving plays Dan Fisher, a striking performance, intense, communicating, often wordlessly, the impact of his decades of war photography, post-traumatic stress disorder, on his physical and psychological health, his relationship with his partner, Josie (Hayley Mc Elhinney). The sequence where he reacts to Josie telling him she is pregnant is a study in itself of a man who is shocked, remembers the past years when their little baby died, his reaction is self-centred, moving into panic attack makes quite an impact on us. Which means, that this is essentially a film about the life of the war photographer, his being celebrated, his weariness, his having to face his relationship with his partner, come to terms with his avoiding of doctors and counsellors, to probe his psyche and come to terms with himself. But, there is a whole other dimension to the film with the character of Sebastian (Andrew Luri in his first film, credible and persuasive), a man who has been allowed into Australia, a refugee from terrors in South Sudan, the brutal loss of his family, but finding a new home, love and devotion from his wife (again, a moving performance from Bolude Watson), a baby girl, her being pregnant, his plans to buy a house and renovate it, believing that to have the land is to have his own home. Sebastian hears Dan on the radio, buys his book of photos, comes to ask him to photograph a group of African men who have formed a choir. Initially Dan refuses, collapses, Sebastian taking him to hospital, then feeling some obligation, going to hear the men sing and being impressed. In the meantime, an exhibition of Dan’s photos is being organised and Sebastian asks him not to exhibit some of the Sudanese photos, not to exhibit such pain and sorrow. And, yet there is more, some moral strong complexities to the plot, challenging the audience

and its sympathies and moral judgements. Many in the audience will be hoping for some kind of resolution, even a happy ending for both parties. But, life is not entirely like that. Happiness is to be hoped for, to be worked for with some kind of self-sacrifice. And so, the audience, having been moved by the stories of both men, the war and refugee context, the implications for Australians welcoming refugees in friendship, in work in collaboration, will find that endings cannot always be clean-cut, clear-cut. This is a film to be recommended. IN MY BLOOD IT RUNS Australia, 2019, 84 minutes, Colour. Dujuan Turner, Carol Turner, Megan Turner. Directed by Maya Newell. The first question to ask is who is the “my” of the title. In fact, it is a nine-year-old boy, turning 10, Dujuan Turner. He is an aboriginal boy, living in Alice Springs, desiring to return to his homeland, beyond Alice Springs. And he makes quite an impact on the audience. The camera likes him. He is quite a screen presence, something of a young screen hero. He also seems wise beyond his years as we listen to his well-articulated opinions and principles, to be a good man, not drinking, not hurting anyone, his good knowledge of English, and his desire and efforts to speak his own language, Arrernte. The audience learns a great deal listening to him, watching him with his grandmothers (and, it is often said, anyone brought up by a grandmother cannot be all bad!), at a white school being taught about Captain Cook, at an indigenous school, learning about traditions (and an alternate perspective on Captain Cook). And what is it that runs in Dujuan’s blood? It is indigenous life, thousands of years old, passed on from generation to generation for so many generations, a consciousness of stories, a consciousness of what we might call creative myths, interpretations of the world. But, in Dujuan’s blood, he recognises something of a life force that he has inherited. He is a healer. And that also is his tradition. And we see him at work with his grandmothers and elderly relatives, drawing the pain from them and thrusting it away. This film takes its place with so many other contemporary films about indigenous people. In 2019, audiences were challenged by the experiences of football player and Australian of the Year, Adam Goodes. But, this time it is the very young generation that audiences are asked to consider. They have been born into a different world – and we see Dujuan and his grandmother lining up at the supermarkets for checkout, with their mobile phones, 21st-century almost-universal style of living. However, there is the innate desire to be one with the land, to know one’s place, the pain of leaving it, the desire to return, for Dujuan to leave Alice Springs and the house there (contrasting with the majority of local neat comfortable homes), a life that is only temporary. There are scenes where Dujuan returns to his homeland, to his relations, to a freedom from

Alice Springs constrictions, to a different way of learning. Later, when the audience realises that there has been a singular absence of male figures so far in the film, father-figures in his story, he goes to Borroloola to meet his father, bond with him, live with him. His father is quite a sympathetic figure, conscious of his own failures, but earnest in his care for his son. There have been many documentaries on aboriginal issues, on indigenous culture – but this one is extraordinarily winning, Dujuan and his wonderfully winning personality communicating his hopes. IT MUST BE HEAVEN Palestine, 2019, 102 minutes, Colour. Elia Suleiman, Gregoire Colin, Gael Garcia Bernal, Stephen Mc Hattie. Directed by Elia Suleiman. It must be Heaven. Not quite. And the question also arises: can there be peace on earth? Those who know the films of writer-director, performer, Elia Suleiman, know that he is an expert at a particular kind of comedy, partly deadpan, partly satire and parody, partly gentle about human nature. But, all the time, he is also making political point. He directed documentaries in the 1990s, especially about Palestine. He himself is a Palestinian who comes from Nazareth. Into the 21st-century and he made a number of comedies (which are worth recommending to those who might be coming to his work via this film; in 2002 there was Divine Intervention, in 2009, The Time that Remains). Practically everyone makes the comparison with the French comedies of CJacques Tati, especially his character, Monsieur Hulot. Tati, early in his career, tall and gaunt. Elia Suleiman is rather shorter, a touch more rotund, distinctive with rather shabbier clothes, always a coat, always a hat. He is in middle-age. He is bearded, bespectacled. He barely says a word throughout the whole film. Tati was a master of mine in the eccentricities of ordinary situations. So too, Suleiman in his character ES, with his hands always behind his back, like Tati. But he generally stands, sits, observes. He can be described as enigmatic, quizzical, a spectator curious about the human race. He sets a tone at the beginning with a religious ceremony, robed Christian clergy, the faithful, many of them very young, a cross and a symbolic knocking at the door of the tomb – but the man behind the door is refusing to open, the celebrant taking off his crown, going behind the scenes, sounds of a fight, the door opening and the faithful invited in. We are not (never) sure what it means but it does set the comic tone. The first part of the film is quiet, ES in his native Nazareth, alone in his apartment, wandering the streets, sitting in cafes, visiting his wife’s grave, exploring the countryside. Then he flies to Paris – nervously looking out the window at what seems to be a shuddering wing. However, he becomes a tourist in Paris, the audience wandering and observing with him, the monuments, the sites, a menacing stranger staring at him in the metro, beggars in the street served food by workers driving an ambulance, nuns serving at an outdoor soup kitchen, a priest standing smoking and observing, all kinds of detail. However, there is a purpose in visiting Paris, to raise money for a film about Palestine, with a lot of discussion about how such a film could be made, how polemic it should be, how political – or rather should it be

simply showing a character like ES visiting France and the US. Because the US is his next destination, similar kinds of tourism and observing, an encounter with Gael Garcia Bernal as he goes to discuss production finance in New York City – and failing again. This time there are more explicit references to Palestine, a strong rally of exiled Palestinians, a conference and his sitting on a panel. One commentator remarked that It must be Heaven is comedy of the absurd. It is. However, the commentator added “absolute nonsense – but in a good sense”. LOVE SARAH UK, 2020, 97 minutes, Colour. Celia Imrie, Shelley Conn, Shannon Tarbet, Rupert Penry- Jones, Bill Patterson. Directed by Eliza Schroeder. If you have ever dreamed of cleaning up a shambles store-space, setting up bakery with specialised cakes, of opening a tea room, Love Sarah is definitely your film. And if you have never had these dreams, Love Sarah is also a film for you. It has sadness, happiness, cuteness, sentiment, and enthusiasm. By the way, Love Sarah is the name of the tearoom situated in a London suburban street. At the end of the film, the name of the producing company appears, Femme Films. And that is very true – this is very much a women’s film, the director, the three central characters, men in supporting roles, a paternity question. And all in London, very British, attractive for those who live in London, and an engaging set of memories for those who ever lived there or visited. The sadness is fairly instant. A woman in her 40s has died. She and her friends had done cooking training in Paris some decades before and were now in a position to set up their own bakery. The three women who loved her are her mother, Mimi (Celia Imrie), her daughter Clarissa (Shannon Tarbert) and her best friend, Isabella (Shelley Conn). They are faced with a challenge and each responds in her own way. Isabella is the driving force but feels she is not expert chef enough for the project. Mimi has been alienated from her daughter and the younger women try to persuade her to become involved. Clarissa, a ballet student, experiences a breakup and moves back with her grandmother. The performances of the three women are engaging, especially Celia Imrie, a past high-wire artist (who does have a moment to illustrate that even, elderly, she could still pose on the trapeze). Celia Imrie reminds us that she was in the Best Marigold hotels films – and this audience is definitely a target for Love Sarah. And the supporting men? Rupert Penry- Jones is Matthew, a top chef, who trained with the two women, was in a relationship with Clarissa’s mother, feels the need for something new in his cooking life, wants to be associated with the women again. While he might have had his caddish moments in the past, he is more genial now (as has been Rupert Penry-Jones’? past screen presence, playing a number of cads). Across the street from the tea and cakes lives an eccentric elderly gentleman, Felix, Bill

Patterson. He calls by, watches the shop out his window, attracts the attention of Mimi who discovers he is an inventor, even eager to set up a security system in Love Sarah. Much of what we might expect from such a scenario takes place: few customers initially, the baking of beautiful cakes (who are very well prepared for their frequent close-ups), visitors, lucky opportunities… In fact, commendably, the film’s and Mimi’s creative brainwave faces the fact that London is a multi-multi-cultural place in that many who have come to the UK have a yearning for the pastries of the past, their past. And, commercially, this provides a bonanza. This is definitely a feel-good film and so it ends for each of the characters feeling good – as we do as we leave the cinema. ROMANTIC ROAD UK, 2017, 82 minutes, Colour. Rupert and Jan Grey. Directed by Oliver Mc Garvey. Is “grey nomads” the title that applies to older travellers as they drive around the countryside, enjoying retirement, getting to know their world better, making friends with similar nomads that they meet in their journeys a title used around the world? Are their British grey nomads. The title for this grey nomad adventure is Romantic Road. That seems to be an understatement title. It certainly is the story of her husband and wife who get on very well together, she supporting her husband in his ambitious travels, his risk-taking. They have had a long time romance, over three decades. But, romantic isn’t exactly the word that describes where they go, what they experience, the rough terain that they travel through, tough times, mechanical difficulties as well as bureaucratic barriers. Our travellers are, literally, Grey nomads. This is a story of Rupert and Jan Grey, he a London lawyer. His father served in World War II in India and so he has affinity with the subcontinent. And his father bought a Rolls-Royce? in 1959, not only still-going, but the star of this trip. And, it is a Rolls- Royce - and Rolls- Royce advertising and publicity will definitely be pleased with how their vehicle stands up after more than 50 years! The travels are in India, in 2013. Northern India. Starting from Mumbai, North to Jodhpur, but across the top to Nepal and views, of course, of the Himalayas. But, in fact, the destination is Bangladesh, a photography festival in Dhaka because Rupert Grey is an enthusiastic photographer and has good contacts in Bangladesh. (Actually, towards the end of the film, despite preparatory visits to the country, he comes up against the sometimes nit-picking bureaucratic tangles about whether he can bring his Rolls across the border – and whether he can drive out and back into India.) We are nicely introduced to Rupert and Jan, testimonies from their daughters, from many of their friends, touches of admiration, and many touches of humour. And we share in the

preparations, studying the maps, contacts with the photography festival, making sure that the Rolls is in top working order (spoiler, not always). Of course, the film serves as an enjoyable travelogue, many telling vistas of Mumbai, the northern desert and the city of Jodhpur, the atmosphere at Katmandu, the mountainous and winding roads leading south, the coastal areas of Bangladesh and into the city of Dhaka and, on the way home, a visit to Kolkota and, Bangalore. For those who enjoy travelogues, plenty to see and to relish. But this is a story of an older couple, their bonding with each other, their sharing this adventure, and enterprise, and achievement. And the film has a great deal of appeal to a wide audience, but especially to international grey nomads. MONOS Colombia, 2019, 104 minutes, Colour. Sophia Buenaventura, Julian Giraldo, Karen Quintero, Laura Castrillon, Deiby Rueda, Paul Cubides, Sneider Castro, Moises Arias, Julianne Nicholson, Wilson Salazar. Directed by Alejandro Landes. As the audience watches a group of children at the opening of Monos, eight of them, blindfold, playing football, trying to score goals, then seeing them lined up, being drilled, military-like, thoughts about child soldiers and children being exploited by the military readily come to mind. And, with the group of eight, being drilled by a dwarf leader, strict precision, demanding physical exercises, then his departure and their suddenly being let loose and behaving like undisciplined teenagers, perhaps many will think of William Golding’s Lord of the Flies. And this is not wrong, especially as the scenario unfolds, the interactions of these children with each other, in the war context, their holding a hostage, some battle sequences, and the youngest of the group, nicknamed Smurf, tied up and facing the pig’s head, shown in close-up. There is some magnificent photography, mountain vistas, then a descent into the lush jungle, rivers and falls. There is no explicit explanation about the war situation. The group of children are stationed at an outpost, experience an attack, and then have to set up headquarters down-mountain in the jungle. They are guarding a hostage, an American engineer, played by Julianne Nicholson. She is made to participate at times in the activities, photographed with a newspaper to authenticate her capture, then her attempts to escape. The children are identified visually at first, then by their nicknames which range from Wolf, Dog, Bigfoot, Boom-boom, and three girls, Lady, the young Swede, and the unexpectedly named Rambo. We get to know them, some of them rather well, a crisis after they are given a cow to provide them with milk and in some mayhem, it is shot, and the leader, Wolf, made to take responsibility – even to his death. At times, they have to act like adults. At times, they

don’t know how to act as adults. On the narrative level, the audience is plunged into an unfamiliar world, asked to think about contemporary uprisings and revolutions, especially in Latin America, to think about the exploitation of children in war and the consequences for them. Towards the end of the film, there are some hints of ordinariness, a couple with children playing, their watching the television, a slight item about making jelly babies in Germany – and then tragedy. There is a helicopter rescue, flying in over the city – and, rather than an ending, the narrative just stopping at a crucial moment, challenging the audience to reflect on what they have seen and felt, and what they might anticipate for the future. (Mono is Spanish for monkey – and Monos, is Spanish slaying for “how cute!”.) THE TAVERNA Australia, 2019, 86 minutes, Colour. Vangelis Mourikis, Rachel Kamath, Senol Mat, Emily O' Brien- Brown, Emmanuela Costaras, Tottie Goldsmith, Salman Arif, Peter Paltos, Maria Mercedes, Christian Charisiou. Directed by Alkinos Tsilimidos. A night at the Tavern. The Greek Taverna. And, where is the Taverna? In Melbourne, which has one of the largest Greek populations in the world. But, this is Melbourne and not everyone that works at the taverna is Greek. There is a Turk. There are two with Indian backgrounds. And there are some Melbourne locals. The touch of cosmopolitan Melbourne. On the whole, this is a very cheerful film though most of the characters are not without their problems. Rather, it is a couple of the customers who are not pleasant. We arrive with the owner, Kostas (veteran Greek actor, Vangelis Mourikis). He opens up the kitchen to begin the night proceedings. And, 80 minutes or so later, we close up with him, quite the wiser and a little more sympathetic about the human problems that need solving. Kostas is a good man, a kind man. He has a loving wife, Helen (Maria Mercedes). They are both concerned about their ice-addict architect son, indulging him in cash, prepared to take blame for his selfish and careless behaviour. On the staff is Katarina, in love with the son, but very clearheaded about how his situation should be dealt with, especially by his parents. There is a young in worker in the kitchen who does have problems with his work visa. Sally, Emily O’Brien-? Brown, one of the producers of the film) is earnest, the touch of the perfectionist, but completely devoted to her lazy partner – and Katarina has some good advice for her as well. The chef is an old Turk, who lost his wife and family long since and is still grieving. He is a good friend to everyone. But, on this particular night, it is belly dancer night. Jamila is the dancer – and does charm all the patrons, many turning up because it is belly dancer night. And, if the other members of staff have problems, Jamila much more so – alienate it from her womanising husband, a restraining order against her and his new girlfriend (both of whom turn up at the restaurant), custody issues about the young daughter.

In a way, these are the ingredients of soap opera. But, the characters are engaging and draw our emotional response. There is humour, a touch of good-willed violence, in Sally getting the opportunity to do a belly dance, some thuggish customers who claim to be restaurant judges, even a visit from the police. While there is coarse language, not as much in so many other films, the Taverna has been given an MA certificate because of the language. The writer-director is Alkinos Tsilimidos who, unfortunately, has not made many films – the drama Every Night, Every Night, was his earliest film and he directed a finely observed film about city life, Tom White (2004) with Colin Friels. So, a night out at the Greek Taverna. A WHITE, WHITE DAY Iceland, 2019, 109 minutes, Colour. Ingvar Sigurdsson, Ida Mekkin Hlynsdottir. Directed by Hlnur Palmason. Iceland has a Scandinavian heritage. It has the clouded atmosphere and temperatures of northern Europe. The landscapes are rugged, coastal and mountainous. And the population is small, something like an island nation village. The Icelandic film industry is not prone to comedy. And this drama is certainly not comic. It is sombre, often grim, white, white days indicating snow but a quotation, Source Unknown, at the film’s opening, suggests that when the day is white, when sky and earth are indistinguishable, ghosts communicate with the living. The initial focus is on a car driving on an icy road, a comparatively long sequence, and then the car skidding, crashing into the guardrail and disappearing. In fact, this episode will be highly significant as the drama unfolds. Then the director uses a telling device, the fixed camera on a farm house which is being repaired, ponies on the property, mountains in the background – then a succession of still shots, the house in night and day, in different seasons, grounding our attention in this environment. We spend a lot of time in the interiors of the house, especially as it is being repaired and renovated, but also some time at the local police station, on the roads and in the tunnel under the mountains, in the countryside, and by the sea. We experience the Icelandic atmosphere. Which is important because the central character, Ingimundur (a powerfully persuaded persuasive performance, often menacing, by Ingvar Sigurdsson), a local policeman, his renovating the house for his daughter and his granddaughter, Salka. We come to realise that he is grieving for his dead wife, killed in that car accident. He holds in his feelings, putting all his energies into the house. He does have some help in counselling but is resistant. Ultimately, reacting badly to the questions put to him (by Skype because of weather difficulties and travel), he erupts. And he takes it out on the local police, another violent eruption. And Salka, with whom he spends a lot of time, cheerfully bonding with her, but

then she experiences the brunt of his outbursts. A significant part of his grief is that he feels his wife had kept secrets from him. And the latter part of the film finds Ingimundur goaded into confrontation, quiet rage, and emotional collapse. As might be expected, there is no neat or happy ending in this kind of Icelandic drama. Rather, Ingimundur has gone through grief, traumatic consequences, emotional collapse, but also steps towards apology, reconciliation, some possibility for peace in his soul and in his life. THE WRETCHED US, 2019, 93 minutes, Colour. John- Paul Howard, Piper Curda, Jamerson Jones, Azie Tesfai, Zarah Mahler, Kevin Bigley. Directed by the Pierce Brothers. The Wretched has a box office distinction – top of the US box office at the time of covid-19 and most of the cinemas in the United States being closed. It had reasonable reviews. This is a horror film, a film about thousand-year-old witches, taking over children, monstrous and cannibals. However, this description might make it sound more horrifying than the film actually is. There is a horror prologue, set “35 years ago” indicating eerie houses, babysitters and their fate, mothers and children, takeover by clawing monsters. It is an indicator prologue rather than having any direct connection with characters when the caption comes up “five days ago”. The central character is Ben (John -Paul Howard), 17 years old. With the focus on him and his experiences, The Wretched seems more of a Young Adult horror film than one for the horror and gore expert fans. They will probably find it rather mild. However, the monster is visualised and there are a number of tense moments. Ben is living with his mother, his parents ready for a divorce, his father harbourmaster. Ben goes to stay with him doing jobs on the harbour front, meeting a fellow worker, Mallory (Piper Curda) and befriending her and her little sister, Lily. Ben is looked down on by the socialite teenagers but does accept an invitation to a party, trapped into going into the pool, his trunks removed and his being embarrassed in having to run away naked. He becomes far more involved in watching the family next door, their little boy is one of those involved in harbour activities. Ben (and we) see the mother transformed into a monstrous witch, the little boy disappearing, Ben challenging the father who claims to have no knowledge of having a son. Ben does confide in his father who dismisses his concerns. Ben becomes more active, goes into the house next door, into the basement, discovers a kind of shrine to some kind of evil power, with its own sign, photos of families with some of the characters scratched out, goes out to rescue Lily but sees her being dragged into the woods and disappearing down a vast hole in a tree trunk.

Of course, Ben decides to rescue the boy and the girl, his father disbelieving (only for his girlfriend to be bewitched) and sending him off with the policeman who has an ominous scar down his neck. This is where the film moves out of the bright sunlight of the earlier part of the film, during the day, on the water, and turns dark and ominous. But, Ben as the hero, confronts the witch, goes down the tree hole… All’s well that ends well despite his father being injured by the witch, the suggestion that mother and father might get together again, a farewell to Mallory who goes out on a boat with a group of children to train – and the suggestion, of course, that she could be taken over and these children in peril. The Wretched 2 is not impossible! NETFLIX RELEASES BLANCHE COMME NEIGE/PURE AS SNOW France, 2019, 112 minutes, Colour. Lou de Laage, Isabelle Huppert, Charles Berling, Richard Frechette, Damien Bonnard, Jonathan Cohen, Vincent Macaigne, Pablo Pauly, Benoit Poelvoorde. Directed by Anne Fontaine. Something of a 21st century fairy tale, Snow White in particular, a rather free-wheeling Snow White (Claire – light) who relates to seven men with passion (frequently sexual), her seven admirers (not exactly dwarfs). The first part of the film is entitled, Claire. She is one of those luminous screen presences, played by Lou de Laage. She works in a hotel owned by her stepmother, Maud (Isabelle Huppert). Her life seems to have humdrum meaning. She is a jogger and is abducted while jogging. After an unexpected car crash, she is about to be killed but is rescued by a local farmer who has a twin brother. Initially suspicious, they care for her, as does their border, a reclusive cello player, and the local vet. She also encounters an eccentric bookseller and his martial arts trainer son. Each in his own way seems to bring her alive, she becoming more freewheeling, passionate, sexual (this treated in a quite frank French way). Her life changes. So does that of the men though most of them while responding to her are also confused. There is quite a lot of beautiful scenery, alpine mountain scenery, winding roads in fog and in sunlight. Meanwhile, the second part of the film focuses on Maud. She is obviously the jealous stepmother, frequently looking in the mirror, attention to her make up. Eventually, she will take the opportunity to try to kill Claire, even with a poisoned apple. There is a particular interest for audiences in the presence of the Catholic priest. The Catholic themes are unexpected. A south-eastern France setting, in the Alps and the Marian apparition shrine of La Salette. But, more unexpectedly, one of the ‘dwarfs’ is a priest.

And, also unexpectedly, this is a very sympathetic and understanding portrait of a middle-aged French priest. He is seen at first in a bookshop, clerical collar, owned by an atheist friend, encountering Claire, chatting in a friendly manner. He rides a motorbike and gives Claire a lift to the shrine. He is a mature man, an understanding man, showing Claire the shrine, not surprised by what she tells him of her sexual encounters. And, she surprises herself by feeling free and comfortable with him, almost immediately, to unburden herself to him. She is frank and direct. He reassures her indicating the wide range of sin that he is told. He also quotes Jesus’ words of not judging. He is shown to be exactly what a good man, a celibate priest, ought to be like. His ministry extends to meeting Claire’s stepmother, Maude, the evil, jealous, murderous stepmother. She feels comfortable with him as he welcomes her to the shrine, talking openly and personably. She has malevolent intentions in meeting Claire. The priest, not knowing this, is able to find an opportunity to bring Maud and the unsuspecting Claire together. At the end, Claire lying in hospital after Maud’s attack on her, the seven men come to her bedside, some kissing her, others respectfully touching her. The priest simply signs the cross on her forehead. Quite a sympathetic picture of a priest (especially in the era of widespread clerical abuse). DA 5 BLOODS Delroy Lindo, Jonathan Majors, Clarke Peters, Norman Lewis, Isiah Whitlock Jr, Melanie Thierry, Paul Walter Hauser, Jasper Paakkonen, Johnny Nguyen, Jean Reno, Chadwick Boseman. Directed by Spike Lee. Spike Lee has been a vigorous and outspoken film director since the middle of the 1980s. In 1989 his classic drama of Brooklyn, Do The Right Thing was released. During the 1990s he made a biography of Malcolm X with Denzel Washington. While he has made several fiction thrillers, he has continually returned in feature films and documentaries to race issues in the United States. He won an Oscar for Best Screenplay for his picture of the infiltration of the Ku Klux Klan by black policeman, BlacKkKlansmen?. Da 5 Bloods has been a significant project for Lee for several years, to dramatise and explore the presence of African-American? soldiers in the Vietnam war. This is an ambitious film, running two and a half hours, set in the present with veterans returning to Vietnam to find the body of their fellow-Blood, Stormin’ Norman (Chadwick Boseman) as well as some gold, recovered from a plane and buried in Vietnam. In this context, there are many flashbacks to the Bloods, their camaraderie, seeing them in action, tension in various battles, encounters with the Vietcong. And, for a wider circulation, and immediate circulation (especially in the times of covid-19), Da 5 Bloods was released on Netflix. Immediate reaction by reviewers and, certainly, by a great number of bloggers, was unexpectedly negative. Some praise for spike Lee and his work, for good intentions, but not for the film itself.

It is not an easy film to watch. We immediately empathise with the ageing men returning to Vietnam, with all their memories, the reaction by the American public when the veterans returned from the war, their subsequent lives, traumas and achievements. The 5 certainly bond well together but each of them has quite a number of problems, most especially Paul (Delroy Lindo in an intense, at times a seemingly over-intense performance). Also joining the group is his alienated son, David (Jonathan Majors), meaning that there is the presence of the next generation, who did not experience the war, who do not have that intense attachment to the war experience. There are scenes as they visit Saigon, somewhat overwhelmed, making comparisons with the past, David becoming involved with a French woman, one of the men revisiting his partner in the past and discovering his daughter. The men also hire a Vietnamese guide (with his own memories of his father in the war) so that they can find the location of the action, of Norman’s death, of the burial place of the gold. They also do negotiations with a shady French businessman, Jean Reno. This will lead to violence, to attacking locals, with their own memories of the war and conflict with the Americans. The group also encounter the French woman who has a company for disposing of landmines – which also have some crucial dramatic moments for the Bloods. While the film is dramatic, at many times it is highly melodramatic, especially as Paul manifests his traumas, his range of moods, his intensity for the gold (and one wonders whether Spike Lee has memories of the intensity of the gold hunt and discovery in John Huston’s classic 1948 The Treasure of the Sierra Madre). One of the suggestions for appreciating Da 5 Bloods is to try to see the film from Spike Lee’s point of view rather than assuming what the audience might have wanted. Spike Lee is caught in his dilemma of wanting to do justice to the African Americans in war as well as critiquing the American government’s involvement in the war and the many disastrous consequences. Da 5 Bloods is certainly a film of conflict and contradictions, not intending for the audience to finish watching 2 ½ hours and feeling that they have completed a dramatic experience in understanding all the issues. The memories and the conflicts inevitably continue. WASP NETWORK France, 2019, 127 minutes, Colour. Penelope Cruz, Edgar Ramirez, Gael Garcia Bernal, Ana de Armas, Wagner Moura, Leonardo Sbaraglia, Nolan Guerra, Tony Plana. Directed by Olivier Assayas. This is a Cuban story. The setting is the 1990s. Fidel Castro is getting older. Sanctions by the American government are biting. Life is difficult in Havana and in the countryside. So many of the Cuban refugees have settled in Miami, some for many decades, others still attempting to escape Cuba. While the material is intrinsically interesting, the earlier part of the film seems rather ordinary, not particularly exciting. The advice would be to give the film about 50 minutes and then there is a plot twist which gives the opportunity for the audience to be more involved.

However, the film does not have the dramatic tension that the subject would indicate, so, while interesting, it is somewhat disappointing, especially since the director, Olivier Assayas, had made the series on the terrorist, Carlos (with Edgar Ramirez). The film opens in Cuba, focusing on pilot and trainer, René (Edgar Ramirez), married to Olga (Penelope Cruz, a glowing screen presence even when she is working in a factory), with a daughter. All seems normal enough even with the difficulties in Havana. René goes on a regular flight – but, preserving cover, flies to Miami and applies for American residence. Which he gains. This leads to the opening up of the world of intrigue between Miami and Havana. René is introduced to the leaders of Cuban exiles in the US, offering his flying services, accepted by the leaders and given various missions. The leaders have harsh memories of the revolution, of the Castro regime, are bent on disrupting events in Havana, even to terrorism. René also becomes friendly with another refugee from Cuba, a charmer with a following, Juan Pablo (Wagner Moura) and his glamorous fiancee (Ana de Armas). What emerges is that the Cuban government fights back against the Miami exiles and their leadership, infiltrating them, reporting back to frustrate the terrorist disruptions – although, the audience is shown a Latin American courier who plants bombs in the main hotels in Havana. The second part of the film shows René in a different light, his mission in Miami, his reconciliation with his wife, the negotiations to bring her and her daughter to the US, the giving birth, her being returned to Cuba. Later in the film, a significant character is introduced, Gerard (Gael Garcia Bernal) who is commissioned to coordinate the Cuban infiltrators in the US. When the group is arrested, René refuses to give any information about the other prisoners, and their serving a sentence in US jails. In looking at reviews and bloggers, we find that there are divided opinions, especially because of political interests (bias?). Some comment that this is Cuban propaganda. Others see it as a picture of American policy against Communist regime. The material and the characters are interesting – but, with so much material, this may have been better served as a specialised miniseries for television.

SIGNIS REVIEWS APRIL 2020 AND THEN WE DANCED ART OF RACING WITH THE RAIN, The BLOODSHOT COME TO DADDY CORPUS CHRISTI DARK WATERS DRIVEN INVISIBLE MAN, The

KOKO: A RED DOG STORY LUCE MILITARY WIVES MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN QUEEN AND SLIM SERVANTS SOUND OF SILENCE, The SUN IS ALSO A STAR, The WAVES AND THEN WE DANCED Georgia, 2019, 113 minutes, Colour. Levan Gelbakhiani, Bachi Valishvili, Ana Javakishvili, Kakha Gogidze' Directed by Levan Akin. World audiences do not see many films from Georgia, capital Tblisi. This film has received rather wider circulation and awards at festivals. As the title indicates, there is a focus on dance. Much of the action here takes place in a dance school in Tblisi, centring on one of the young trainees, Marek (Levan Gelbakhiani), who comes from a dancing family, especially his father who is now a businessman. His brother also studies at the school. Audiences are less familiar with dancing styles and traditions from central and eastern Europe and will find the rehearsal and performance scenes rather different. Many of them are accompanied by a beating drum, having strong steps, intense physical movement. There is an explanation that this is traditional dancing but has been consolidated during the era of the Soviet Union. The dance has become very masculine, suspicions of any softening, any feminine influence, even with the number of female dancers. With these aspects, and details of life in the capital, family life and apartments, the role of the older generation, especially the women keeping house and cooking as well as loving support, the expectations of the men to be strong and supportive, the film is an invitation to another world. However, with 21st century changes in social communication, media,, there is much more relaxation in the attitudes and’s lifestyles of the younger generations. (And all of them smoke – all the time!). Marek is not the most successful of dancers continually criticised by the dance instructor and supervisors. The instructors do not look like dancers but resemble the stereotype of police and secret agents. Marek dances with one of the young women at the school, friends from their childhood. However, a new, somewhat older, dancer from outside the city, full of self-confidence, take his place in the school and Marek is fascinated. And so, the film explores themes of sexual orientation, Marek and his understanding himself, acknowledging himself, although his interactions with the newcomer are concealed from the others.

There is gossip that another of the dancers, forced out of the closet, has given up his dancing and has become a male prostitute. The culture is homophobic. And yet, Marek is determined to succeed, despite the criticisms, despite the emotional involvement as well as disappointment at rejection. He goes downhill, self-absorbed, experimenting in drink and sexual behaviour? Though he injures his ankle at rehearsal, he is determined to go to the final audition, persevering the falling, ever more determined to succeed, the final image of him defiant. The film has interest in terms of Eastern European dance and its traditions and style. It is also an Eastern European exploration of homosexuality and the effect of coming out in Georgian society. THE ART OF RACING IN THE RAIN US, 2019, 109 Minutes, Colour. Milo Ventimiglia, Amanda Seyfried, Kathy Baker, Martin Donovan, Gary Cole, Kevin Costner as the voice of Enzo. Directed by Simon Curtis. The title certainly catches the attention. What kind of racing? What kind of art? And the rain? The quick answers are: speed car racing; skills plus the innate gift for driving; and the challenge of rain, going into a deliberate skid before being forced to skid. And, according to the central character of this film, that is a skill for getting through the difficulties of life. Readers of Garth Stein’s novel will know that the central character is, in fact, a dog. He is Enzo, bought as a puppy by his owner, racing car driver, Denny (Milo Ventimiglia). And they bond. Not only is Enzo the central character but he provides the narration for the film, describing events, analysing characters, commenting on situations, a complete anthropomorphic dog character – except that Enzo is speaking to the audience and not to the other characters in the film. They perceive his body language – and seem to interpret him quite accurately. And the appeal of Enzo and his narration is that it is all done by Kevin Costner. These comments will indicate whether the audience wants to see this film. It has a huge appeal to dog lovers. It is highly emotional, some might say sentimental, a film of empathy with Enzo. But, it may have little appeal to non-dog lovers who may not be caught up at all in Enzo’s view of life and his role in Danny’s life and his career. Enzo also tells us that there is a Mongolian book which indicates that in reincarnation, dogs can become human. That is certainly his main aim in life, and with his psychological insights and commentary, he is a long way on this road. And, of course, there is the suggestion at the end… So, Enzo observes Denny, his work in the garage, his training as a driver, some opportunities, but not an outstanding career. More successful is his encounter with Eve (Amanda Seyfried), courtship, marriage, birth of their daughter, Zoe, family life together. But, there are several dramatic difficulties. Eve’s wealthy parents do not approve of Denny,

especially her father, Maxwell (Martin Donovan being particularly arrogant), Trish, Kathy Baker, more sympathetic. There is also the drama of Eve’s illness and questions about custody for Zoe, Maxwell taking legal advantage of an outburst by Denny in desperation. There is also a step forward in Denny’s career, as an instructor and trainer, an invitation to Italy from Ferrari. Americans must be strong dog-lovers, judging from the very favourable and numerous comments on the Internet Movie Database. BLOODSHOT US, 2020, 109 minutes, Colour. Vin Diesel, Guy Pearce, Eliza Gonzalez, Sam Heughan, Toby Kebbell, Lamorne Morris, Tallulah Riley, Siddarth Dhananjay, Johannes Hauker Johannesson. Directed by Dave Wilson. When audiences think of Superheroes, they tend to think of the world of DC comics or, perhaps more especially, of the Marvel Universe. Bloodshot comes from neither, but rather another comic book world, Valiant. If you like Vin Diesel, no problem here. It is definitely a Vin Diesel vehicle, a Vin diesel entertainment. In the opening action sequences in Mombasa, Kenya, there is tough action. But, Ray, Diesel’s tough soldier, comes under suspicion, is taken with his wife, interrogation, death. So, where can the action go? Guy Pearce is the head of an organisation which specialises in resuscitating dead heroes. He is smoothly spoken, sounds very intelligent, very reasonable – and, of course, is a 21st-century version of Dr Frankenstein bringing to life a creature whom he wants to control. There have been other experiments and some of the henchman in the institution are the products of resuscitation. There is also K.T., Katie (Eliza Gonzalez) who assists the doctor and who is dependent on him. But, what can be done with this kind of resuscitated soldier? Obviously, he has to go on mission, stronger, more resilient than before. It is the missions which lead to the drama, especially when the doctor is able to play on Ray’s memories, insert different memories, always centring on the violent killing of his wife which he witnessed. In fact, there are several missions, rivals to be eliminated, all in the name of security and order. Katie, of course, is attracted towards Ray and is becoming more disillusioned with the doctor, leading to some complications in the missions, Ray discovering that his memories are not all true. There has to be some kind of confrontation. At the institution, there is a whiz kid with all the technology developments in the resuscitation, memories development, control. But, Katie knows another whiz kid with even more technical ability, Wigan (Lamorne Morris in an entertaining comic and serious performance).

Audiences will be looking forward to the final confrontations between Ray the doctor – and may even be looking forward to Katie, Wigan and Ray going towards the future, and sequels. This is a superhero action show which fulfils anticipation. COME TO DADDY Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, 2019, 95 minutes, Colour. Elijah Wood, Stephen Mc Hattie, Garfield Wilson, Madeline Sami, Martin Donovan, Michael Smiley, Simon Chin, Ona Grauer. Directed by Ant Simpson. What starts out as a reunion between father and long lost son, turns into a melodrama with some touches of violent horror. While the story has an American setting, was filmed near Vancouver, has Irish finance, it was written and directed by a New Zealander, Ant Simpson, who specialised in some horror films. This reviewer had started to review Come to Daddy but was interrupted by the coronavirus. On resuming the review sometime later, it seemed best to start again. Realising that there had been quite a twist in the middle of the film, watching the first part again was a surprise. Not so much a surprise in what was presented but the discovery of the clever ambiguity in the set up, the son visiting his father, the father’s long absence from the family, his way of dealing with his son, finding out about his life, his relationship with his mother, a test about the son’s claiming that he was a friend of Elton John, an eeriness about the relationship. It was surprising to listen to the dialogue in the light of the twist – very clever.. The success of the film rests on the shoulders of Elijah Wood as the son, alienated from his father, to receive a letter from him and making a long journey to meet him. It is quite easy to identify with Elijah Wood in most films, seeing from his point of view, feeling from his point of view. And, Stephen McHattie? is intense as the father, enigmatic in his relating to his son, quite grotesque at times. The film shifts tone with the twist, quite unexpected. There are some interesting cameos by Garfield Wilson as a seriously odd police officer who judges characters by the colour of their eyes. There is a sympathetic funeral director. But there are also some criminals who threaten, Martin Donovan as an ambiguous presence, Michael Smiley as something of a deranged and violent Irishman. It is up to a Elijah Wood, timid in himself, fearful of the violence, to come out of himself, take tough stands, try to redeem the situation. And, at the end, a quiet moment which gives new meaning to Come to Daddy. CORPUS CHRISTI

Poland, 2019, 115 minutes, Colour. Bartosz Bielenia, Aleksandra Konieczna, Eliza Rycembel. Directed by Jan Komasa. Corpus Christi, the Latin for the body of Christ, has found a place in the English language, a city in Texas, a religious celebration, a reference to the celebration of the Eucharist. It is an apt title for this quite intriguing story of a Polish parish and the young priest, Daniel (Bartosz Bielenia) who serves some time ministering and having quite an effect on the parishioners. But, we know right from the beginning, that he is not a priest. There is a certain curiosity in wanting to see this film because it was one of the five nominees for the 2019 Oscars category of Best International Film (won by Korea’s Parasite). It seems a strange selection for the award and seems even stranger that it finished in the top nominees. It will be of particular interest to Catholic audiences who might be intrigued as to the situation, the character of the young man, how he manages in the parish and the impact that he has on people. On the other hand, some Catholic audiences might be repelled at his character, his presumption in taking on the role of parish priest, think that it is somewhat sacrilegious. But, it is interesting, especially in terms of so much of the dialogue where everybody says “Blessed be God” in their frequent greetings to one another, and some homily reflections on the presence of God everywhere, especially in strange situations and circumstances. Daniel has committed some violent crimes when young and is imprisoned in a juvenile detention centre, a Catholic Centre, with priests on the staff, including a chaplain. Daniel discusses a desire to enter a seminary with the chaplain but is told that with his convictions he has no chance. And, as we see some of the behaviour of the inmates, cocaine, drinking, sexual activity, some brutality towards each other, we are not surprised. However, it is Daniel who prepares the altar for Mass, does the serving, intones the hymn singing. Sent on parole to a sawmill in a remote town, he wants to avoid the mill, goes into the church, encounters a young woman, says he is a priest and shows her the black shirt and clerical collar that he has taken from the institution. He meets the local parish priest, an elderly and sick man who is taken to hospital – and the people ask Daniel to hear the confessions, say Mass. One of the features of this film is that it is not anticlerical. It takes for granted the church, Mass, sacraments, anointing of the sick, funerals, pastoral care of people, and it is accurate and respectful in most of its details. One of the main questions, of course, is what is the reality of priesthood. Daniel has some non-exemplary moments, especially with the young girl in the parish, and is pressurised by one of his fellow inmates to hand over the parish collection. But, Daniel is imbued with a sense of reverence, all kinds of moving words and sentiments coming from him as homily, as encouragement for behaviour, his challenging the parishioners to overcome quite some bigotry concerning an accident in which a number of the teenagers from the village were killed. In fact, with some contemporary

and eyebrow-raising detail, there is the temptation to remember the novel by Georges Bernanos and Robert Bresson’s film, Diary of a Country Priest. Daniel is very young, his life ahead of him, and we wonder what impact this priestly episode will have on his future. But, for audiences who have responded favourably to the film, there is much to consider about God, prayer, sin and guilt, forgiveness, the role of the priest in the church. (It is interesting to speculate what would happen in a sequel…) DARK WATERS US, 2019, 126 minutes, Colour. Mark Ruffalo, Anne Hathaway, Tim Robbins, Bill Pullman, Bill Camp, Victor Garber, Mare Winningham. Directed by Todd Haynes. This is a social and political drama well worth seeing. Since the 1980s there have been many films both for cinema and for television that have explored industrial contamination of the environment. It is almost 40 years since Silkwood, 20 years since Erin Brockovich. During the following decades, there were many films with American settings as well as international settings highlighting the poisoning of waters. Dark Waters is based on a true story and was released in 2019. In 2020, there was a parallel story with the Japanese setting, Minimata, with Johnny Depp as a World War II photographer invited to go to Japan to photograph people suffering desperate illnesses for Life Magazine. One might say that it was much more explicitly preachy than Dark Waters which relies on its dramatic impact. The screenplay is based on a New York Times magazine article by Nathanial Rich, The Lawyer who became DuPont’s? Worst Nightmare. The lawyer is Rob Billot who pursued the issues for almost 20 years, and is still working. He is played with determination and intensity by Mark Ruffalo who is one of the producers of this film. Direction is by Todd Haynes, not his usual kind of film (such as Velvet Goldmine, Far from Heaven, I’m Not There, Carol). Rob Billot came from West Virginia and, though less well trained and qualified then other partners, was accepted into the managing directors of the prestigious law firm Taft, in Cincinnati. Some contacts from his home town, Parkersburg, alert him to the pollution from DuPont’s? factory and works from the 1960s and 1970s. The film, chronicling Billot’s campaign, year by year, illustrates his research, communication, not without hostility, from Parkersburg locals, his thorough investigation of petrochemicals, the challenge to DuPont?, the massive documentation that he has to store and examine. He does have the support of the head of the firm, played by Tim Robbins, but has to encounter critiques and delaying tactics from DuPont?. It takes a toll on his health leading to a collapse. It puts a strain on his family, his wife, played by Anne Hathaway, and his three sons. (He has a Catholic background with a church scene and the singing of a St Louis Jesuit hymn – and a Protestant church scene where they also seen singing Here I am, Lord.) We see Billot’s devotion, his offer of getting testing for Parkersburg residents to ascertain the levels

of harm, working with a key family, but the years of waiting for the results of the investigation. And, then to his dismay, and the audience’s dismay, the further double dealings and reneging by DuPont?. Though it takes almost 2 decades, and does not have the immediate compensation results that had been hoped for, there is some ultimate redress. (One of the issues from the du Pont plant was the production of Teflon, its harmful effects in its widespread use, and its being prohibited from 2005.) A commentator noted that in its portrayal of disastrous realities, it is more terrifying than a horror film. DRIVEN US, 2019, 113 minutes, Colour. Jason Sudeikis, Lee Pace, Judy Greer, Isabel Arraiza, Michael Cudlitz, Erin Moriarty, Jamey Sheridan, Iddo Goldberg, Tara Summers, Justin Bartha, Corey Stoll. Directed by Nick Hamm. While John De Lorean is a central character in this film, the focus is more on the conman, Jim Hoffman, who is befriended by De Lorean, becomes instrumental in helping him with a drug dealing solution to his financial problems, betrays him to the police but is ambiguous in his answers in the court and so, ultimately, helps De Lorean to freedom. Some audiences were very critical of the film. The criticism seemed to indicate that they were expecting a biography of a car inventor and manufacturer like Tucker, the Man and his Dreams. While there are some insights into the character of John De Lorean, his mythmaking in his own mind leading to his ambitions and inventions, his ultimate decisions and involvement in the drug running, he is the subordinate character to Jim Hoffman. Lee Pace is very effective as De Lorean. Jason Sudeikis is also very effective as Hoffman. Judy Greer appears as his wife. Corey Stoll is the FBI agent, determined to arrest DeLorean?, using Hoffman and ultimately frustrated. It means that the early part of the film shows Hoffman as a pilot, bringing drugs from Colombia to the United States, arrested by the FBI, willing to be bait for De Lorean, set up in a luxury house, finding himself accepted by De Lorean and going to parties. However, in the past, he has absconded with some of the money from the drug dealing organiser and offers to pay back his debt by introducing him to De Lorean and using him for the drug deal. The film opens with Hoffman in the witness seat in a court case, so arresting audience attention, and then finishes with him and how he behaved, the effect for De Lorean, the frustration of the FBI agent. THE INVISIBLE MAN US/Australia, 2020, 124 minutes, Colour. Elisabeth Moss, Aldis Hodge, Harriet Dyer, Oliver Jackson- Cohan, Storm Reid, Michael Dorman.

Directed by Leigh Whannel. Novelist H.G.Wells is best known for his science fiction stories, War of the Worlds, Things to Come, The Time Machine. But he also wrote the imaginative The Invisible Man. It was filmed, became something of a horror classic with Claude Rains in the 1930s. Since then, there have been a variety of remakes, updates, spoofs… So, here is a 21st-century version certainly updated, a lavish San Francisco setting (with some local photography for the atmosphere of the city and its surroundings but the action filmed in Sydney). In Wells’s novel and in the first film, the invisible man concealed himself in order to gain absolute control, no limits to his world. In this current version, there is a focus on control but this time of a mad scientist dominating his wife. And, that’s how it begins, with the wife escaping from her home, a wealthy mansion, then her husband in pursuit. Then comes news of his suicide, but… Critics and box office tended to agree that the film works well. It might have become more successful around the world (over $100 million) but its release was cut short by covid-19 and it went to streaming sources. While the film is basically the brainchild of the novelist, this version is also the brainchild of an Australian cinema whiz kid (now in his early 40s), Leigh Whannell. With his writer-director friend, James Wan, they establish the Saw franchise when they were in their mid-to-late 20s. While Whannell has continued as an actor and a prolific screenwriter, especially with the Insidious series, he also directed a small-budget horror film, well worth catching, Upgrade. Elisabeth Moss, a strong screen presence in many films and, of course, with The Handmaid’s Tale, is Cecilia, the wife who flees from her husband, asks for refuge from her sister who tends to be hostile, is supported by a San Francisco police officer, obtaining help also from his student daughter. The atmosphere continues to be heightened as the husband uses his scientific and technological knowledge to create a suit which renders him invisible, his wife having intimations of his presence, bewildering physical contact while he is unseen, and then some mad attempts at wrecking violence on those who support her. The film is often in bright light and colour, widescreen, not necessarily the atmosphere for such horror, but it all works very effectively. Cecilia can take only so much and, the latter part of the film sees her fighting back, confronting her husband, discovering his invention of the suit in their mansion, and, of course, exploiting it against her husband. As they say, when alerting potential audiences who may not like this kind of horror thriller, “very good of its kind”. KOKO: A RED DOG STORY Australia, 2019, 78 minutes, Colour. Jason Isaacs, Felix Williamson, Sarah Woods, Toby Trustlove, Kriv Stenders, Carol Hobday, Nelson

Woss. Directed by Aaron Mc Cann, Dominic Pearce. This is a story to please those who enjoyed the original Red Dog as well as the sequel, Red Dog: True Blue. It is a film for dog lovers. It is for a family audience. Critics, on the other hand, were singularly unimpressed and unmoved. Since dogs cannot be interviewed, filmmakers have to create a situation for them to exhibit their personalities and engage with audiences. This was certainly the with Koko, the dog who was chosen to portray Red Dog in the film. This reviewer remembers going to one of the previews in Melbourne and the dog himself was a star attraction before the screening. This documentary is part reconstruction, part interviews. Toby Trustlove portrays the younger version of the film director, Ruth’s tenders, while Felix Williamson portrays the younger version of the producer, Nelson Woss. Sarah Woods portrays the younger Carol Hobday, the owner and trainer of Koko. Before focusing on the dog himself, this documentary gives some substantial background to the original red dog, memories of him in the Pilberra, the statue dedicated to him, the tourists who visit the statue. In the re-created sequences, the director, Kriv Stenders, goes to great lengths to search for a personable dog to portray the role, finally going to a Victorian town, encountering an owner and trainer with her husband, some pleasant banter re-created to illustrate the rapport between the two, the initial counter with Koko and some other dogs, the attraction of their personalities, some auditions (which were actually used at the time for promotion of the film), the training, the filming of various scenes of the film. When the initial dog, Kamir, was dyed red, he came out in blotches which left the way open for Koko. There are interviews re-created by director and producer the time, and then interviews with the real director and producer inserted. After the filming, Carol Hobday gave the Koko to the producer, Nelson Woss, and there are scenes of him with the dog, with his daughter and the dog at home, taking the dog to the vet, his performance at the previews and promotion, his collapse and death. Some time also given to discussions about finding a star for the film, the eventual contact with Josh Lucas, his coming to Australia, his being interviewed about his rapport with Koko. Which means then that there are a lot of pleasant scenes between humans and dogs, a pleasure for the ordinary audience, reminding them of their response to the film, certainly an entertainment for dog-lovers. The film is narrated by Jason Isaac, the English actor who played the father in the sequel, Red Dog: True Blue. And a pleasing tribute to and memorial of Koko himself. LUCE

US, 2019, 109 minutes, Colour. Kelvin Harrison Jr, Naomi Watts, Octavia Spencer, Tim Roth, Norbert Leo Butz, Marsha Stephanie Blake. Directed by Julius Onah. Luce is an unexpected film. It is the story of an now-teenager who grew up in war-torn Eritrea, a child soldier, adopted by an American couple and brought to the United States where he excels in sports, in studies, in debates. He seems to be an ideal young man in a loving family and benefiting from American education. He states he is fully committed to the United States. Kelvin Harrison Jr gives a very sympathetic performance as Luce – which makes the ambiguity of the ending even more ambiguous and disturbing. Harrison was a lead in Waves and also appeared in Dark Waters. Naomi Watts and Tim Roth are the parents, she idealistic, the couple deciding not to have their own children, he fascinated by children and obviously wanting children of his own. They are placed in very difficult circumstances when one of Luce’s significant teachers, Octavia Spencer, reports odd and bad behaviour. The drama traces their sympathies, their suspicions, their arguments, their confrontations. For the most part of the film, Luce is a very genial and conscientious character, good at his running, making student speeches, practising his debating techniques. But then, there is the issue of a young student, his relationship with her, his mother contacting her, the teacher also confronting her. Then, the teacher becomes a victim, being bad-mouthed, her trying to deal with her mentally disturbed sister, her house then painted with graffiti. Which means then that the audience is challenged to ask about Luce and to see whether he is the ideal young American man or whether he is a pathological liar. MILITARY WIVES UK, 2020, 113 minutes, Colour. Kristin Scott Thomas, Sharon Horgan, Jason Fleming, Greg Wise, Lara Rossi. Directed by Peter Cattaneo. British film makers have a flair for creating enjoyable films which rely on special groups, sometimes rather oppressed groups, relying on music and dance to create an enthusiastic spirit. In the 90s there was the band in Brassed Off as well as the performance of The Full Monty. In more recent times there has been Finding Your Feet and, more specifically with choral singing, the men with their shanties in Fishermen’s Friend and now the wives of men overseas on active service and their choir, Military Wives. Interesting to note that the director of Military Wives is Peter Cattaneo who, back in the 90s, was responsible for The Full Monty. This is a fictional variation on what happened in fact, military wives forming choirs and performing,

initially a way of the women coping with the absence of their husbands and the dangers of active service. The range of wives is quite wide, British, different racial backgrounds, orientations… And, as you might expect, it is not always easy to get a group going, working together, becoming cohesive. It depends on who is in charge, who has the responsibility. In this case, it is Lisa (Sharon Horgan), a down-to-earth type, with a problem daughter at home. However, the more aristocratic wife of an officer, Katie (who is played, as you might expect, by Kristin Scott Thomas) assumes that she is in charge. Needless to say, there are emotional prickles, some verbal jousts, leadership rivalry. But, it doesn’t need the gift of prophecy or premonitions to know that, ultimately, there will be reconciliation and there will be success. Quite some demands on Katie. The women are not initially the greatest of singers. However, some talent emerges, Katie organising the rehearsals by the book, over literally, Lisa more instinctive. And there are the complexities of one of the wives receiving the news of her husband’s death, its impact, the funeral, the women coming together to sing at the funeral. There is a pleasing climax with the women singing in the Albert Hall which means that while it acknowledges ups and downs, joy and grief, apprehensions and relief, this is a feelgood film in the staunch British tradition. MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN US, 2019, 144 minutes, Colour. Edward Norton, Gugu Mbatha- Raw, Alec Baldwin, Bobby Cannavale, Willem Dafoe, Bruce Willis, Ethan Suplee, Cherry Jones, Dallas Roberts, Josh Pais, Fisher Stevens, Robert Wisdom, Michael Kenneth Williams. Directed by Edward Norton. Motherless Brooklyn is a story of political and financial corruption in New York City (with memory references to 19 century corruption and wheeler dealing, and memories of Gangs of New York). It is a story of violence and deception. The original novel was published in 1999 by Jonathan Letham (further films based on his novels, Tonight at Noon and You Don’t Love Me Yet). The film is a labour of love for Edward Norton who worked on the screenplay, produced and directed and plays the central role of a young man, working as a private eye, afflicted, often unexpectedly, with a variation of Tourette’s Syndrome. Running time is long – and some critics and audiences found it too long. The setting of the novel has been changed from the more recent past, going back to the 1950s, the experience of the city in the aftermath of World War II, veterans returning, jobs, elections, promises, the pulling down of harsh and poor neighbourhoods, possibilities for gentrification in the city at the expense of those turned out of the old areas, principally black neighbourhoods.

The initial focus is on Bruce Willis as a detective, Frank, with Lionel as his protégé. Lionel hears Frank negotiating on the phone and then hears him being shot. At the hospital, Frank whispers in his ear. Lionel is not sure but devotes himself to investigating, at times pretending to be a newspaper journalist, ingratiating himself into some people’s confidence. When the new mayor is elected, giving an earnest public speech then gathering with cronies behind-the-scenes, the major developer, Moses Randolph, enters and demands different lucrative portfolios. He is played with relentless cynicism by Alec Baldwin. There are further complications for Lionel leading him to a nightclub, the address on a box of matches belonging to Frank. This introduces him to a jazz world and jazz players as well as the young woman, Laura, Gugu Mbatha Raw, who is involved in social protests and social research under the guidance of a rather formidable campaigner played by Cherry Jones. Enter also a mysterious character played by Willem Dafoe who has dreams of what New York City might be like. Through him Lionel is led to quite a tangle of unanticipated relationships between the central characters as well as a relationship with Laura. There are also a number of betrayals, especially concerning Frank’s widow and the boss of Lionel’s small group of detectives, Tony (Bobby Cannavale). When Lionel suddenly discovers some key evidence (in the brim of Frank’s hat), there are even more dangerous complications, verbal confrontation with Moses, physical confrontation with thugs. On the one hand, the film is full of regret about this kind of corruption in New York City. On the other hand, it is a picture of a one-man crusade and its dangerous consequences. QUEEN AND SLIM US, 2019, 132 minutes, Colour. Daniel Kaluuya, Jodie Turner- Smith, Bokeem Woodbine, Chloe Sevigny, Flea. Sturgill Simpson, Indya Moore. Directed by Melina Matsoukas. The title is something of an enigma because the two central characters are never referred to as Queen or as Slim during the whole film. In fact, the newspaper reports their names as Ernest Hines and Angela Johnson. Be that as it may, they turn out to be unexpectedly interesting characters. There is a lot of cross reference to them as a contemporary Bonnie and Clyde. While they do get entangled with the police and are pursued across America, they are not outlaws in the sense of Bonnie and Clyde. Another helpful reference might be to The Odd Couple. This is a strong African- American film, the central couple, the screenwriter and the director (although Daniel Kaluuya is a British actor). This is a road movie, Queen (Jodie Turner- Smith both forceful and vulnerable) and Slim (Daniel kill Kaluuya from Get Out and Black Panther) driving through Ohio, Kentucky, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, Florida. The initial emphasis is on the odd couple, two strangers meeting on a date in a

diner, he a rather ordinary citizen, devoted to his father, she a lawyer whose recent client has just been executed. They seem to have very little in common and the date is a flop. However, in a moment of lapse in driving, they are pulled over by an aggressive cop, obnoxiously racist, who draws a gun – and, in the consequence scuffle, Queen is shot in the leg and then shoots the cop. The dilemma. To wait for the police? To drive off and escape? However, the cop had phoned in to headquarters the details of the case. And so, the pursuit is on. What follows is the drama on the road but there are a whole lot of incidental anecdotes along the way which makes the pursuit and escape more telling. The car breaking down, their being helped by the local sheriff, taking his car. They encounter a young man at a service station shop who just wants to hold their gun. When their next car breaks down, they take it to a garage, the owner knowing who they are, but his young son coming in, facing them as heroes, and his going to a race rally the next day and violently confronting a policeman in a rage. But, the main stop is with Queen’s uncle, whom she had defended in court, a Vietnam veteran, running a group of girls in Louisiana. But, while they change their appearance, the police are on to them and the uncle (Bokeem Woodbine) gives them a car and a reference to a buddy he fought within Vietnam. As they travelled to this contact, they stop at a bar, live music, they dance, are recognised and supported. Then, in their exhilaration, Queen sits on the front seat window exhilarated with her arms in the air in the wind, eventually persuading Slim to do the same thing. They arrive at the friend’s house, hide, then escape, flying to Florida to get a plane which will fly them out of the country. It is no spoiler to say that they do not succeed. There is quite some pathos at the brutality of the ending – and there are certainly more than echoes of Bonnie and Clyde. SERVANTS Slovakia, 2020, 80 minutes, black-and-white. Samuel Skyva, , Samuel Polakovic, Vlad Ivanov. Directed by Ivan Ostrochovsky. Servants is an arresting title for this film. The setting is a seminary in Bratislava, Slovakia, 1980. The question immediately arises: are the seminarians servants of the church, servants of the state? Conflicts? One of the co-writers of the screenplay, British writer, Rebecca Lenkiewicz, also wrote the screenplay for such striking films as Ida, Disobedience, Collett. Audiences of Central European films will immediately make a connection to Ida, Catholic themes in difficult times, black-and-white photography, brevity of the narrative, (Servants connecting with Ida and the Polish cinema, means connections with Polish films about clergy, clerical abuse in Kler, a young man masquerading as a priest in a village in Corpus Christi.) The black-and-white photography is quite striking, use of light and shadow, unexpected angles, like

an aerial shot of seminarians kicking a football, some reminiscences of Expressionist cinema. The editing and pace are quite different. Often there is a tableau-like presentation of characters and situations, some time before the characters actually speak, scenes reminiscent of silent cinema. With the editing, sometimes swift, audiences are asked to supply from their imagination and response some details as to the characters and the events. The musical score is quite wide ranging, suggestive, piano tones, orchestral during the final credits. All this has a rather different cumulative effect on the audience. The film opens with sinister events, depositing a dead body under an overpass. The sequence recurs later in the film, the murder of dissident priest from the seminary. However, the film is mainly about two young men, a blessing from their parish priest, a train journey to Bratislava, a rather formal entry into the seminary, their beginning their training. The film has a lot of detail about the seminary and the staff, an unexpectedly large number of seminarians, the gatherings, instructions by the seminary Dean, meetings with the spiritual director, cassocks and formality, yet moments of sport, football, trampoline, and a table tennis match involving up to ten seminarians moving in a circle and successive men batting the ball. And surreptitious smoking on the seminary roof. However, some of the seminarians listen to Radio Free Europe, part of the underground church, in contact with the Vatican. On the other hand, there is a Catholic group, named Pacem in Terris after the encyclical by Pope John XXIII, more of a compliant group led by the Dean. Ultimately, the two young men are caught up in the political-religious conflicts, one making contact with dissidents, a scene with a rebel group of laity meeting and reading quite apocalyptic texts, some women present (the only women in the film apart from the nuns who work in the seminary). Then the seminarians are urged to participate in a hunger strike against the authorities who have collected all the typewriters from the seminary, trying to track down who composed dissident notices. There is a sobering sequence when one of the young men is arrested, interrogated by a panel, standing naked before them, threatened with the draft, insinuations about his mother wanting him to be a priest. Both the young men are forced to take stances, one tragic, the other leaving the film with an open ending. (Audiences know that within the decade, the Soviet Empire will have collapsed with changes in Slovakia.) A very interesting and challenging film, an addition to studies about Catholic priests. THE SOUND OF SILENCE US, 2019, 85 minutes, Colour. Peter Sarsgaard, Rashida Jones, Tony Revelori, Austin Pendleton, Bruce Altman. Directed by Michael Tyburski. This is a film which the general public would find very difficult. Its main appeal is to the arthouse audience, an audience who which want something different, something stimulating to reflect on.

Peter Sarsgaard plays what might be an eccentric genius or someone who is just eccentric – with some mental health problems. We see him out and about in New York City, listening to sounds, sensing the different sounds in different neighbourhoods, mapping the city and its sounds. He is also available to clients who want to improve the sounds and atmosphere of their apartments or particular rooms. One of his main clients is played by Rashida Jones, his working in her apartment, his forming an attachment to her. Meanwhile, in the real world, Peter has an office and takes on an enthusiastic young apprentice, Tony Revelori. However, he is ambitious, is motivated by self-promotion and the possibility of making money, contacting a company who want to take over Peter and his work. In the meantime, Peter has support from a Columbia University professor, Austin Pendleton, and tries to get some of his findings published. By this stage of the film, it is becoming clearer that Peter is definitely an eccentric, that his findings and methods are dubious, a magazine editor putting him off from publishing his work. And, a sad ending, for Peter and the lack of possibilities for his future. THE SUN IS ALSO A STAR US, 2019, 100 minutes, Colour. Yara Shahidi, Charles Melton, John Leguizamo. Directed by Ry Russo-Young?. In a way, this is what Young Adult literature is about. The target audience is young men and women in their teens, young men and women in their 20s. This is definitely a young Young Adult story which is a romance, yet full of regrets. It is also a story of the variety of the population of New York City, the various ethnic groups – in this particular case, from the West Indies and from South Korea. Most of the action takes place over a day and a half. We are introduced to the two central characters, seeing them in their situations and in their families. Then there will be a chance encounter, one seeing the other from a distance and intrigued, then following, help in preventing an accident, then conversation. She is a young woman from a West Indian family who have settled in New York. She loves science, is ambitious to be a scientist, wants to stay in the United States. However, her family are subject to deportation moves and she makes a number of efforts to prevent the deportation. He is a young man from a Korean family, an enterprising father who has set up a hair business (telling us that this was very strong in Korea), with a loving mother and with a brother who is at great pains to become a tough American.

He sees her from a distance at Grand Central Station, and it is he who saves her from being knocked down by a car. She is on her way to an interview to get help from a lawyer to stop the deportation (a sympathetic John Leguizamo). He is on his way to an interview about his future, his father wanting him to study medicine while he himself wants to be a poet. They become friendly, he challenging her to look into his eyes steadily for several minutes, telling her that it will have an emotional effect. They also have a visit to his father’s store and an encounter with his brother. They visit her family, involving packing, and her father is aggressively unsympathetic. And his appointment is put off till the next day so they have some time together. And, as in romantic stories, they will encounter each other – both having appointments with the same lawyer. However, the future seems not to be… There is an epilogue to the film five years later. The family has gone back to the West Indies and the young woman has continued her studies, eventually getting documents to enable her to return to the United States. He, in the meantime, writes poetry, recites his poetry to the customers in the restaurant that they had visited in the past. She had loved the sun and had told the poet this – and, just as she goes out the door, read it in the restaurant in hope, regretting that the two of them had not met after all these years, as his poem about the sun. And… Is there a sequel? For Romantics and for realists, there should be a sequel! WAVES US, 2019, 135 minutes, Colour. Kelvin Harrison Jr, Lucas Hedges, Taylor Russell, Alexa Demie, Sterling K.Brown, Renee Elyse Goldsberry, Clifton Collins Jr. Directed by Trey Edward Shultz. Waves received a great deal of critical acclaim on its release in the United States. It is a particularly American story – and may not have the same kind of appeal for audiences outside America. There was some criticism, however, that it was very long, many of the sequences over-prolonged, some audiences losing interest in the characters and the situations. The setting is Florida and the focus on an African-American? family. Particular attention is given to the older teenage son of the family, Tyler, a strong performance from Kelvin Harrison Jr (Luce, The Photograph). He is involved in school sports, especially wrestling, a number of scenes of training and performance, encouraged by his father, Ronald (Sterling K. Brown, also a strong performance) sharing the training with his son. Outside school hours and outside home, Tyler moves with what might be called the fast crowd, having a relationship with his girlfriend, Alexis (Alexa Demie). Also at home is his loving stepmother (Renee Elyse Goldsberry) and his younger sister, Emily (Taylor Russell). Emotional complications arise when Tyler is discovered to have physical difficulties, injuries, but preferring to continue to please his father and wrestle until his final collapse during a bout. There are emotional complications at home, his rebelling against his stern father, harsh criticisms of his

stepmother. This is completely aggravated when his girlfriend reveals that she is pregnant. His reaction is almost completely self-centred, taking her to an abortion clinic, in a rage when she decides to keep the baby. The action becomes particularly melodramatic and tragic with Tyler confronting his girlfriend. Tyler is arrested, sentenced to prison – and the film then veers into its second part, the story of Emily, her encounter with one of her fellow students who had trained in wrestling with Tyler. Initially awkward, Luke (Lucas Hedges) bonds with Emily. In the meantime, her parents have become alienated because of Tyler’s imprisonment. The most dramatic part of this drama is Luke and Emily visiting Luke’s estranged father, dying in hospital. On the one hand, Luke and Emily have the possibility of a happy ending in future – and there is some resolution for the parents and a glimpse of Tyler serving his time in prison.

SIGNIS REVIEWS MAY 2020 With cinemas closed and major film productions delayed because of Covid-19, the monthly reviews will have more limited significance than usual. Here is a selection of cinema films made available for streaming as well as some Netflix recent releases. FILMS MADE FOR CINEMA BUT NOW RELEASED ON STREAMING ART OF SELF-DEFENSE, The HARRIET LEUNIG FRAGMENTS, The MA VIVARIUM NETFLIX FILMS (especially some Spanish mysteries) DANGEROUS LIES EXTRACTION INVISIBLE GUARDIAN, The (Spanish) LEGACY OF THE BONES, The (Spanish) OCCUPANT, The (Spanish) SILENCE OF THE WHITE CITY, The (Spanish) SPENSER CONFIDENTIAL UNCORKED

THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE US, 2019, 104 minutes, Colour. Jesse Eisenberg, Alessandro Nivola, Imogene Poots. Directed by Riley Stearns. This is a drama about what it means to be male, macho, the elements of being a man in contemporary society. But, the film is full of irony, moments of parody, a critique of ideas and practice of machismo. (Some of the response to the film was very negative because audiences heard it was meant to be comic – but they failed to perceive the inherent ironies funny; others were negative because they saw it as an attack on martial arts.) Jesse Eisenberg has specialised over the years in portraying nervous, sometimes nerdish characters (even though he did play Lex Luthor in more recent Superman films). Here he is, Casey, a 30 something, working as an accountant, living by himself (except for his favourite pet dog), very awkward in his communication with others. One night he is mugged in the streets and finds himself in hospital, feeling cut off from his work, unwilling to go back to work despite invitations from his boss. He considers buying a gun and goes through the processes of choosing and being interviewed for documentation. But, then he sees the Karate school. We are introduced to a character, the director of the school, who seems to be a very direct character in his dealings with his students, affirming and challenging. However, as the film progresses, he is the embodiment of the machismo, making further and further demands on his students and, ultimately revealed as an arch controller and manipulator. He is played effectively by Alessandro Nivola. And, he has an enormous impact on Casey, urging him to punch as if he kicked and kick as if he punched. Complicating the issue is one of the students, female, played by Imogen Poots (who, after this film, co-starred with Jesse Eisenberg in the symbolic Vivarium). Casey’s experience with the martial arts, straightforward but eventually sinister, transforms him – but into what? HARRIET US, 2019, 125 minutes, Colour. Cynthia Erivo, Leslie Odom Jr, Joe Allman, Clarke Peters, Henry Hunter Hall, Tim Guinee, Joseph Lee Anderson, Janelle Monae, Vondie Curtis- Hall. Directed by Kasi Lemmons. Perhaps the title does not strike a chord, not elicit memory. So, who is Harriet? She is Harriet Tubman, one of the key African- American women in 19th century American history. To that extent, this film is a must for audiences throughout the United States. And it is important for non-Americans to experience something of the life of this woman, her courage, her causes, her commitment.

She is played by singer-actor, Cynthia Erivo (who made such an impression as the singer in Bad Times at El Royale and Widows), an Oscar-nominated performance (and something of a shock to discover that she was actually born in London). Initially, Harriet was a young slave in a southern plantation, called Minty. The initial part of the film offers a portrait of life for the slaves on the plantation, their work, hardships, religious fervour, and the arrogant behaviour of the landowners, parent generation, younger generation. Minty decides that she wants to escape and uses a great deal of ingenuity, local help and contacts, experiences of the dangers of pursuit, of the terrain, before she reaches the North, and finds a haven in the black community of Philadelphia. It is a new life for her and she chooses the name Harriet. And that is only the beginning. A substantial section of the film involves Harriet, her return to the south, wanting to rescue her family members, setting up means for others to escape, accompanying them, succeeding, many escapees able to use the Underground Railroad. In fact, she gets such a reputation that she is feted in the media, condemned by the landowners in the South, out to capture her. But, life is not easy. She is pursued,but continues her work, takes more public stances, challenges both black and white leaders in the North. It is a wonder that we do not know more about her. Especially since she led an active group in an uprising during the Civil War. And, surprisingly, she did not die until 1913, a half-century after her participation in the war. Well worth seeing, well written and acted, and a substantial reminder of the experiences of African- Americans in slavery and in freedom. THE LEUNIG FRAGMENTS Australia, 2019, 97 minutes, Colour. Directed by Kasimir Burgess. Michael Leunig has been an extraordinary presence in the Australian imagination for several decades. This is particular the case because of his prolific cartoons his immediately recognisable sketch style – appearing frequently in the pages of The Melbourne Age and The Sydney Morning Herald. He has a wry view of human nature, of the world, of the universe. This is a portrait of Leunig rather than a biography – he often appears as a difficult character, unpredictable, with moods, and members of his family with the exception of one son were unwilling to participate. The director, Kasimir Burgess, made contact with Leunig and was able to film the cartoonist over a period of five years, sometimes with long time lapses in between takes. There are many talking heads who are most complementary about Leunig, especially the comic

genius, the late John Clarke and Philip Adams some of the cartoonists provocations as “waspish”. However, there are also some remarks included by fans of his cartoons who find themselves not particularly moved by Leunig as a person. Some television personalities, like Virginia Trioli, are critical of some of the stances he has taken. So, the film is in bits and pieces, something like a jigsaw puzzle, but not complete, many holes, many gaps. But there is enough material here, perhaps more than enough, about Leunig’s life and its effect on him, the development of his views, his characters, Mr Curley and the duck, the range of his art and style, some of the cartoons becoming alive in animation. There is a final session at the Sydney Opera House with his doing a sketching session on stage. Admiring him, or disliking him (or his cartoons), he has a distinctive point of view, continually consciousness-raising. MA US, 2019, 99 minutes, Colour. Octavia Spencer, Juliette Lewis, Diana Silvers, Mc Kaley Miller, Corey Fogelmanis, Gianni Paolo, Dante Brown, Tanya Waivers, Luke Evans, Missy Pyle, Alison Janney. Directed by Tate Taylor. Ma sounds a kind of folksy ingratiating name for mother or a mother-figure. And, when we are introduced to her and find she is being played by that fine character actress, Octavia Spencer, we might expect something genial. But then some will notice that this is a Blumhouse production and Blumhouse is best noted for thrillers, and a lot of horror stories. And, this is the direction in which Ma (both the character and the film) takes us. However, unlike many of the Blumhouse productions, there is nothing supernatural in this plot. This is a focus on the complexities of human nature. Ma is Sue Ann, getting older, living at home, working as a vet (with Allison Janney as her boss in a rather low key cameo role). However, the initial focus is on a mother and daughter, Juliette Lewis and Diane Silver, the mother returning to the town where she grew up. She gets a job in a casino. The daughter goes to school where she encounters a group of friendly students (who, surprisingly, remain her friends throughout the film despite all the ups and downs, especially the final downs). However, they have a touch of the rebellion in them and want to buy some alcohol and, encountering Ma walking a dog, they enlist her help. Not only does she help, but she invites them to the basement of her house where they can party. They take up the invitation. Ma is exhilarated and enters more and more into the partying. Of course, it all becomes quite complex. There are flashbacks to Sue Ann when she was at school and bullied. There is the discovery that she has a daughter whom she protects. And, some of the parent generation in the present worth the bullies from the past. As the behaviour becomes more and more sinister, and Ma is threatened, the screenplay moves towards some violence and cruelty, some mad and deadly manifestations.

It is interesting to watch Octavia Spencer as Sue Ann, genially dealing with the youngsters, but becoming more and more possessive, even deranged. Not everybody’s choice for entertainment, but in its way, drawing us in. VIVARIUM Ireland, Denmark, Belgium, 2019, 97 minutes, Colour. Imogen Poots, Jesse Eisenberg, Jonathan Aris, Senan Jennings, Eana Hardwicke. Directed by Lorcan Finnegan. It is probably useful to check on a definition of the title word, one that is not normally used in frequent conversation. A vivarium (Latin, literally for "place of life"; plural: vivaria or vivariums) is an area, usually enclosed, for keeping and raising animals or plants for observation or research. Often, a portion of the ecosystem for a particular species is simulated on a smaller scale, with controls for environmental conditions. And there is some further precision: A vivarium may be small enough to sit on a desk or table, such as a terrarium or an aquarium, or may be a very large structure, possibly outdoors. While we are wondering about the title, the film opens in a pleasantly ordinary way. Gemma (Imogen Poots) is a successful kindergarten teacher. Tom (Jesse Eisenberg) works on trees and gardening. Off they go to a real estate agent, testing the possibility of buying a house together. There is an alert with Martin, the agent, behaving in a puzzling and robotic way. He persuades them to go with him to examine the house – while the interiors seem very suitable, we sense a tension when there are rows and rows of streets with identical, identical homes. So, this is what a suburban Vivarium could look like. And then, there is a growing sense of menace, as Martin disappears, as the couple get in their car, drive to leave, find themselves continually going in circles, arriving again at the house, No 9, eventually running out of petrol, then walking in circles, finally stranded. Gemma and Tom are trapped in this suburban Vivarium. How will they cope? Food appears outside the front door in boxes, delivered anonymously. Then a baby is delivered. Then a patch of soil appears on the front lawn and Tom begins to dig, to dig, to dig, deeper and deeper, keeping himself occupied, but becoming obsessed. In the meantime, Gemma tries to manage with the baby. If audiences want to know what happens with the baby – and quite a lot does, highly dramatic, increasingly menacing…, then see the film. No explanations are given. There is no indication as to who is controlling the experiment and observing in this Vivariuim. How significant are our speculations as to this image of never-ending streets and houses as a symbol of our contemporary world? Is there no control? And what of any

indications of transcendence? Any place for God…? Gemma experiences the equivalent of a nightmare during the day, all the inhabitants of the houses trapped in the Vivarium. Life and death? No escape? The screenplay does not spell out answers for audiences who want something clear at the end. It is over us to continue our responses, increasingly alarmed, increasingly pessimistic. NETFLIX DANGEROUS LIES US, 2020, 96 minutes, Colour. Camilla Mendes, Jessie T.Usher, Elliot Gould, Cam Gigandet, Jamie Chung, Sasha Alexander, Michael P.Northey. Directed by Michael Scott. In comparison with many other thrillers, this one, despite its title, is rather mild. Which means that the average audience might be able to sit through it comfortably and enjoy it. On the other hand, there is a lot of commentary about its being too mild. Camilla Mendes and Jessie T Usher play married couple, Katie and Adam, she working in a diner, he studying, but falling on difficult financial times even after he does some heroics in stopping a robbery in the diner. By this time, she is a carer for an elderly gentleman, Leonard, who lives alone in a mansion. He is played by Elliot Gould (the character being 88 but Gould being 80 the time of filming). He dies and there are all kinds of complications, money stored in a chest in the Attic, an estate agent visiting and pressing Katie for a sale. An unexpected lawyer (Jamie Chung) who announces that Leonard has left everything to Katie. Then the police investigate the death, are suspicious of the couple. Adam begins to enjoy the inheritance that Leonard has left them, becoming extravagant. Ultimately, there is a background story of a diamond robbery, a murder, violent threats to the couple – and a mixture of happy and unhappy ending. EXTRACTION US, 2020, 116 minutes, Colour. Chris Hemsworth,Rudhrakash Jaiswal, Randeep Hooda, Golshifteh Farahani, Piyush Khati, David Harbour, Wayne Blair, Rob Collins. Directed by Sam Hargrave. This is a Netflix action show, a star vehicle for Chris Hemsworth moving into real life (or a-fantasy of real-life and military action) away from the Marvel Universe. Hemsworth produced the film. It was written by Joe Russo who collaborated with his brother, Anthony, on the Captain America and Avengers movies. This film was directed by Sam Hargrave who collaborated with the Russo Brothers

and has credits for 80 films for his stunt work. It shows in this film. One wonders whether it was a good idea to open the film with Chris Hemsworth in action but actually being shot, seemingly fatally. Of course, the whole action of the film will build up to this sequence. The film also opens in India with some affluent schoolboys, especially a young boy called Ovi. The young actor, Rudhrakash Jaiswal, proves himself to be a strong screen presence, sharing a lot of the time with Chris Hemsworth, but creating a credible character. His father is in jail, and affluent gangster. Ovi is abducted by a rival Bangladeshi gangster lord. The father wants his son recovered and asks his manager, the supervisor of his son, to get the boy back, no holds barred. In the meantime, we are taken to the Kimberleys and introduced to Chris Hemsworth as Tyler, an available mercenary. (And some scenes with Wayne Blair and Rob Collins to give an authentic Kimberleys atmosphere.) His previous connections, especially in the person of Nick Khan (Golshifteh Farahani) arrives to persuade him to take on the case. After the opening with the wounded Tyler, the caption says two days ago. And, what an exhausting, rather impossible, two days it is. Tyler confronts the captors, shows them why he is a mercenary, takes the boy. What follows is, as expected, all kinds of chases, vehicles crashing, soldiers pursuing, narrow escapes, hiding, using wits… Eventually, there is a dramatic pause with Tyler and the boy bonding, Tyler telling him his life story, giving Chris Hemsworth a chance to act over and above his action skills. One might say that this is a film for combat-fans. There are many fights, many brutal moments, a huge body count. Which means that the film is targeted for those who enjoy macho action (though there is are some interventions by Niki Khan, including her being a crack sniper). This is the kind of material made popular by Stephen Seagal or Jean-Claude? van Damme. Chris Hemsworth is more credible as an action hero than both of them. As has been noted, action for combat-fans. THE INVISIBLE GUARDIAN/ EL GUARDIAN INVISIBLE Spain, 2017, 129 minutes, Colour. Marta Etura, Elvira Minguez, Nene. Directed by Fernando Gonzalez Molina. The Invisible Guardian refers to a mythological forest protector in northern Spain. This is a police detective investigation, a series of serial killings of young women, naked, posed with hands like a statue of the Virgin Mary, a particular cake placed on their bodies. The local police investigate but a detective, who grew up in the town, has left the town and worked with the FBI in the United States, now returns and pursues the investigation.

The investigation is interesting in itself, following the clues, discovering connections, going back many years and further victims. The investigation is complicated by the mythologies of the area, communicated to the detective by her aunt who brought her up after she had suffered sadistic torments from her mentally unbalanced mother. Her two sisters are also in the town, the older who runs the bakery inherited from their father, and seems to resent the young woman. The detective is criticised by various people in the town. The screenplay also focuses on the detective’s past, showing Her Is a little girl, her treatment by her mother, the support of her father, going to live with her aunt, her leaving the town and not wanting to return. The film has very solemn atmosphere, many scenes of mist, clouds, rain, rivers and waterfalls. Eventually, the mystery is linked with her family’s very conservative and judgemental attitudes, condemning young women for their behaviour – and one of the family then responsible for the murders. The film was successful – and there were two sequels. THE LEGACY OF THE BONES/ LEGADO DE LOS HUESOS Spain, 2019, 121 minutes, Colour. Marta Etura, Nene, Leonardo Sbaraglia, Francesc Orella, Imanol Arias, Benn Northover. Directed by Fernando Gonzalez Molina. The Legacy of the Bones is the second in a trilogy of mysteries, police work and detection. They are all set in Basque country – with a background of some Spanish superstitions as well as Spanish Catholicism – there is also the story of the detective herself, her growing up, her dominant mother and madness, her relationship with her sisters, her leaving the town, going to work with the FBI, her contact with an agent in the US who gives her advice. She is also in relationship with an artist and in this film is pregnant and gives birth. However, there are demands on her because of her work, pressures on her partner, but her wanting to be a devoted mother. There is a madness associated with the series of murders but they are to be seen in the context of a prologue from the 16th century when newly born daughters were offered in sacrifice. There is also the Catholic dimension, this time with a psychologist who works in the local hospital and is an imminent member of Opus Dei. However, the focus again is on the detective’s mother, her madness, and her involvement with the series of women’s deaths. It builds up to a dramatic climax between mother and daughter – the mother escaping, presumably to be involved in the third film in the trilogy.

HOGAR/THE OCCUPANT Spain, 2020, 103 minutes, Colour. Javier Gutierrez, Mario Casas, Bruna Cusi, Ruth Diaz. Directed by David Pastor, Alex Pastor. The original Spanish title is more telling than the English version. The Spanish word, Hogar has overtones of hearth and home, being at home. With the English title, one can ask who is the occupant, the advertising man who continues to return to the apartment that his had to leave or his friend his family now occupies the apartment. This is a film about a middle-aged man losing his job, relying on his reputation as an advertising agent in the past (the film opening with his bright and breezy commercial about family life in the 1990s). He now is told he is too qualified for jobs. This has some devastating effects, discussions with his wife, moving out of the apartment, trying to relate to his son who is involved in studies but is putting on too much weight, the proposal to sell the family car. He also tries for another advertising job but is humiliated by being offered a contract to work six months’ probation without pay. The man goes into a church and then joins a help-group and their discussions, making contact with a friendly man, going out to coffee with him, but Spending a story about having an ex-wife and an alienated daughter. The irony is that the new friend is occupying his old apartment. Initially, the situation is friendly, being invited to dinner, meeting his friend’s wife and daughter, but then asking his friends help after he crashes his car. There are also complications with blackmail by the local gardener – leading to more desperate action by the advertising man. Perhaps the audience has been suspicious about the advertising man’s behaviour – but, from this point on, he is quite sociopathic, alienating his wife and son and leaving, deceiving the friend’s wife about her husband’s behaviour, insinuating himself into her life and that of her daughter. This eventually leads to violence (setup by the advertising man). Some of the commentary on the film consists of surprise that there is no retribution for this sociopath after we have seen his destruction of his own family, his killing his friend, becoming part of the friend’s family and taking his job. While his wife does try to confront him with the truth, he exercises financial power over her, threatening her. Perhaps this is the point of the film, telling the story of the sociopath and leaving the audience amazed at what he has done and how he gets away with it. SPENSER CONFIDENTIAL US, 2020, 111 minutes, Colour. Mark Wahlberg, Winston Duke, Alan Arkin, Bokeem Woodbine, Iliza Shlezinger. Directed by Peter Berg. Director Peter Berg and actor Mark Wahlberg have worked together several times: 22 Miles,

Patriots’ Day, Deepwater Horizon, Lone Survivor. They truly have a rapport – especially for action films. This is a Netflix film, a story of Boston, the police, drug dealing, police corruption. We are in familiar ground – except that Wahlberg plays Spenser, an angry policeman who physically attacks his superior, accusing him of corruption. He served a sentence in jail, returns to be in his life anew with the help of his old friend and mentor, Henry, played by Alan Arkin, and a big would-be boxer, played by Winston Duke. In the background and then in the foreground is a former girlfriend, Sissy, Iliza Shlesinger. Bokeem Woodbine appears as an old friend and the force but who is revealed as a villain. Tough stuff, especially a lot of physical fights with Mark Wahlberg – but rather average. UNCORKED US, 2020, 104 minutes, Colour. Mamadou Athie, Courtney B.Vance, Sashun Compere, Lathun Pollard. Directed by Prentice Penny. While this family drama is set in the African- American community in Memphis, Tennessee, the basic plot is applicable to many families in many cultures. The focus is on a young man, Elijah (Mamadou Athie), in his 20s, destined to work in his father’s restaurant, his father having inherited the business from his father. It is the family business. However, Elijah’s vision goes beyond working in the family business, he has a special skill with wines, expertise in tasting, identifying… He takes the opportunity to develop his skills, attend courses, and a new world opening up for him. And, as we might expect, his stern father (Courtney B.Vance) is not in favour. Deep down, he does understand, but in practice he does not. On the other hand, he is supported by his loving mother (who has problems of her own, diagnosed with terminal cancer). Elijah tries to combine living in both worlds. He works hard in the restaurants. This is made all the harder by the stern attitude of his father. He enrols in studies, makes a number of friends, wants to qualify as a professional. In fact, this includes the student group going to Paris for further education, the family chipping in for money to pay his fare. But, fate and fatality intervene, especially with the illness of his mother. Elijah experiences some depression, the feeling that he is not destined to fulfil his ambitions, resigned to working for his father. There is a happy ending but not in the way that we might have been expecting or hoped for. Elijah does have some communication with his father, even gaining some support. But, as the film ends, he has not reached his goal – but, he hopes, and we hope, that he is well on the way.

SIGNIS REVIEWS JUNE 2020

AFTER TRUTH: DISINFORMATION AND THE COST OF FAKE NEWS BAD EDUCATION ENDINGS, BEGINNINGS HORS NORMS/ THE EXTRAORDINARY LITTLE MONSTERS PROXIMA SAME KIND OF DIFFERENT AS ME TRIP TO GREECE NETFLIX RELEASES BECOMING CATCHER IS A SPY, The LOVE IS BLIND AFTER TRUTH: DISINFORMATION AND THE COST OF FAKE NEWS US, 2020, 95 minutes, Colour. By Andrew Rossi. This is a film about conspiracy theories, American conspiracy theories – which may seem very wild in the United States but seem even wilder to those outside the United States. This documentary was released by Home Box Office in 2020, at the beginning of the election year and President Trump hoping for a second term. The thrust of the documentary is that the conspiracies portrayed in this film tend to be perpetrated and believed in by Trump supporters. Some of them have been used to bolster support for him. There are a number of sequences from the 2016 Trump rallies, the denunciation of Fake News, urging the crowds to turn to the press boxes and shout at them. In 95 minutes, not all conspiracies can be considered so there is a selection here. The point is made that a conspiracy is not just investigating an event and having opinions but rather holding that the opinions are the truth. This is particularly the case in a conspiracy that was heard of outside the United States but was particularly American. In order to target Hillary Clinton in her presidential campaign, this conspiracy theory focused on a family pizza establishment in Washington DC, where families could gather, have recreation, especially with ping-pong tables, and enjoy their pizza. The conspiracy concerned the proprietor of the pizza establishment: Comet, James Alefantis speak emotionally to camera. The venue was frequented by politicians and the media. Stories were told that the pizza establishment was a cover for a paedophile ring, organised by the manager and by Hillary Clinton herself, that the menu items were codes for choosing boys or girls for sexual activity, that the basement of the establishment was where the abuse took place. This conspiracy received a great deal of coverage, detrimental to Hillary Clinton. The film shows the journey of a conspiracy theorist from South Carolina, so incensed that he rode his bike to Washington DC, brandished a gun, threatening the staff and patrons. Quick thinking on the part of the staff meant that the police arrived quickly and overpowered him, no injuries to customers.

There are talking head interviews with quite a number of journalists, a focus on to right-wing conspiracy fabricators, Jack Bergman and Jacob Wohl, scenes of their planning their work, press conferences with innuendo rather than facts – and being challenged by the journalists present. Indications are given on various extreme websites and information on those sites. Perhaps best known outside Australia is the broadcaster, Alex Jones, who said that the murder of the school children at Sandy Hook was a hoax. There are quite a number of excerpts focusing on him, information given that he is Internet presence was closed down, his going to Washington, enraged, confronting journalists and denouncing them. The tone of the film is set from the beginning with a conspiracy about military exercises in Texas in 2016, locals up in arms, the theory that Barack Obama was preparing prisons for his opponents. There is a scene with a local meeting, the military Had explaining what was happening and the locals telling him that they didn’t believe a word he said. The film is helpful in presenting these conspiracies and their backgrounds, the personalities promoting, the experts critical of them. While the immediate response from some audiences was favourable, commending the expose, there was a great deal of hostility against the documentary from large numbers who believed that the film was all propaganda against American citizens who wanted to know the truth. BAD EDUCATION US, 2020, 108 minutes, Colour. Hugh Jackman, Alison Janney, Geraldine Viswanathan, Ray Romano, Annaleigh Ashford, Stephen Spinella, Raphael Casal, Alex Wolfe. Directed by Corey Finley. Decades ago, Michael Douglas as Gordon Gecko on Wall Street gave a speech affirming that “greed is good”. Here is a true story, from an affluent community on Long Island at the beginning of the2000s, where public figures in education not only gave the thumbs up to Gordon Gecko’s theory but, extravagantly, put it into practice. This is also a showcase for the acting talents of Hugh Jackman. He brings his extraordinary charm to the role of Frank Tassone, a local superintendent of schools, beloved by his community, applauded by everyone, ambitious to develop the prestige of the school where he is based, the status of the local community, the property values of homes in the area. He is supported in his work by the local school principal, played by Ray Romano, and his associate in the office and in the ambitions, played by Alison Janney. But, it is all a facade. The building begins to crumble when the associate, competent in managing accounts, competent in fabricating accounts, is exposed to the horror of the school board, a compromise being found for her dismissal in that she has resigned for health reasons. She is not supported by Tassone as she had expected – and leaves him a dire note, responding to her being branded as a sociopath, accusing him of being a greater sociopath. And, she is not wrong. In fact, the film could be viewed as the portrait of a narcissist, a sociopath, full of charm concerning his own well-being and success, conscienceless in his exploitation. Frank Tassone a looks in the mirror quite often, sees wrinkles of ageing, undergoes some plastic surgery, but always smiling, no matter what.

His facade takes a lot longer to crumble. He is an arch manipulator, pressurising the school accountant to interpret the books in his favour. And, there is the greater revelation about his private life, his assertion that his wife is long dead, the discovery that has been living with a partner for over 30 years, that has been come infatuated with a young dancer in Las Vegas. Audiences will be somewhat aghast at his self-indulgence, $20,000 spent on a first-class return flight to London with the dancer, the amount of money he has fraudulently covered, he and his assistant embezzling millions of dollars from the community. While the attention is on Frank Tassone, the interesting character who leads to his unmasking is a young student at the school, studying journalism, working on the student paper, doing some investigative work (and, when interviewed by Frank, his urging her not just a write puff pieces). She does her research with documents, discovers Frank’s apartment and his partner, is instrumental in his unmasking. She is played convincingly by Australian actress, Geraldine Viswanathan. This is a moral fable, a warning that while greed has its many moments of good, it is intrinsically evil and leads to downfall. ENDINGS, BEGINNINGS US, 2019, 110 minutes, Colour. Shailene Woodley, Jamie Dornan, Sebastien Stan, Matthew Gray Gubler, Lindsay Sloane, Wendy Malick, Kyra Sedgwick. Directed by Drake Doremus. Every audience can identify with this title, many endings in our lives, many beginnings. However, the reference here is particularly to young adults, especially those in their late 20s, early 30s, the age of the main protagonists. This is a film by Drake Doremus who has made a succession of films exploring relationships between younger people. The focus is on Daphne, played by Shailene Woodley, who built a strong reputation for performance during her 20s, including The Descendants, the Insurgent series, Big Little Lies. She is involved in a breakup with her longtime boyfriend, decides to take something of a sabbatical, moves in with her half-sister, tries to get some jobs, wants to sort herself out. Daphne reflects on her past, her beginnings, the absence of her father, her mother caring for her but many relationships with men. By contrast, her half-sister is pregnant, relates well with her husband – although Daphne sees them often quarrelling. The issue is whether she will drift or, as the title indicates, will find some beginnings. The key to her search is, of course, in relationships. She has flashbacks to her past boyfriend. She has given up drinking. (Although, it is extraordinary how many cigarettes she and the cast smoke during the film – with some comment by her on what the Surgeon General might think.) At a party, she encounters two men, Jack (Jamie Dornan keeping his Irish accent) and Frank (Sebastian Stan). Interestingly, the two could pass for brothers, same height, general appearance and build, both bearded. She is attracted to Jack, a serious-minded writer with prospects for

advancement, time in Italy, researcher. The audience might be more puzzled by her attraction to Frank, very outgoing, not particularly inhibited or scrupulous in his behaviour. The audience watches Daphne letting herself go in a sexual relationship with Frank. She is more controlled, even more tender, in her sexual relationship with Jack. In the meantime, she is getting advice from her half-sister, from friends who work in the art world where she did, from her mother. But, for a young woman entering her 30s, the principal beginning is pregnancy, the desire to have a child, but with the problem to be solved about communicating to both Jack and Frank about the pregnancy as well as the paternity issues. Since the title begins with endings and ends with beginnings, the screenplay, of course, will leave the audience standing with Daphne, contemplating this particular beginning for a life and what she will do. HORS NORMES/ THE EXTRAORDINARY/THE SPECIALS site France, 2019, 114 minutes, Colour. Vincent Cassel, Reda Kateb, Helene Vincent, Bryan Mialoundama, Benjamin Lusieur, Marco Locatelli. Directed by Olivier Nakache, Eric Toledano. Who is Extraordinary? What is Extraordinary? Audiences who have seen C’est la vie, the Intouchables, Samba, and recognise the names of the writers-directors, will be expecting (eagerly) a film about some kind of caregiving. And that is precisely what happens. The film has also served as a challenge to French medical and health authorities and their dealing with autistic men, women and children, especially those severely affected, those who are outside the norms which bureaucracy tends to impose, everything regulated, everything seemingly safe all secured. The central characters are based on two actual caregivers who are seen in photos during the final credits. They are played by Vincent Cassel and Reda Kateb. Vincent Cassel has played so many criminals over the decades, so many sinister -looking characters, that it may take many audiences offguard to see him so genial, so humane, so full of humanitarian energy as caregiver, Bruno. Reda Kateb has appeared in quite a number of French dramas, playing here another sympathetic caregiver, Malik, one who takes risks as Bruno does but also has some order and discipline in his working with the autistic as well as with his staff, especially the volunteers. Because, in fact, so many of the staff are volunteers, chosen by Bruno and Malik, taking them on to care with training on the spot, there is very often quite a risk. The film is full of wonderful examples of the work, the extraordinary challenge that most of us would not be equipped to handle in terms of emotions, skills, long-term patience. There is Joseph, a rather rotund young man who has a penchant for pulling emergency levers on the Paris Metro. When he gets a job in a factory, where he does well, he gets a crush on one of the workers, going beyond bounds, having to move out. There is Valentin, a reclusive boy, wearing a leather helmet, sitting alone, banging his head against a wall. One of Malik’s volunteers, Dylan, a young homeless man, begins to work with him, patiently staying with him, eventually, very eventually, achieving some success. There are many pictures of doctors and nurses, many sympathetic, referring the autistic to Bruno

and Malik and their care. There are many parents, some puzzled, some anxious, some desperate, and a portrait of Joseph’s mother (Helene Vincent).. Bruno is full of energy, never stopping (well, some arranged dates but he is always on call and has to go), collaborating with Malik, but facing the challenge of the inspectors, finally and in desperation asking who would take the men and women if not them? The government? And treat them – how? So, this is a film of special pleading, taking the audience into an unfamiliar world for most, asking for understanding and for empathy. LITTLE MONSTERS Australia, 2019, 93 minutes, Colour. Lupita Nyong'o Alexander England, Josh Gad, Kat Stewart, Diesel La Torraca, Nadia Townsend, Marshall Napier. Directed by Abe Forsythe. Australian writer-director, Abe Forsythe, once made a parody of Ned Kelly, called Ned. Here he tries his hand at an Australian zombie film. It is a blend of the serious and the comic. The main focus of the story is a group of young children and their teacher. The teacher, Miss Caroline, is played by American actress Lupita Nyong’o who won an Oscar for her performance as the slave in 12 Years a Slave, featured in the Star Wars series, in Black Panther and in Jordan Peele’s horror/comedy, Us. The leading man is Alexander England, Dave, a lumbering scruffy type who will have to be redeemed, but looking like a cousin of Chris Hemsworth. Audiences may be put off at the beginning by the focus on Dave and his rather raucous clash with his girlfriend and then discovering her having an affair. Crushed, Dave takes refuge with his sister and bonds with her young nephew. He takes him to school where he meets Miss Caroline. Some presume him to be a teacher so he accompanies Miss Caroline to the theme park where they are to have a day’s excursion. Part of the attraction is that an American comedian who has a television program devoted to children (which they watch with rapt attention, imitating his movements, completely loyal) will be an attraction. He is played by American Josh Gad but turns out to be a completely obnoxious, foulmouthed, lecherous would-be celebrity. In the meantime, at an Army installation, experimenting with the dead, a number of zombies escape, menace everyone in the theme park and transform them, except that Miss Caroline and Dave with the children, as well as the celebrity, in the park shop. Most of the action of the film has the zombies outside, continually menacing. But, the inventiveness of Miss Caroline and her singing, care for the children, Dave helping, that they survive, assuming that it is all part of the excursion and the game. Miss Caroline ventures out and confronts the zombies to retrieve from the store the nephew’s Darth Vader suit which he can put on to distract the zombies so that Dave and the celebrity can escape. Of course, the celebrity is obnoxious, refuses Dave’s entry into his vehicle – but is summarily and gorily dispatched. And, of course, Miss Caroline and Dave escape with the children, though almost

blasted with the weapons of the Army, the children restored to their mothers – and, Dave transformed, may have a future with Miss Caroline. This is an undemanding zombie film which disappointed the fans of the gory but pleased those who like zombies presented with a lighter touch! PROXIMA France/Germany, 2019, 107 minutes, Colour. Eva Green, Zelie Boulant, Matt Dillon, Aleksey Fateev, Lars Eidinger, Sandra Huller. Directed by Alice Winocour. There may be a difficulty for prospective audiences with such an enigmatic title as Proxima. And there was a difficulty for other prospective audiences when they heard that it was a film about space. Many felt that they were misled, that it is not an action show that they were expecting but rather a domestic drama. So, the film has to be seen and appreciated as a domestic drama. Yes, the setting is space exploration, but the preparations and training for those who want to go into space. The actual blast off of the rocket occurs only at the end of the film. This is a story of international collaboration, part of the preparation for eventual travel to Mars, a space experiment where the astronauts will go into space for a year but experience all kinds of potential disorientation, shutting out of the outside atmosphere, learning how to live in the confined rocket, the discovery of how humans could cope with a long journey to Mars. The central character, the next woman into space (Proxima) is Sarah, played by Eva Green. Sarah has dreamt of being an astronaut since she was a girl, has been accepted into the training program, has been accepted into this particular space venture. Much of the early part of the film shows the rigorous training, the exercise, various pressures, the need for exactness, precision in timing, the adaptation to living in space for a year, loss of gravity, looking at the world upside down, seclusion. There is a pressure on Sarah, expectations of a woman going into space, some unsympathetic attitudes from men, more demanding expectations from the authorities. This creates a great deal pressure, of course, for Sarah. However, at the core of this story is Sarah’s relationship with her 10-year-old daughter, Stella. There is a strong loving bond, mother and daughter comfortable with each other. But there is also the preparation for Stella that she be separated from her mother for a year, and having to get used to it in the preceding months as her mother goes into intense training, quarantine. Sarah is separated from her husband, Thomas (German actor Lars Eidinger) who agrees that Stella should live with him during this extended period. In many ways Stella adapts. Sarah is continually concerned. While Stella seems to accept the long separation, the lived reality places strains on her, moving from France to Germany, new school, difficulty with maths, difficulty making friends, with phone calls and Skype with her mother. An interesting discussion would occur between men and women watching the film, discussing their different attitudes towards Sarah, her ambitions and career, her goals in life, the pressures of separation from her daughter, the appeal to the maternal instincts of the audience.

Eva Green combines both charm and intensity to her performance, a certain edge to her training, to her concern about her daughter – with, finally, a brash decision to take her daughter to see the rocket site as she had promised but had failed to fulfil. A symbolic episode to indicate how the problems might be resolved. During the final credits, there is a range of impressive photos inserted, a perhaps unexpected number of female astronauts in recent decades, seen with their children. For those not expecting space exploration and action, Proxima offers an emotional exploration, of mother-daughter love and challenge. SAME KIND OF DIFFERENT AS ME US, 2017, 119 minutes, Colour. Greg Kinnear, René Zellweger, Djimon Hounsou, Jon Voight, Olivia Holt, Geraldine Singer. Directed by Michael Carney. As the title indicates, this is about human similarities and differences, in the context of American society, black and white. In fact, the words of the title are spoken by the central black character, Denver Moore (Djimon Hounsou), at the funeral of his white friend, a woman he admired and who had asked that he speak at her funeral, Debbie Hall (René Zellweger). His friend is Ron Hall ( Greg Kinnear). This is the kind of film that gets the label “inspirational”. And so it is. However, it is not a fiction. It is based on the story of the three central characters, actual characters from Texas. In the event, Denver and Ron collaborate on a book about their stories, their tentative meetings, the growing friendship, all in the context of a soup kitchen and the outreach to the homeless. After they completed the book, they toured the United States, a speaking tour, a fundraising tour, donations which were in the millions. At first the film seems to be the story of Ron, an art dealer, driving to stay with an artist friend to write a book. Then it goes back two years. Ron seems to be something of a celebrity, happily married to Debbie, two children. Then we find that he has been unfaithful to her, his lover urging him to tell the truth to his wife, his doing so, her dismay, her ringing the lover to say that she forgave her, forgiving her husband. In some ways, Debbie seems too good to be true. But she is good. She works diligently at the soup kitchen, getting Ron, who is rather reluctant as might be imagined, to help her with the serving. One of the clients of the soup kitchen is an irascible man, causing a lot of disruptions, seemingly absorbed in himself and his woes. This is Denver Moore. In fact, the story of Ron and Debbie seems rather matter-of-fact all things considered. And so the film veers towards the story of Denver himself, Ron making some outreaches towards him, Denver gradually being accepting, and Denver then telling his stories, taking the audience and Ron into his past through flashbacks. The audience is taken back to the cotton fields, the world of slavery, Denver as a boy, living in poverty, as an adolescent, working in the cotton fields, his desire to run away, discovering the wonders of town life which amazed him, but his bad decision, an attempted robbery, years in prison.

While Denver admires Debbie, he comes to like Ron, who gets him some better clothes, and even takes him to an art gallery where he makes astute comments on Picasso. This also sadness in the film, but an atmosphere of joy and triumph at Debbie’s funeral, the applause at Denver’s speech (a standing ovation, even including Ron’s quite bigoted alcoholic father, played with quite some aggression by Jon Voight). This is a film for ordinary cinemagoers who are prepared to welcome a story of good people, their struggles, triumph over evil. It has a high profile central cast. (But some audiences, especially some critics, don’t have an appetite for seeing goodness in film, preferring more dramatic conflicts between good and evil.) There are photos of the two men in the final credits – and a clip of the actual Denver speaking on tour. THE TRIP TO GREECE UK, 2020, 103 minutes, Colour. Steve Coogan, Rob Brydon, Michael Towns, Kareem Alkabbani, Claire Keelan, Rebecca Johnson, Tim Leach, Richard Clews. Directed by Michael Winterbottom. For almost a decade, audiences have enjoyed both the television series and the film versions of The Trip. It began in the north of England but later there were international travels, to Italy and to Spain. And now, The Trip to Greece. Audiences who have visited Greece will be delighted with an overview of the scenic delights of Greece. Audiences who have not visited Greece will also be delighted – and thinking of possible plans for a trip. This time Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon decide to follow the route of Odysseus and his travelling home from the Trojan War to his wife Penelope at Ithaca. Which means that they start in Turkey near Troy, travel through the Aegean, via Lesbos, memories of Sappho, to the amphitheatre at Epidaurus, donning theatrical masks and miming, to Athens and the Piraeus, to Macedon and memories of Aristotle and Alexander the Great (and some criticisms of this conqueror), to Mount Olympus, to the site of the Olympic Games, and to further sites westward. Audiences will expect a lot of gourmet touches – and they won’t be disappointed, even if the meal sequences are shorter than might have been expected, and there is the continued distraction of the scenery outside, as well is the patter and banter between the two in their competitiveness and their impersonations. But, we are taken behind-the-scenes, a variety of kitchens, chefs with their skills, waiters and their style of service. So, no disappointment in what is served here. Along the way, there are humorous references to Hercules, to the Sirens, a visit to caves where they sing chant. And, speaking of music, Rob does various parity variations on Grease is the word, some falsetto singing, some Rod Stewart songs, the Bee Gees and Stayin’ Alive. And they do their best in mimicking the score of Chariots of Fire. The banter between the two is up-to-date, Rob Brydon’s television career, Steve Coogan being praised for his impersonation of Stan Laurel in Stan and Ollie, and an even longer list of media celebrities that they impersonate, reprisals of many from the previous trips, but a list which includes Roger Moore, Sean Connery, Marlon Brando (and both imitating scenes from The Godfather),

Laurence Olivier in Marathon Man, along with Dustin Hoffman in that film as well as The Graduate, Midnight Cowboy (and some Jon Voight) as well, Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Werner Herzog, Hugh Grant, and Steve Coogan even doing a Godzilla! For those who know British actor, Ray Winstone and his tough gangster roles, surprised to remember that he did play Henry VIII on television, they do a long funny sequence of his Henry VIII using gangster accent and language. However, there are some touches of pathos in this film, more than others, Steve and his son, phone calls, arrangements on phone with the agents, news of his father’s illness, some graphic nightmares. Rob, on the other hand, has phone calls with his daughter, Chloe, and his wife. There is a sombre tone towards the end as Steve gets news of his father’s death, makes every effort to get back to England, is reunited with his son, the funeral. On the other hand, Rob, like Odysseus, reaches the end of his travels and is reunited with his wife, happy holidaying on an island and in the waters. They discuss whether there will be other films of trips – and the decision, the meantime at least, is not. NETFLIX RELEASES BECOMING CATCHER WAS A SPY, The LOVE IS BLIND BECOMING US, 2020, 89 minutes, Colour. Directed by Nadia Hallgren. After leaving the Oval Office and her eight years as First Lady of the United States, Michelle Obama wrote a memoir, Becoming, and went on a national tour to promote her book. This is a record of the tour and her many meetings as well as talk shows, filling in a great deal of the background of her growing up, the presence of her mother and brother in her life and during the tour, memories of her dead father and his contribution to her life, a great number of photos. This is a film which, obviously, will appeal to Michelle Obama fans. And, reading some of the hostile, even hateful, comments on blogs such as the IMDb, she has a number of people who are definitely not fans, of her, of President Obama. For outsiders United States, it may be very surprising to find such venomous comments. Clearly, this is a film in favour of Michelle Obama. There are many mentions of her husband but he appears in comparatively few sequences, some photos of the past, courtship and marriage, parenthood, campaigning, his installation as president, and his appearing at some of the meetings (noting his courteous and urbane manner). It appears that the media soon became hostile to Michelle Obama during the campaign, articles and the target of criticisms, especially on television reporting. On the other hand, she was welcomed by many who admired her.

This film is a collage, moving from meeting to meeting (in huge auditoriums with large crowds) to television studios and a range of talk show hosts including Stephen Colbert. There is comment on her wardrobe, an interview with her stylist with explanations of decisions made, quite a range of dresses and outfits for the meetings and interviews – and her own comment about the campaign when people noted that she had made a speech but gave more attention to what she wore. She is obviously supportive of her husband, relating well with her daughters, both in sequences from the past As Well Is at the end of the film with the daughters eight years older than they were at the time of the election. She has little to say about American foreign policy or even economics but concentrates on meeting people, especially African-American? people, and, more especially, the younger generation, engaging with them in conversation, getting them to tell their stories, articulate their hopes, affirming them in their stories. She is full attention to each person she meets, evident in the sequence of her book-signing, explaining that this is how communication should happen. This is one of the main impacts that this film has, her positive outlook on life, self-confidence, and encouraging this in all her listeners. For those against the Obamas, there will be little interest in this film. For those who admired the Obamas, especially Michelle Obama, there may not be anything new but there is much that will delight and encourage. THE CATCHER WAS A SPY US, 2018, 98 minutes, Colour. Paul Rudd, Mark Strong, Jeff Daniels, Tom Wilkinson, Sienna Miller, Guy Pearce, Paul Giamatti, Giancarlo Giannini, Hiroyuki Sanada, Connie Neilson, Shea Whigham. Directed by Ben Lewin. The screenplay for this film, written by Robert Rodat (The Patriot, Saving Private Ryan, The Command) is based on a 1990s book, Catcher was a Spy: The Mysterious Life of Moe Berg. It has been directed by Australian writer-director, Ben Lewin (born in Poland and a migrant after World War II, directing The Dunera Boys about the Jews put on a ship, finally finding refuge in Australia, film and television in Australia but two decades of working in film and television in the United States). It can be noted that the year after the release of this film, a feature length documentary, The Catcher Behind the Plate, was released, going over the life and mission of Moe Berg, drawing on documents and footage. This is a story that is more in common with the John Le Carre world rather than an action show. However, there is a section in the middle involving the central characters during the American advance in Italy towards Rome. And, there is also some tension at the end of the film when Moe Berg has to make a decision about his killing of a German scientist or not. The focus of the film is on Moe Berg himself, something of a loner, an enigmatic figure, a champion baseball player in the 1930s, yet very well educated, encyclopedic knowledge, comfortable in a

dozen languages. He was also a patriot, volunteering to work for the American government during World War II, but prepared for war by his participation in a baseball tour of Japan in the late 1930s and his surreptitiously photographing buildings in anticipation of war. He is taken on by World War I hero, Bill Donovan (The Fighting 69th), finds a desk job too confining, but receives a commission to go to Europe to find the Nobel-prize-winning German scientist, Werner Heisenberg, to find out whether he is building a nuclear bomb for the Germans and, if so, to assassinate him. Jeff Daniels is confidently commanding as Donovan. Berg goes to Italy in company with a scientist played by Paul Giamatti and a military attache a played by Guy Pearce. The film has a strong supporting cast including Tom Wilkinson as a scientist in Zürich, Mark Strong as the German scientist, Heisenberg, Giancarlo Giannini as an Italian scientist, Sienna Miller as a close friend of Berg, she in love with him, he rather solitary, some with suspicions that he was gay, but his remaining a loner all his life. He was awarded the presidential medal for his work in the war but declined it, never explaining why. Some of the comments about this film note that it might have been longer, filling in more detail of Berg himself as well is a number of the other characters. LOVE IS BLIND US, 2019, 89 minutes, Colour. Shannon Tarbet, Aidan Turner, Benjamin Walker, Matthew Broderick, Chloe Sevigny, Mark Blum. Directed by Monty Whitebloom, Andy Delaney. Very mixed responses to this drama. For some, it is a beautifully written and acted story of interactions between three central characters. For others, it is weird, as is the behaviour of the characters, and, perhaps, psychologically implausible. The central character is a young woman, Bess, played by British Shannon Tarbet. She is working in an optometrist shop, studying in part, the owner very sympathetic to her and hoping she will work in the shop. At home, she is devoted to her father who has Parkinson’s, and played sympathetically by Matthew Broderick. But a key element is that she thinks her mother is dead, but she is not. She is in the house, but Bess does not see or hear her, despite her father’s reassuring her. This is the beginning of the implausibility for some audiences. In the town, Bess is friendly with a student of psychology, Farmer, played by Benjamin Walker. He explains that he is on the spectrum and this is very clear in his behaviour, manner of speaking, manner of relating and interacting with people. He is trying to help Bess. The other central character, Russell, played by Irish Aidan Turner (Poldark and other television series) works in demolition but has a very low self-image (despite being rather dashing in appearance and manner) and is suicidal. There are many unanticipated interactions between the three characters, at first Bess unable to see or sense the presence of Russell, Farmer urging her to speak aloud as if he was present, Russell following her and listening. There are some emotional moments as the father suffers and infection after surgery, goes into a

coma and dies – and the audience seeing his wife, played by Chloe Sevigny, dealing with the death and the funeral. The narrative here does not reach any final conclusion, leaving the audience to wonder about the characters, possible changes in their lives, the possibility for Bess seeing Russell and falling in love. Someone remarked, “romantic but weird”. SIGNIS REVIEWS JULY 2020 BURDEN DOGS DON’T WEAR PANTS HEARTS AND BONES IN MY BLOOD IT RUNS IT MUST BE HEAVEN LOVE SARAH MONOS ROMANTIC ROAD TAVERNA, The WHITE, WHITE DAY, A WRETCHED, The NETFLIX BLANCHE COMME NEIGE/ PURE AS SNOW DA 5 BLOODS WASP NETWORK BURDEN US, 2019, 117 minutes, Colour. Garrett Hedlund, Forest Whitaker, Andrea Riseborough, Tom Wilkinson, Tess Harper, Crystal Fox, Usher Raymond. Directed by Andrew Heckler. The setting for this film is 1996, a small town in South Carolina. The film was produced in 2018 but had limited release – unfortunately. In the context of the upheaval in the United States with the death of George Floyd, the brutality of the police in Minneapolis, the consequent protest and riots throughout the United States – and protest beyond, mean that Burden’s release at this time is more than topical, extremely challenging. The film is based on actual events. The main characters involved collaborated with the making of the film – even seeing it as an appeal for collaboration and contribution to in New Beginnings Ministry in the Laurens County.

For the outsider to the United States, it is something of a surprise to find that in 1996, citizens of this town are active members, proud members of the Ku Klux Klan. And, they are refurbishing an old cinema to become the Redneck Ku Klux Klan Museum, replete with all kinds of robes, instruments, weapons and Klan activity memorabilia. At the centre of the demolition and rebuilding is a rather serious young man, not the brightest, past Army service and wounds, brought up in this town by a demanding father, expected to be a member of the Klan, participate in the activities, believe religiously, quoting the Scriptures and God’s will asserting the supremacy of the white race, despising the blacks, automatically using the derogatory “nigger”. And, there have been lynchings in the recent past, especially the uncle of the local Baptist pastor. We might wonder where this is all leading. Much of the early part of the film shows the clan members, led by the local owner of a repossession business, Tom Griffin, played by British actor, Tom Wilkinson. He sees the young man, whose name is Michael Burden, as a surrogate son. As the screenplay develops, it is comparatively low key, a small-town story, focusing on persons, personal relationships. Michael encounters a young single mother, Judy (British actress Andrea Riseborough), with a son. Michael is attracted, setting up an emotional conflict as well as a conflict of loyalties to the Klan, to Judy and the care of her son. As the museum opens, the Minister, David Kennedy (Forest Whitaker) and the black citizens demonstrate outside, chanting, singing. While some of the young men of the town are eager to protest, the resort to violence, the Reverend Kennedy is very strong on non-violence and peace. At one stage, Tom Griffin urges Michael to go on to the roof of a store and shoot the Reverend Kennedy. Garrett Hedlund’s performance as Michael Burden is well worth seeing, a nuanced performance. There are some examples of outbreaks of violence, but the emphasis of this story is on redemption, the power of love, acknowledgement and confession, atonement, reconciliation. It is a challenge to Reverend Kennedy’s family, helping Michael in his dilemma, giving refuge to Judy and her son, practising what he preaches. So, in fact, this is a faith film, an inspirational film, with pictures of Michael Burden and David Kennedy interspersed amongst the final credits. This is a challenge reminder of deep-seated prejudices, extreme racism endorsed by an exclusivist interpretation of Christianity, the conflict between the supremacist theology and the Christian gospel of love and forgiveness. DOGS DON'T WEAR PANTS Finland, 2019, 105 minutes, Colour. Pekka Strang, Krista Kosonen, Ilona Huhta. Directed by J. -P. Valkeapaa.

Two alerts before the review of this film. Firstly, the subject is sado-masochism, the role of a dominatrix and her client, a subject that a number of audiences would prefer not to watch. Secondly, this is an intelligently made film, well-acted and directed, exploring a difficult subject, relationships between the experience of pain and sexuality, offering much to reflect on. This is a Finnish film, set in Helsinki, a surgeon working in a hospital, living at home with his school-aged teenage daughter. There is a prologue, something of a nightmare, with the surgeon unable to save his wife who drowns. Her death recurs in his nightmares, in his imagination, in his regrets and judgement on himself. Some years later, he takes his daughter to have her tongue pierced for her birthday. While he waits, he encounters a sado-masochist chamber, and is attacked by the dominatrix, Mona. This stirs something in him. He is not in any personal relationship with a partner, and he returns to an appointment with Mona. She treats him as a dog, on all fours, and he willingly concurs and acts out this game. On the one hand, the surgeon becomes obsessed with Mona, returning for visits, for humiliation, the beatings, for pain. He becomes more remote with his daughter, not turning up at her band recital, her questioning him. At work, his colleagues are concerned and the authorities asking for a psychological assessment. On the other hand, the film shows something of the personality of the young woman who is a dominatrix, a graphic scene with another client with candles burning on his bare back, his pain and her having to extinguish them. She allows the surgeon to return, but we see that it has something of a personal effect on her, some emotional response. She indulges the surgeon, especially with scenes of asphyxiation – where he blacks out, is taken to hospital, his daughter coming to visit him, reviving, having to wear a neck brace. He becomes so obsessive that he waits outside the premises, follows Mona, tries to get into a sadomasochist club but is refused. He follows Mona home, asks her for more pain, and there follows, audiences probably grimacing, some pain with the prolonged extraction of a tooth with pliers. This seems to bring the surgeon to some kind of decision, to return to hospital, to take his daughter to a Museum. However, he returns to the club – and is absorbed into lights, its music, gyrating dancing, smiling, it would seem, for the first time in the film, seeing Mona and her beginning to smile. This is not a psychological analysis of sadomasochistic behaviour, rather a portrait, storytelling, for audiences to identify with characters, will be repelled by them, assess their behaviour, needs, motivations. This kind of film could be seen as a cry for help, an out of the depths kind of cry. However, it is also an ‘enter the void’ kind of film, little hope, no way out – and the surgeon, ultimately surrendering to the void. HEARTS AND BONES Australia, 2019, 111 minutes, Colour.

Hugo Weaving, Andrew Luri, Hayley Mc Elhinney, Bolude Watson, Alan Dukes. Directed by Ben Lawrence. Heart and Bones is a very impressive film in many ways. It offers its audience, in Australia and worldwide, a 21st-century Australian story, growing Australian consciousness, a challenge to the Australian conscience. The film opens strikingly with an overseas ambush, war photographer Dan Fisher seeing a crashed car, dead occupants, his taking photos, frightening a little girl on the other side of the car, her running away, Dan pursuing and falling, his associate warning that there were landmines, Dan photographing the little girl, her running away, an explosion. In fact, this is the main part of the film, at least visually, which focuses on the title theme of bones. There will be other photographs. There were the other very sad stories, especially from uprisings and massacres in South Sudan. The rest of the film concentrates on the title theme of hearts, emotional stories, probing of the past and coming to terms with it. Australian audiences who watch films and documentary television programs on refugees and asylum seekers know more about those who have fled from Asia and the Middle East. There is not such a concentration on refugees from Africa, from countries like South Sudan. (In cities like Melbourne, federal politicians and some media have tended to demonise and overstate the activities of young Sudanese members of gangs – and, in a sequence where Dan Fisher is interviewed by Fran Kelly on Radio National Breakfast, she asks him, quoting the Minister for Border Control, whether he thinks his photos are ‘misery-porn’). Hugo weaving plays Dan Fisher, a striking performance, intense, communicating, often wordlessly, the impact of his decades of war photography, post-traumatic stress disorder, on his physical and psychological health, his relationship with his partner, Josie (Hayley Mc Elhinney). The sequence where he reacts to Josie telling him she is pregnant is a study in itself of a man who is shocked, remembers the past years when their little baby died, his reaction is self-centred, moving into panic attack makes quite an impact on us. Which means, that this is essentially a film about the life of the war photographer, his being celebrated, his weariness, his having to face his relationship with his partner, come to terms with his avoiding of doctors and counsellors, to probe his psyche and come to terms with himself. But, there is a whole other dimension to the film with the character of Sebastian (Andrew Luri in his first film, credible and persuasive), a man who has been allowed into Australia, a refugee from terrors in South Sudan, the brutal loss of his family, but finding a new home, love and devotion from his wife (again, a moving performance from Bolude Watson), a baby girl, her being pregnant, his plans to buy a house and renovate it, believing that to have the land is to have his own home. Sebastian hears Dan on the radio, buys his book of photos, comes to ask him to photograph a group of African men who have formed a choir. Initially Dan refuses, collapses, Sebastian taking him to hospital, then feeling some obligation, going to hear the men sing and being impressed. In the meantime, an exhibition of Dan’s photos is being organised and Sebastian asks him not to exhibit some of the Sudanese photos, not to exhibit such pain and sorrow.

And, yet there is more, some moral strong complexities to the plot, challenging the audience and its sympathies and moral judgements. Many in the audience will be hoping for some kind of resolution, even a happy ending for both parties. But, life is not entirely like that. Happiness is to be hoped for, to be worked for with some kind of self-sacrifice. And so, the audience, having been moved by the stories of both men, the war and refugee context, the implications for Australians welcoming refugees in friendship, in work in collaboration, will find that endings cannot always be clean-cut, clear-cut. This is a film to be recommended. IN MY BLOOD IT RUNS Australia, 2019, 84 minutes, Colour. Dujuan Turner, Carol Turner, Megan Turner. Directed by Maya Newell. The first question to ask is who is the “my” of the title. In fact, it is a nine-year-old boy, turning 10, Dujuan Turner. He is an aboriginal boy, living in Alice Springs, desiring to return to his homeland, beyond Alice Springs. And he makes quite an impact on the audience. The camera likes him. He is quite a screen presence, something of a young screen hero. He also seems wise beyond his years as we listen to his well-articulated opinions and principles, to be a good man, not drinking, not hurting anyone, his good knowledge of English, and his desire and efforts to speak his own language, Arrernte. The audience learns a great deal listening to him, watching him with his grandmothers (and, it is often said, anyone brought up by a grandmother cannot be all bad!), at a white school being taught about Captain Cook, at an indigenous school, learning about traditions (and an alternate perspective on Captain Cook). And what is it that runs in Dujuan’s blood? It is indigenous life, thousands of years old, passed on from generation to generation for so many generations, a consciousness of stories, a consciousness of what we might call creative myths, interpretations of the world. But, in Dujuan’s blood, he recognises something of a life force that he has inherited. He is a healer. And that also is his tradition. And we see him at work with his grandmothers and elderly relatives, drawing the pain from them and thrusting it away. This film takes its place with so many other contemporary films about indigenous people. In 2019, audiences were challenged by the experiences of football player and Australian of the Year, Adam Goodes. But, this time it is the very young generation that audiences are asked to consider. They have been born into a different world – and we see Dujuan and his grandmother lining up at the supermarkets for checkout, with their mobile phones, 21st-century almost-universal style of living. However, there is the innate desire to be one with the land, to know one’s place, the pain of leaving it, the desire to return, for Dujuan to leave Alice Springs and the house there (contrasting with the majority of local neat comfortable homes), a life that is only temporary.

There are scenes where Dujuan returns to his homeland, to his relations, to a freedom from Alice Springs constrictions, to a different way of learning. Later, when the audience realises that there has been a singular absence of male figures so far in the film, father-figures in his story, he goes to Borroloola to meet his father, bond with him, live with him. His father is quite a sympathetic figure, conscious of his own failures, but earnest in his care for his son. There have been many documentaries on aboriginal issues, on indigenous culture – but this one is extraordinarily winning, Dujuan and his wonderfully winning personality communicating his hopes. IT MUST BE HEAVEN Palestine, 2019, 102 minutes, Colour. Elia Suleiman, Gregoire Colin, Gael Garcia Bernal, Stephen Mc Hattie. Directed by Elia Suleiman. It must be Heaven. Not quite. And the question also arises: can there be peace on earth? Those who know the films of writer-director, performer, Elia Suleiman, know that he is an expert at a particular kind of comedy, partly deadpan, partly satire and parody, partly gentle about human nature. But, all the time, he is also making political point. He directed documentaries in the 1990s, especially about Palestine. He himself is a Palestinian who comes from Nazareth. Into the 21st-century and he made a number of comedies (which are worth recommending to those who might be coming to his work via this film; in 2002 there was Divine Intervention, in 2009, The Time that Remains). Practically everyone makes the comparison with the French comedies of CJacques Tati, especially his character, Monsieur Hulot. Tati, early in his career, tall and gaunt. Elia Suleiman is rather shorter, a touch more rotund, distinctive with rather shabbier clothes, always a coat, always a hat. He is in middle-age. He is bearded, bespectacled. He barely says a word throughout the whole film. Tati was a master of mine in the eccentricities of ordinary situations. So too, Suleiman in his character ES, with his hands always behind his back, like Tati. But he generally stands, sits, observes. He can be described as enigmatic, quizzical, a spectator curious about the human race. He sets a tone at the beginning with a religious ceremony, robed Christian clergy, the faithful, many of them very young, a cross and a symbolic knocking at the door of the tomb – but the man behind the door is refusing to open, the celebrant taking off his crown, going behind the scenes, sounds of a fight, the door opening and the faithful invited in. We are not (never) sure what it means but it does set the comic tone. The first part of the film is quiet, ES in his native Nazareth, alone in his apartment, wandering the streets, sitting in cafes, visiting his wife’s grave, exploring the countryside. Then he flies to Paris – nervously looking out the window at what seems to be a shuddering wing. However, he becomes a tourist in Paris, the audience wandering and observing with him, the monuments, the sites, a menacing stranger staring at him in the metro, beggars in the street served food by workers driving an ambulance, nuns serving at an outdoor soup kitchen, a priest standing smoking and observing, all kinds of detail. However, there is a purpose in visiting Paris, to raise money for a film about Palestine, with a lot of discussion about how

such a film could be made, how polemic it should be, how political – or rather should it be simply showing a character like ES visiting France and the US. Because the US is his next destination, similar kinds of tourism and observing, an encounter with Gael Garcia Bernal as he goes to discuss production finance in New York City – and failing again. This time there are more explicit references to Palestine, a strong rally of exiled Palestinians, a conference and his sitting on a panel. One commentator remarked that It must be Heaven is comedy of the absurd. It is. However, the commentator added “absolute nonsense – but in a good sense”. LOVE SARAH UK, 2020, 97 minutes, Colour. Celia Imrie, Shelley Conn, Shannon Tarbet, Rupert Penry- Jones, Bill Patterson. Directed by Eliza Schroeder. If you have ever dreamed of cleaning up a shambles store-space, setting up bakery with specialised cakes, of opening a tea room, Love Sarah is definitely your film. And if you have never had these dreams, Love Sarah is also a film for you. It has sadness, happiness, cuteness, sentiment, and enthusiasm. By the way, Love Sarah is the name of the tearoom situated in a London suburban street. At the end of the film, the name of the producing company appears, Femme Films. And that is very true – this is very much a women’s film, the director, the three central characters, men in supporting roles, a paternity question. And all in London, very British, attractive for those who live in London, and an engaging set of memories for those who ever lived there or visited. The sadness is fairly instant. A woman in her 40s has died. She and her friends had done cooking training in Paris some decades before and were now in a position to set up their own bakery. The three women who loved her are her mother, Mimi (Celia Imrie), her daughter Clarissa (Shannon Tarbert) and her best friend, Isabella (Shelley Conn). They are faced with a challenge and each responds in her own way. Isabella is the driving force but feels she is not expert chef enough for the project. Mimi has been alienated from her daughter and the younger women try to persuade her to become involved. Clarissa, a ballet student, experiences a breakup and moves back with her grandmother. The performances of the three women are engaging, especially Celia Imrie, a past high-wire artist (who does have a moment to illustrate that even, elderly, she could still pose on the trapeze). Celia Imrie reminds us that she was in the Best Marigold hotels films – and this audience is definitely a target for Love Sarah. And the supporting men? Rupert Penry- Jones is Matthew, a top chef, who trained with the two women, was in a relationship with Clarissa’s mother, feels the need for something new in his cooking life, wants to be associated with the women again. While he might have had his caddish moments in the past, he is more genial now (as has been Rupert Penry-Jones’? past screen presence, playing a number of cads).

Across the street from the tea and cakes lives an eccentric elderly gentleman, Felix, Bill Patterson. He calls by, watches the shop out his window, attracts the attention of Mimi who discovers he is an inventor, even eager to set up a security system in Love Sarah. Much of what we might expect from such a scenario takes place: few customers initially, the baking of beautiful cakes (who are very well prepared for their frequent close-ups), visitors, lucky opportunities… In fact, commendably, the film’s and Mimi’s creative brainwave faces the fact that London is a multi-multi-cultural place in that many who have come to the UK have a yearning for the pastries of the past, their past. And, commercially, this provides a bonanza. This is definitely a feel-good film and so it ends for each of the characters feeling good – as we do as we leave the cinema. ROMANTIC ROAD UK, 2017, 82 minutes, Colour. Rupert and Jan Grey. Directed by Oliver Mc Garvey. Is “grey nomads” the title that applies to older travellers as they drive around the countryside, enjoying retirement, getting to know their world better, making friends with similar nomads that they meet in their journeys a title used around the world? Are their British grey nomads. The title for this grey nomad adventure is Romantic Road. That seems to be an understatement title. It certainly is the story of her husband and wife who get on very well together, she supporting her husband in his ambitious travels, his risk-taking. They have had a long time romance, over three decades. But, romantic isn’t exactly the word that describes where they go, what they experience, the rough terain that they travel through, tough times, mechanical difficulties as well as bureaucratic barriers. Our travellers are, literally, Grey nomads. This is a story of Rupert and Jan Grey, he a London lawyer. His father served in World War II in India and so he has affinity with the subcontinent. And his father bought a Rolls-Royce? in 1959, not only still-going, but the star of this trip. And, it is a Rolls- Royce - and Rolls- Royce advertising and publicity will definitely be pleased with how their vehicle stands up after more than 50 years! The travels are in India, in 2013. Northern India. Starting from Mumbai, North to Jodhpur, but across the top to Nepal and views, of course, of the Himalayas. But, in fact, the destination is Bangladesh, a photography festival in Dhaka because Rupert Grey is an enthusiastic photographer and has good contacts in Bangladesh. (Actually, towards the end of the film, despite preparatory visits to the country, he comes up against the sometimes nit-picking bureaucratic tangles about whether he can bring his Rolls across the border – and whether he can drive out and back into India.) We are nicely introduced to Rupert and Jan, testimonies from their daughters, from many of

their friends, touches of admiration, and many touches of humour. And we share in the preparations, studying the maps, contacts with the photography festival, making sure that the Rolls is in top working order (spoiler, not always). Of course, the film serves as an enjoyable travelogue, many telling vistas of Mumbai, the northern desert and the city of Jodhpur, the atmosphere at Katmandu, the mountainous and winding roads leading south, the coastal areas of Bangladesh and into the city of Dhaka and, on the way home, a visit to Kolkota and, Bangalore. For those who enjoy travelogues, plenty to see and to relish. But this is a story of an older couple, their bonding with each other, their sharing this adventure, and enterprise, and achievement. And the film has a great deal of appeal to a wide audience, but especially to international grey nomads. MONOS Colombia, 2019, 104 minutes, Colour. Sophia Buenaventura, Julian Giraldo, Karen Quintero, Laura Castrillon, Deiby Rueda, Paul Cubides, Sneider Castro, Moises Arias, Julianne Nicholson, Wilson Salazar. Directed by Alejandro Landes. As the audience watches a group of children at the opening of Monos, eight of them, blindfold, playing football, trying to score goals, then seeing them lined up, being drilled, military-like, thoughts about child soldiers and children being exploited by the military readily come to mind. And, with the group of eight, being drilled by a dwarf leader, strict precision, demanding physical exercises, then his departure and their suddenly being let loose and behaving like undisciplined teenagers, perhaps many will think of William Golding’s Lord of the Flies. And this is not wrong, especially as the scenario unfolds, the interactions of these children with each other, in the war context, their holding a hostage, some battle sequences, and the youngest of the group, nicknamed Smurf, tied up and facing the pig’s head, shown in close-up. There is some magnificent photography, mountain vistas, then a descent into the lush jungle, rivers and falls. There is no explicit explanation about the war situation. The group of children are stationed at an outpost, experience an attack, and then have to set up headquarters down-mountain in the jungle. They are guarding a hostage, an American engineer, played by Julianne Nicholson. She is made to participate at times in the activities, photographed with a newspaper to authenticate her capture, then her attempts to escape. The children are identified visually at first, then by their nicknames which range from Wolf, Dog, Bigfoot, Boom-boom, and three girls, Lady, the young Swede, and the unexpectedly named Rambo. We get to know them, some of them rather well, a crisis after they are given a cow to provide them with milk and in some mayhem, it is shot, and the leader, Wolf, made to

take responsibility – even to his death. At times, they have to act like adults. At times, they don’t know how to act as adults. On the narrative level, the audience is plunged into an unfamiliar world, asked to think about contemporary uprisings and revolutions, especially in Latin America, to think about the exploitation of children in war and the consequences for them. Towards the end of the film, there are some hints of ordinariness, a couple with children playing, their watching the television, a slight item about making jelly babies in Germany – and then tragedy. There is a helicopter rescue, flying in over the city – and, rather than an ending, the narrative just stopping at a crucial moment, challenging the audience to reflect on what they have seen and felt, and what they might anticipate for the future. (Mono is Spanish for monkey – and Monos, is Spanish slaying for “how cute!”.) THE TAVERNA Australia, 2019, 86 minutes, Colour. Vangelis Mourikis, Rachel Kamath, Senol Mat, Emily O' Brien- Brown, Emmanuela Costaras, Tottie Goldsmith, Salman Arif, Peter Paltos, Maria Mercedes, Christian Charisiou. Directed by Alkinos Tsilimidos. A night at the Tavern. The Greek Taverna. And, where is the Taverna? In Melbourne, which has one of the largest Greek populations in the world. But, this is Melbourne and not everyone that works at the taverna is Greek. There is a Turk. There are two with Indian backgrounds. And there are some Melbourne locals. The touch of cosmopolitan Melbourne. On the whole, this is a very cheerful film though most of the characters are not without their problems. Rather, it is a couple of the customers who are not pleasant. We arrive with the owner, Kostas (veteran Greek actor, Vangelis Mourikis). He opens up the kitchen to begin the night proceedings. And, 80 minutes or so later, we close up with him, quite the wiser and a little more sympathetic about the human problems that need solving. Kostas is a good man, a kind man. He has a loving wife, Helen (Maria Mercedes). They are both concerned about their ice-addict architect son, indulging him in cash, prepared to take blame for his selfish and careless behaviour. On the staff is Katarina, in love with the son, but very clearheaded about how his situation should be dealt with, especially by his parents. There is a young in worker in the kitchen who does have problems with his work visa. Sally, Emily O’Brien-? Brown, one of the producers of the film) is earnest, the touch of the perfectionist, but completely devoted to her lazy partner – and Katarina has some good advice for her as well. The chef is an old Turk, who lost his wife and family long since and is still grieving. He is a good friend to everyone. But, on this particular night, it is belly dancer night. Jamila is the dancer – and does charm all the patrons, many turning up because it is belly dancer night. And, if the other members of staff have problems, Jamila much more so – alienate it from her womanising husband, a restraining order against her and his new girlfriend (both of whom turn up at the restaurant), custody issues about the young daughter.

In a way, these are the ingredients of soap opera. But, the characters are engaging and draw our emotional response. There is humour, a touch of good-willed violence, in Sally getting the opportunity to do a belly dance, some thuggish customers who claim to be restaurant judges, even a visit from the police. While there is coarse language, not as much in so many other films, the Taverna has been given an MA certificate because of the language. The writer-director is Alkinos Tsilimidos who, unfortunately, has not made many films – the drama Every Night, Every Night, was his earliest film and he directed a finely observed film about city life, Tom White (2004) with Colin Friels. So, a night out at the Greek Taverna. A WHITE, WHITE DAY Iceland, 2019, 109 minutes, Colour. Ingvar Sigurdsson, Ida Mekkin Hlynsdottir. Directed by Hlnur Palmason. Iceland has a Scandinavian heritage. It has the clouded atmosphere and temperatures of northern Europe. The landscapes are rugged, coastal and mountainous. And the population is small, something like an island nation village. The Icelandic film industry is not prone to comedy. And this drama is certainly not comic. It is sombre, often grim, white, white days indicating snow but a quotation, Source Unknown, at the film’s opening, suggests that when the day is white, when sky and earth are indistinguishable, ghosts communicate with the living. The initial focus is on a car driving on an icy road, a comparatively long sequence, and then the car skidding, crashing into the guardrail and disappearing. In fact, this episode will be highly significant as the drama unfolds. Then the director uses a telling device, the fixed camera on a farm house which is being repaired, ponies on the property, mountains in the background – then a succession of still shots, the house in night and day, in different seasons, grounding our attention in this environment. We spend a lot of time in the interiors of the house, especially as it is being repaired and renovated, but also some time at the local police station, on the roads and in the tunnel under the mountains, in the countryside, and by the sea. We experience the Icelandic atmosphere. Which is important because the central character, Ingimundur (a powerfully persuaded persuasive performance, often menacing, by Ingvar Sigurdsson), a local policeman, his renovating the house for his daughter and his granddaughter, Salka. We come to realise that he is grieving for his dead wife, killed in that car accident. He holds in his feelings, putting all his energies into the house. He does have some help in counselling but is resistant. Ultimately, reacting badly to the questions put to him (by Skype because of weather difficulties and travel), he erupts. And he takes it out on the local police, another violent

eruption. And Salka, with whom he spends a lot of time, cheerfully bonding with her, but then she experiences the brunt of his outbursts. A significant part of his grief is that he feels his wife had kept secrets from him. And the latter part of the film finds Ingimundur goaded into confrontation, quiet rage, and emotional collapse. As might be expected, there is no neat or happy ending in this kind of Icelandic drama. Rather, Ingimundur has gone through grief, traumatic consequences, emotional collapse, but also steps towards apology, reconciliation, some possibility for peace in his soul and in his life. THE WRETCHED US, 2019, 93 minutes, Colour. John- Paul Howard, Piper Curda, Jamerson Jones, Azie Tesfai, Zarah Mahler, Kevin Bigley. Directed by the Pierce Brothers. The Wretched has a box office distinction – top of the US box office at the time of covid-19 and most of the cinemas in the United States being closed. It had reasonable reviews. This is a horror film, a film about thousand-year-old witches, taking over children, monstrous and cannibals. However, this description might make it sound more horrifying than the film actually is. There is a horror prologue, set “35 years ago” indicating eerie houses, babysitters and their fate, mothers and children, takeover by clawing monsters. It is an indicator prologue rather than having any direct connection with characters when the caption comes up “five days ago”. The central character is Ben (John -Paul Howard), 17 years old. With the focus on him and his experiences, The Wretched seems more of a Young Adult horror film than one for the horror and gore expert fans. They will probably find it rather mild. However, the monster is visualised and there are a number of tense moments. Ben is living with his mother, his parents ready for a divorce, his father harbourmaster. Ben goes to stay with him doing jobs on the harbour front, meeting a fellow worker, Mallory (Piper Curda) and befriending her and her little sister, Lily. Ben is looked down on by the socialite teenagers but does accept an invitation to a party, trapped into going into the pool, his trunks removed and his being embarrassed in having to run away naked. He becomes far more involved in watching the family next door, their little boy is one of those involved in harbour activities. Ben (and we) see the mother transformed into a monstrous witch, the little boy disappearing, Ben challenging the father who claims to have no knowledge of having a son. Ben does confide in his father who dismisses his concerns. Ben becomes more active, goes into the house next door, into the basement, discovers a kind of shrine to some kind of evil power, with its own sign, photos of families with some of the characters scratched out, goes out to rescue Lily but sees her being dragged into the woods

and disappearing down a vast hole in a tree trunk. Of course, Ben decides to rescue the boy and the girl, his father disbelieving (only for his girlfriend to be bewitched) and sending him off with the policeman who has an ominous scar down his neck. This is where the film moves out of the bright sunlight of the earlier part of the film, during the day, on the water, and turns dark and ominous. But, Ben as the hero, confronts the witch, goes down the tree hole… All’s well that ends well despite his father being injured by the witch, the suggestion that mother and father might get together again, a farewell to Mallory who goes out on a boat with a group of children to train – and the suggestion, of course, that she could be taken over and these children in peril. The Wretched 2 is not impossible! NETFLIX RELEASES BLANCHE COMME NEIGE/PURE AS SNOW France, 2019, 112 minutes, Colour. Lou de Laage, Isabelle Huppert, Charles Berling, Richard Frechette, Damien Bonnard, Jonathan Cohen, Vincent Macaigne, Pablo Pauly, Benoit Poelvoorde. Directed by Anne Fontaine. Something of a 21st century fairy tale, Snow White in particular, a rather free-wheeling Snow White (Claire – light) who relates to seven men with passion (frequently sexual), her seven admirers (not exactly dwarfs). The first part of the film is entitled, Claire. She is one of those luminous screen presences, played by Lou de Laage. She works in a hotel owned by her stepmother, Maud (Isabelle Huppert). Her life seems to have humdrum meaning. She is a jogger and is abducted while jogging. After an unexpected car crash, she is about to be killed but is rescued by a local farmer who has a twin brother. Initially suspicious, they care for her, as does their border, a reclusive cello player, and the local vet. She also encounters an eccentric bookseller and his martial arts trainer son. Each in his own way seems to bring her alive, she becoming more freewheeling, passionate, sexual (this treated in a quite frank French way). Her life changes. So does that of the men though most of them while responding to her are also confused. There is quite a lot of beautiful scenery, alpine mountain scenery, winding roads in fog and in sunlight. Meanwhile, the second part of the film focuses on Maud. She is obviously the jealous stepmother, frequently looking in the mirror, attention to her make up. Eventually, she will take the opportunity to try to kill Claire, even with a poisoned apple. There is a particular interest for audiences in the presence of the Catholic priest. The Catholic themes are unexpected. A south-eastern France setting, in the Alps and the Marian apparition shrine of La Salette. But, more unexpectedly, one of the ‘dwarfs’ is a priest.

And, also unexpectedly, this is a very sympathetic and understanding portrait of a middle-aged French priest. He is seen at first in a bookshop, clerical collar, owned by an atheist friend, encountering Claire, chatting in a friendly manner. He rides a motorbike and gives Claire a lift to the shrine. He is a mature man, an understanding man, showing Claire the shrine, not surprised by what she tells him of her sexual encounters. And, she surprises herself by feeling free and comfortable with him, almost immediately, to unburden herself to him. She is frank and direct. He reassures her indicating the wide range of sin that he is told. He also quotes Jesus’ words of not judging. He is shown to be exactly what a good man, a celibate priest, ought to be like. His ministry extends to meeting Claire’s stepmother, Maude, the evil, jealous, murderous stepmother. She feels comfortable with him as he welcomes her to the shrine, talking openly and personably. She has malevolent intentions in meeting Claire. The priest, not knowing this, is able to find an opportunity to bring Maud and the unsuspecting Claire together. At the end, Claire lying in hospital after Maud’s attack on her, the seven men come to her bedside, some kissing her, others respectfully touching her. The priest simply signs the cross on her forehead. Quite a sympathetic picture of a priest (especially in the era of widespread clerical abuse). DA 5 BLOODS Delroy Lindo, Jonathan Majors, Clarke Peters, Norman Lewis, Isiah Whitlock Jr, Melanie Thierry, Paul Walter Hauser, Jasper Paakkonen, Johnny Nguyen, Jean Reno, Chadwick Boseman. Directed by Spike Lee. Spike Lee has been a vigorous and outspoken film director since the middle of the 1980s. In 1989 his classic drama of Brooklyn, Do The Right Thing was released. During the 1990s he made a biography of Malcolm X with Denzel Washington. While he has made several fiction thrillers, he has continually returned in feature films and documentaries to race issues in the United States. He won an Oscar for Best Screenplay for his picture of the infiltration of the Ku Klux Klan by black policeman, BlacKkKlansmen?. Da 5 Bloods has been a significant project for Lee for several years, to dramatise and explore the presence of African-American? soldiers in the Vietnam war. This is an ambitious film, running two and a half hours, set in the present with veterans returning to Vietnam to find the body of their fellow-Blood, Stormin’ Norman (Chadwick Boseman) as well as some gold, recovered from a plane and buried in Vietnam. In this context, there are many flashbacks to the Bloods, their camaraderie, seeing them in action, tension in various battles, encounters with the Vietcong. And, for a wider circulation, and immediate circulation (especially in the times of covid-19), Da 5 Bloods was released on Netflix. Immediate reaction by reviewers and, certainly, by a great number of bloggers, was unexpectedly negative. Some praise for spike Lee and his work, for good intentions, but not

for the film itself. It is not an easy film to watch. We immediately empathise with the ageing men returning to Vietnam, with all their memories, the reaction by the American public when the veterans returned from the war, their subsequent lives, traumas and achievements. The 5 certainly bond well together but each of them has quite a number of problems, most especially Paul (Delroy Lindo in an intense, at times a seemingly over-intense performance). Also joining the group is his alienated son, David (Jonathan Majors), meaning that there is the presence of the next generation, who did not experience the war, who do not have that intense attachment to the war experience. There are scenes as they visit Saigon, somewhat overwhelmed, making comparisons with the past, David becoming involved with a French woman, one of the men revisiting his partner in the past and discovering his daughter. The men also hire a Vietnamese guide (with his own memories of his father in the war) so that they can find the location of the action, of Norman’s death, of the burial place of the gold. They also do negotiations with a shady French businessman, Jean Reno. This will lead to violence, to attacking locals, with their own memories of the war and conflict with the Americans. The group also encounter the French woman who has a company for disposing of landmines – which also have some crucial dramatic moments for the Bloods. While the film is dramatic, at many times it is highly melodramatic, especially as Paul manifests his traumas, his range of moods, his intensity for the gold (and one wonders whether Spike Lee has memories of the intensity of the gold hunt and discovery in John Huston’s classic 1948 The Treasure of the Sierra Madre). One of the suggestions for appreciating Da 5 Bloods is to try to see the film from Spike Lee’s point of view rather than assuming what the audience might have wanted. Spike Lee is caught in his dilemma of wanting to do justice to the African Americans in war as well as critiquing the American government’s involvement in the war and the many disastrous consequences. Da 5 Bloods is certainly a film of conflict and contradictions, not intending for the audience to finish watching 2 ½ hours and feeling that they have completed a dramatic experience in understanding all the issues. The memories and the conflicts inevitably continue. WASP NETWORK France, 2019, 127 minutes, Colour. Penelope Cruz, Edgar Ramirez, Gael Garcia Bernal, Ana de Armas, Wagner Moura, Leonardo Sbaraglia, Nolan Guerra, Tony Plana. Directed by Olivier Assayas. This is a Cuban story. The setting is the 1990s. Fidel Castro is getting older. Sanctions by the American government are biting. Life is difficult in Havana and in the countryside. So many of the Cuban refugees have settled in Miami, some for many decades, others still attempting to escape Cuba. While the material is intrinsically interesting, the earlier part of the film seems rather ordinary, not particularly exciting. The advice would be to give the film about 50 minutes and

then there is a plot twist which gives the opportunity for the audience to be more involved. However, the film does not have the dramatic tension that the subject would indicate, so, while interesting, it is somewhat disappointing, especially since the director, Olivier Assayas, had made the series on the terrorist, Carlos (with Edgar Ramirez). The film opens in Cuba, focusing on pilot and trainer, René (Edgar Ramirez), married to Olga (Penelope Cruz, a glowing screen presence even when she is working in a factory), with a daughter. All seems normal enough even with the difficulties in Havana. René goes on a regular flight – but, preserving cover, flies to Miami and applies for American residence. Which he gains. This leads to the opening up of the world of intrigue between Miami and Havana. René is introduced to the leaders of Cuban exiles in the US, offering his flying services, accepted by the leaders and given various missions. The leaders have harsh memories of the revolution, of the Castro regime, are bent on disrupting events in Havana, even to terrorism. René also becomes friendly with another refugee from Cuba, a charmer with a following, Juan Pablo (Wagner Moura) and his glamorous fiancee (Ana de Armas). What emerges is that the Cuban government fights back against the Miami exiles and their leadership, infiltrating them, reporting back to frustrate the terrorist disruptions – although, the audience is shown a Latin American courier who plants bombs in the main hotels in Havana. The second part of the film shows René in a different light, his mission in Miami, his reconciliation with his wife, the negotiations to bring her and her daughter to the US, the giving birth, her being returned to Cuba. Later in the film, a significant character is introduced, Gerard (Gael Garcia Bernal) who is commissioned to coordinate the Cuban infiltrators in the US. When the group is arrested, René refuses to give any information about the other prisoners, and their serving a sentence in US jails. In looking at reviews and bloggers, we find that there are divided opinions, especially because of political interests (bias?). Some comment that this is Cuban propaganda. Others see it as a picture of American policy against Communist regime. The material and the characters are interesting – but, with so much material, this may have been better served as a specialised miniseries for television.

SIGNIS REVIEWS AUGUST 2020 CINEMA RELEASE 23 WALKS BOYS STATE BLOOD VESSSEL DANCING AT THE VATICAN DEERSKIN (LE DAIM)

HOUSE OF CARDIN LITIGANTE SON, A/ UN FILS. BIK ENEICH VIGIL, The NETFLIX STREAMING CORRUPTED, The EUROVISION SONG CONTEST: THE FIRE SAGA HATER, The I SEE YOU OFFERING TO THE STORM/ OFRENDO A LA TORMENTA OLD GUARD, The PLATFORM, The SERGIO 23 WALKS UK, 2020, 95 minutes, Colour. Dave Johns, Alison Steadman. Directed by Paul Morrison. Mostly on Hampstead Heath. And with dogs. This is a very entertaining outing for those of us who are not as young as we used to be. And, it is entertaining for those who don’t want a lot of violent action up there on the screen, or on the small screen either, but are happy to keep company with two likeable characters, share their lives, enjoy their happiness, be upset at their griefs, live in hope, at least, for a happy ever after. And our two characters and Dave and Fern. Each of them lives alone although they have adult children, Dave with grandchildren. And each of them has a dog, Dave has Tilly. Fern has Harry. They all live in London, Dave in a housing estate but he is threatened with having to move away to Luton. Fern lives in the house co-owned with her former husband, who wants the house to go on sale, she expecting to have to find a small flat. Any walk on Hampstead Heath, in fine London weather, the grass, the trees, the paths, the view towards the city is always attractive. (There are several further walks out in countryside settings.) Not that the first meeting is auspicious – at all. While Tilly and Harry make instant connection, Fern is rather grumpy about the dogs tangling, ticking Dave off. But, as frequently happens (we hope) in real life, the continued encounters move from gruff, to polite acknowledgement, to the exchange of a few words, to longer conversations, to a developing friendship. And the screenplay, by Paul Morrison (who is who comparatively few films: 1999, Solomon and Gaynor with dialogue in English, Welsh and Yiddish; a delightful film about cricket, Wondrous Oblivion, 2003; a story about Federico Garcia Lorca, Luis Bunuel, and Salvador Dali with Robert Pattinson of the artist, Little Ashes, 2008) sounds just right.

But, of course, how we respond relies very strongly on the performers. Dave Johns is a comic performer in England, sometimes in films, but who made an extraordinary impact as Ken Loach’s I, Daniel Blake – and in this one too he has some difficult interactions with bureaucracies. Alison Steadman has had a long career as a character actress in film and television. Dave Johns is the gentle a character. Alison Steadman is the stronger character, more hurt by life. Although, we discover that Dave has a secret that he should have revealed earlier, a secret that shows his tenderness, but also his deep need for some friendship and love. Which means that what might seem on paper to be rather sentimental, has a great deal of warm sentiment but some tough realities, Dave and the memories of his wife, the demands from his daughter, delighting in his grandchildren. Fern has a sadness with her son, reformed addict, but enjoys learning some Spanish before she goes to her daughter’s wedding in the Canary Islands. The couple work with each other so well, show how friendship actually works and, step-by-step, leads to the possibilities of love and intimacy. As mentioned, this is a story for the older audience – but it won’t hurt a younger audience to see it and appreciate what life has meant, now means for the older generations. BLOOD VESSEL Australia, 2019, 94 minutes, Colour. Nathan Philips, Alyssa Sutherland, Robert Taylor, Christopher Kirby, Alex Cooke, Mark Diaco, John Lloyd Filling ham, Troy Larkin, Vivienne Perry, Ruby Isobel Hall. Directed by Justin Dix. The title is nicely evocative for a film about a ghost ship. It has been written, produced and directed by Justin Dix, his expertise has been in special effects, especially for his company (again an evocative title) Wicked of Oz Studios, Melbourne-based where Blood Vessel was shot. So, audience expectation is for a horror film. But horror film suggests different expectations from different audiences. For diehard Monsterfests fans who want instant blood and gore, even in the opening credits, unless it is immediately gory, the film is seen as a failure. Which, is what happened to some of the commentors on this film (recommending only the second half). which is a pity, not doing justice to the establishing of the scene, introducing the characters, a sense of mystery, evocative moments, with the action moving credibly towards the blood and gore in the final 30 minutes. For this reviewer, the first hour is particularly interesting. We are immediately informed that the action takes place towards the end of World War II. A group of men, and one woman, are adrift in a lifeboat in the North Atlantic, two British, a Russian, two Americans (one sympathetic, African-American?, the other of noxious), an English woman, an Australian soldier. They see the German ship coming towards them in the night. It is a mysterious ship, as they discover dead members of the crew, others vanished. Apart from the Marie Celeste atmosphere, the first part of the film has a sense of realism, the

challenge to each of the characters as to how they are to survive, to make contact, to be rescued. The Australian is a born leader. The Russian is a supportive ally. One of the Americans is surly and presumptuous. And the British woman is a dignified British mother. The Englishman, a code breaker for the British government, is rather weasley (in appearance, glasses and stature, reminding horror fans of Donald Pleasance). Looking at aspects of the cargo, there is more than suspicion, especially in the discovery of gold bars which might explain what happened to the ship. But there are also evocative suggestions of middle European superstitions, carvings, contents of boxes, mysterious books. So, most audiences, except for those who have been impatiently longing for the blood and gore) can be satisfied with a mysterious drama. Spoiler alerts, and alerts to those who might find blood and gore too hard to watch, it does move into demonic presence, overtones of Transylvanian vampirism, as well as echoes of And Then There Were None. And a grimly disturbing ending. Certainly one of the better films of its genre. (And, impressively made and post-produced in Australia.) BOYS STATE US, 2020, 109 minutes, Colour. Directed by Amanda Mc Baine, Jesse Moss. This is a very American documentary. It offers insights into the world of American politics, so different from that of many other countries. Audiences from these countries will be surprised, and sometimes alarmed. However, given the state of American politics in the American presidency during the years when this film was made, the first term of President Trump, non-American audiences will be given plenty to reflect on. Boys State is an American institution, established by the American Legion in 1935. During the opening credits there are indications as to some prominent personalities who participated in the boys State exercise: Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Rush Limbaugh. This annual event in many of the states of the union takes place over a week. This film’s focus is on the event for boys, generally age 17, and for this film in the state of Texas. Gradually, the audience begins to understand what is in play. And, serious play it is. The boys are interviewed by members of the American Legion and approved for participation and scholarship. They assemble, a thousand of them, in uniform dress, in dormitories and with large dining room, meeting rooms. The boys are immediately divided into two groups, the Nationalist Party, the Federalist Party. Over the week, they are to go through various processes that parallel the party assemblies, nominations and campaigns, elections, in state politics. Several boys are singled out by name early in the film so that the audience has a particular focus. They form an interesting cross-section of young Americans. It is a surprise to find that

Ben, has had two leg amputations because of meningitis as well as having an injured arm. But, he has a strong presence and determination, very few holds barred, not any way impeded by his disability except in a walking limp, with his eye on the governorship in the final election but finding his place as Party Manager, recruiting, campaigning, chairing meetings, strong on input and motivation. We are also introduced to Steven Garza, Mexican background, short, swarthy, participating in demonstrations about guns, very determined, quieter in his approach, also aiming for governor, energetic in his campaigning and making friends. The other two principal boys are quite a contrast, René, African- American, self-conscious, but self-confident, intense speech campaigning for Party Manager, winning, but falling foul of some dissidents who want to impeach him. By contrast there is Robert, may be seen as a typical Texan, easy-going, not particularly sensitive to others’ feelings or holding on to issues, intent on being accepted to West Point. For audiences who find this Boy’s State week unusual, it is sometimes difficult to keep pace with what is happening, campaigns, speeches, voting, selection of candidates – and the number of convention equivalents to hear the ideas of the candidates for governor. However, every so often, there are more personal interviews with the forenamed boys, their emotional reactions to what has happened to them, their political and philosophical reflections. For so many, the motivation is: win at all cost, truth is not always relevant. René says at the end that one boy would make an excellent politician – but that was not a compliment. Of interest to American audiences and to non-American audiences is the selection of political issues that the boys want to debate. While they are vociferously patriotic, songs, music, brass band as boosters, one of the key issues is gun-control, the Second Amendment, an emphasis on bearing arms and defending oneself that seems alien to many non-Americans. There are also some enthusiastic anti-abortion stances, one or another of the boys quietly mentioning that he was pro-choice, an allusion to LGBTQ issues only, passing mentions of education. The film serves as a record of the thinking of young men in America of this period, a snapshot – and interesting to reflect on 10 years earlier and the election of President Obama. And, our wondering what the equivalent will be like for the 2028 American election. DANCING AT THE VATICAN UK, Argentina, Italy, Venezuela. 2019, 40 minutes, Colour. Charles Sabine. Directed by Brian Moore. Not an expected activity! However, at the end of this moving documentary, a number of pilgrims move up to the stage of the papal audience hall, a popular Argentinian singer, Axel, playing his guitar, a spirit of joy. By this time, we have come to know who these dancers are. The group at the papal audience had a slogan, “Hidden No More”. Which makes us realise that, if we Had not had direct contact with someone suffering from a particular illness, a named disease, like Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s, we do not know much

about the illness at all. Since the disease featured in this documentary is Huntington’s Disease, we realise that it does not have quite the public profile as, say, Parkinson’s, where, again, people in the public profile, like Pope John Paul II or actor, Michael Fox, are well-known. So, this brief film serves as a deserved public recognition of those, around the world, who suffer from Huntington’s Disease. And the realisation that it is not contagious, but rather is inherited. The producer of the film is a British journalist, himself and inheritor, Charles Sabine, who had the idea of enlisting Pope Francis in the campaign for better recognition and understanding. The focus is on a community in Venezuela, on Lake Maracaibo. We are introduced to the population of the small fishing village, quite a number of whom have the disease. For those who have not experienced it, watching the behaviour, the symptoms, a kind of physical jerkiness at times, some seeming lack of awareness of what is happening can be disturbing. In this village, the disease is not understood, people being very wary, misjudging the behaviour of those who have inherited HD. Sabine notes that the ways of Vatican bureaucracy are slow-moving but he perseveres in writing to the officials for an audience with the Pope. And, after some months, there is an agreement, not just for a private audience but for a large gathering, Pope Francis to speak, to welcome the visitors, to meet and embrace many of them. And, so, we accompany a young boy who has been shunned by the village, bullied at school because of his family, and a 15-year-old girl from Argentina. (And there is some delight when the boy is presented with a football and a jersey by a celebrated player and Axel arrives to play a song for the girl delighted and awestruck.) The group is sponsored by an Italian doctor, member of the Italian Senate, who brings a delegation to a session in the Senate. She also introduces the group to the Pope and there are quite a number of doctors and specialists in the papal audience. And, to the delight of the organisers, Pope Francis actually says out loud the HD slogan, Hidden No More, in English, Italian, Spanish. No wonder, the group danced in the Vatican. Social groups, parish groups, school classes, all could, within a short space of time, be emotionally involved leading to greater understanding and appreciation of Huntington’s Disease, the burden of those who have inherited it, the day by day challenges their carers. LE DAIM/ DEERSKIN France, 2019, 77 minutes, Colour. Jean Dujardin, Adele Haenel, Albert Delpy, Marie Bunel, Pierre Gommart. Directed by Quentin Dupieux. This very brief film is designed for audiences who are looking for and appreciate what might be called cinema of the absurd. They probably won’t be disappointed. Many will want to watch this film because of its star, Jean Dujardin, the popular French actor who won an Academy award for Best Actor in The Artist (2011). They don’t know what they

are in for! In one sense, this is a film about a middle-age crisis – certainly a very unusual style of crisis with completely unexpected consequences. Jean Dujardin is Georges, suddenly introduced driving a car, filling up with petrol, taking off his jacket, stuffing it down the service station’s toilet bowl, flooding overflow, and his driving off carefree. But, that is only the beginning. However, in a brief prologue, three young people are filmed, taking off their jackets, speaking to camera and swearing that they will never wear a jacket ever again in their life and putting their jacket in the boot of a car. That sequence will recur later, with full meaning. But it does give a clue to the theme and its absurdity, what might be called the dejacketisation of the world. Georges has an extreme abhorrence to jackets but say the least. It is difficult to say more about the plot in a film review. Its impact relies on audiences not really knowing what will happen next or where the screenplay is going. But, there are strong clues as Georges drives into the mountains, finds an old man who has advertised a deerskin jacket which Georges covets, pays thousands of euros for, drives off happily, especially with a video camera which the old man throws in as a bonus. By this time, we gather that Georges is an extreme narcissist, admiring the coat, admiring himself in the coat, continually looking in the mirror, in window glass reflections, in the windows of his car. Later, as he has cosy and questioning conversations with the coat, there is a touch of schizophrenia. And, no secret, he is obsessive. The gift of the video camera makes a great impression on him, his buying a book in the local small village bookshop, his beginning to film and encountering a young woman, Denise (Adele Haenel in the local bar, who expresses her desire to edit films (she has practised on her computer at home and re-edited Pulp Fiction in linear fashion!). By this stage, the audience has accepted Georges (although he is in no way likeable) and wonders about his filmmaking. It is best now not to pursue the plot developments in a review, what is best is for unexpected action to be discovered, not without some shocks, by the audience. And, embarrassingly, in a moment of black humour, they may, like this reviewer, actually laugh at the moment when we see what happens to Georges! Yes, and a number of comments have actually said, “Oh deer!”. HOUSE OF CARDIN US/France, 2019, 95 minutes, Colour. Directed by P. David Ebersole, Todd Hughes. “A magazine cover reaches millions of people”. A passing remark in this documentary about Pierre Cardin (born in Italy, Pietro Cardine, is family fleeing was Selena’s fascism to France when the boy was two). His career is one of the epitomes of French fashion success, a member of the French Academie. On the day that this reviewer watched this documentary about him, he had turned 98 the day before, July 2nd.

Devotees of fashion have been very well served by feature-length documentaries in recent years, portraits of Christian Dior, Eve St Laurent, Coco Chanel, Vivian Westwood, Alexander Mc Queen… This one makes for interesting and arresting viewing. It is full of energy, continually on the move, images, many images, of clothes and design, models from Europe, the Americas, and, especially Asia and Japan, intercutting the narrative. (There is an enormous credit list at the end, noting the sources of so many of the images of Cardin’s creations.) And, it is not only the dresses and suits, formal and informal (“modern” is mentioned so often), but also the range of furniture, home objects, large and small designs that feature throughout. And, not content with this creativity, Cardin has opened theatres, sponsored festivals, invited all kinds of performers, avant-garde and traditional, Marlene Dietrich, Dionne Warwick, Alice Cooper… And theatrical, ballet and dance events. We take it for granted when Pierre Cardin explains that his life is work. And, as that is repeated throughout the film, enormous amounts of the evidence is there. He loves to work. In fact, for those who know nothing about him and his life, the would begin to wonder whether he has any private life at all. About 20 minutes before the end of the film, there is some mention about his life, his companionship with actress Jeanne Moreau, his relationship with Andre Oliver, his main assistant for over 40 years. But, that is about all. And, given his work and accomplishment, there would not seem to have been much time for any kind of private life. And, right throughout the film, there is Cardin himself. Photos of when he was young, working with the Red Cross in Vichy France during the war, coming to Paris in 1945, dress designs for a Jean Cocteau film, encouraged by Dior in 1946, 1950 going out on his own, many images of his shopfronts (and his name in lights, even on the Great Wall of China), film footage of him at work, with models, catwalks… And, then, even more footage and photos of him as he moves towards middle age, more as he moves into late middle age. And, in the decades of video and social media, plenty of footage of him in old age. And, for the film itself, the he is, a powerful and genial presence in his 90s, always involved, commenting on his work, making the audience, even those who know very little of him, pleased to make something of his acquaintance. Not a biography of the man at all, a portrait. Rather, a biography of his work, his creativity. LITIGANTE Colombia, 2019, 93 minutes, Colour. Carolina Sanin, Leticia Gomez, Antonio Martinez, Alejandra Sarria, David Roa, Jorge Carreno. Directed by Franco Lolli. A film written by women (with French background), about strong women and their interactions, life-and-death situations. This is a serious film. It is also a sombre film in its seriousness – although there are some moments of lightness, touches of humour. It is also a film from Latin America, from Colombia, set in Bogota. However, as audiences watch the women and their situations, it is really a universal story and could be taking place

and any big city around the world. Audiences can identify with the women, although at many moments this is rather difficult, and can appreciate the continued hardships and challenges. The litigant a of the title is a middle-aged woman, Silvia (a convincing if sometimes alienating performance by Carolina Sanin) – although her litigation is in the background, her profession as a consultant concerning allotting of government contracts, officials finding that some of the business activity contravened the law, her eventually being brought to court. Rather, in the foreground, immediately from the opening sequences of the film, she is in a contentious relationship with her mother. She loves her mother. Her mother loves her. But it is an extraordinarily harsh bickering relationship, mother criticising her daughter continually, daughter trying her best to support her mother prone to outbursts of exasperation. Her mother, Leticia (Leticia Gomez) is having an MRI. We learn that she has undergone chemotherapy in the past, the doctor advising that her cancer is now terminal, advising more chemotherapy. Many audiences will identify with this central issue of the film: acceptance of terminal cancer, the reluctance to accept the doctor’s verdict by other members of the family, the urging of chemotherapy and the reluctance of the person with the cancer to undergo all the pain and discomfort of the treatment, the loss of quality of life. To that extent, this film is well worth seeing and responding to its dilemmas. There is also a complication that Silvia is a single mother, Antonio her five-year-old son quite a bright spark, devoted to his mother, loving his grandmother, also his aunt, Silvia’s younger sister, Maria José, who continually helps during her mother’s illness. At home, is a boarder, Sergio, a very sympathetic, a gay man. Silvia is obviously not into relationships but after a hostile interview from the media, she encounters the interviewer at a party, rebukes him but then is attracted and they begin a relationship, he quite a genial and supportive man, she being a mixture of responsive and brittle, treating him very badly. The film opened Critics Week at Cannes 2019 to favourable reviews but, a number noted that commercially it would be a hard sell. This is true. However, for audiences who want substantial drama, significant personal and family issues, it is well worthwhile. BIK ENEICH/ A SON/ UN FILS Tunisia, 2019, 95 minutes, Colour. Sami Bouajila, Najla Ben Abdallah, Youssef Khemiri. Directed by Mehdi Barsaoui. A simple title, direct, for a drama that might happen anywhere in the world, but a simple title for a treatment of its themes which is cultural and geographical specific. In fact, the setting is Tunisia (with some sweeping location photography, especially in the mountains). The date is 2011. Audiences will appreciate that this is the period of the Arab Spring in North Africa. In the background of this story are references to strict Islamists wanting power, armed groups in road ambushes, and, especially, what was happening in neighbouring Libya, uprisings, the privy to the downfall of Colonel Gadaffi. This is the background, but, centre-screen, is the story of a family. It starts with exuberance and joy, father, mother and son, friends and relatives, out at a picnic, hopeful, modern and

contemporary, happy prospects. (As in other Tunisian films, the picture of Islamic Tunisian society is a mixture of tradition, especially in women’s dress, and a more “secular” lifestyle.) Within the first 15 minutes, A Son moves from this exhilaration, mother father and boy jubilantly singing in the car on the way home, to unexpected violence, to a crisis, hospital and surgery, the probing of family secrets. A word to describe the experience of this film is “harrowing”. While we might say that, at times, life itself is harrowing enough, it seems very important to experience this kind of harrowing story, experience its beginning, complex developments, and ending within two hours of screen time. (This film has been compared to some Iranian films of recent years, in subject and in quietly dramatic style, like A Separation, a just comparison, a quietly intense sharing with characters, troubles, sadness, that touches both heart and mind in ways unanticipated.) Sami Bouajila is a celebrated French actor with African background and has appeared in a number of films for two decades. Here he plays Fares, a successful businessman, devoted to his wife, Meriem, who is also a professional. They have an 11-year-old son, Aziz, who seems to have a zest for life. And it is he who is taken to hospital, requiring demanding surgery, hanging on for his life, much of his liver destroyed, in need of a liver transplant (but finding himself way down on the list for transplants, strict legal and religious traditions in Tunisia, permissions and documentation required). While the focus is on Aziz and audience hopes for successful surgery, the drama takes us into unanticipated complications, emotional complications to be handled by Fares and Meriem. They are complications that audiences will recognise and appreciate how difficult it is to communicate them and deal with their consequences. There is also a significant sub-plot, a sleazy entrepreneur who haunts hospital waiting areas and checks out anxious parents, offering them alternate (and expensive) ways for transplants – and a revelation about a black market in organ donors and a cruel exploitation of young children. This is the first full-length feature of the Tunisian director, Mehdi Barsaoui. It is accomplished filmmaking, accomplish storytelling, an accomplished invitation for the audience to be willing to share harrowing experiences. THE VIGIL US, 2019, 89 minutes, Colour. Dave Davis, Menashe Lustig, Malky Goldman, Lynn Cohen, Fred Melamed, Ronald Cohen. Directed by Keith Thomas. Vigil, in the past, has possessed religious connotations. And so it has here. This is a horror film with a difference. Dialogue is in English but much of it in Yiddish. While it is set in New York City, it is set within the Jewish community, giving an initial explanation of the ritual of keeping vigil by a dead body, keeping guard over the body, a comforting presence for members of the family. The name of the person keeping vigil, the technical name is Shomer. So, the audience is prepared for this kind of vigil and whatever

may happen. Pre-credits, there is an additional teaser with some dark and images from the concentration camps, a victim, an official, a man with a gun ready to shoot (with the scene returning towards the end of the film). There is a transition to a group of young Jewish men and women in a room, discussing, quite earnestly, some situations in which they have found themselves. Audience attention is drawn to one young man, Yacov (Dave Davis, not the most Jewish name), seen looking at himself in a mirror, studiously, then taking some medication. As the group disperses, they notice a rabbi standing by lamppost in the street. As they exit, and Yacov exchanges phone numbers with one of the young women, Sarah, the rabbi approaches him with a proposition. He needs a Shomer, and offers the job to Yacov – and we learn soon enough that Yacov was a very devout, Orthodox, a Shomer, but seems to have lost his faith, has become quite secular, especially in his money deal for payment to be a Shomer. The dead man is Mr Litvack, a reclusive man, mourned by his wife who has Alzheimer’s. While it is uncomfortable, Yacov has been a Shomer before, and is persuaded to settle in for a vigil of five hours before the mortician’s arrive. It is dark inside the house and, of course, some of the lights will flicker and fail. The camera goes often to the clock, time passing quickly, then not… The setting has its effect on Yacov as he gazes at the body covered by a sheet, looks around the room, checks with his mobile phone, making some contact with Sarah. But, as the night progresses (or regresses for Yacov), he is sometimes asleep, sometimes awake, sometimes awake in his sleep, nightmare experiences, tormenting memories, upsetting imagination. He especially recalls an incident where he accompanies, wearing his Orthodox locks and hat, a young boy down the street when they are attacked by a group of men, Yacov pushed to the ground, recovering his hat, but immobile to help the young boy, guilt continuing to weigh on him. Mrs Litvack appears during the night in disturbing ways. The body seems to disappear under the sheet but returns. And there is blood on it covering its head. The concentration camp scene recurs. Yacov has had his mental and emotional problems, phones his therapist and leaves a message – and the mystery of a therapist bring back with detailed instructions, then the real therapist returning the call. Which means then that the audience shares Yacov’s vigil, shares his mental and emotional situation, sees a film in the basement where the dead man talks about the effect of demons and their reaching out. Day dawns. New York seems normal. But, of course, it is not. NETFLIX RELEASES THE CORRUPTED UK, 2019, 102 minutes, Colour. Sam Claflin, Timothy Spall, Hugh Bonneville, Noel Clarke, Charlie Murphy, Joe Claflin,

Naomi Ackie. Directed by Ron Scalpello. There is usually something intriguing about a thriller which focuses on financial corruption, police corruption, government corruption. And this is the case with the aptly titled The Corrupted (which applies to most of the central characters). This is a British thriller which opens in 2002, London, the announcement that the Olympic Games will be held there in 2012. The focus is on shady land developers, secret deals, pressure on individuals to sell up, pressure on signatures, then murder. There is a quick collage of how the development in East London developed during the years of preparation for the games. However, the action in most of the film is in the present. Almost a decade after the games, the London district and the games environs look bright and prosperous. Then the action takes up with the shady land dealer, played by a rather gaunt, perennially sinister self-made man, surrounded by formidable -looking thugs, but not averse to pulling a trigger himself. He is now well-known as a successful developer, a man who contributes to charities. Is in league with a rather dapper businessman, played by Hugh Bonneville, who proves that he is as sinister as the others. But the human drama focuses on Liam Mc Donough (Sam Claflin in a role that could have been taken in the past by Jason Statham and Claflin looking rather like him here). He gets out of prison after 14 years and is met by his brother, played by Sam Claflin’s brother, Joseph, who is involved with a bank robber but also on the payroll of the developer. The two brothers had been witnesses to their father’s death in 2002, assuming that he had been pressurised and had killed himself, which the audience has seen and knows is not the case. Liam is separated from his wife and son. The brothers bank robbery goes awry and his partner is captured, tortured and killed with a brother hired to participate in the victim’s dismemberment. This film doesn’t hold back so much on the violent behaviour of the criminals, including a shooting and burial in a remote area of the bank of the Thames. There is an earnest police Inspector, played by Noel Clarke, who, with a challenged by a journalist, begins to investigate the developments. What emerges is that there is a link of corrupt police, the audience unsure about the stances of the Chief, David Heymann. This all builds up to dramatic confrontations, thugs and hit men, police betrayals, more killings and a final confrontation between Liam and the developer. The finale takes on something of a cynical tone, while some don’t survive, but, some happiness and hope for Liam. EUROVISION SONG CONTEST: THE STORY OF FIRE SAGA US, 2020, 123 minutes, Colour. Will Ferrell, Rachel Mc Adams, Dan Stevens, Mikae Persbrandt), Pierce Brosnan, Melisanthe Mahut, Demi Lovato, Graham Norton, Jamie Demetriou. Directed by David Dobkin

On the one hand, the annual Eurovision competition has an enormous following in many parts of the world, a popular cultural landmark for all the countries of Europe. It has a limited following in the United States. So, it is something of a surprise, that an American company would make a film about it, about characters who want to be in the competition and win it at all cost, about the competition itself, the kind of music, the visual presentation for television, costumes, décor, singing and dancing styles. But they have. The film was directed by David Dobkin (The Wedding Crashers and other comedies). And, it was co-written by its star, Will Ferrell. The filmmakers have chosen Iceland as the country that they will present, explore, parody. Iceland could stand in for Eurovision enthusiasts from any country but, with its being small, with its financial difficulties, with its Scandinavian and Viking tradition, it provides an entertaining background for its story. The film is broad comedy, not relying on very much subtlety. And this is particularly the case for Will Ferrell, his character, Lars, a middle aged fisherman whose be-all and end-all is to win Eurovision. But, there is some subtlety in the characterisation of his singing partner, Sigrit, a particularly engaging performance by Rachel Mc Adams. The opening takes us back to the 1970s, the community in a small town in Iceland, Pierce Brosnan, of all people, as the local patriarch, tough and macho, disdaining Eurovision, but amazed and alarmed when his little boy, dances in front of the television as Abbas sings Waterloo. And he is joined by the little girl who doesn’t talk. To the present. Lars fishes with his disapproving father, craving his affirmation. He plays in the local band with Sigrit – but the locals want only one popular song, Ding-dong, not interested in their compositions. They try to prepare for Eurovision – watching the Icelandic competition, especially the favourite singer, when suddenly everything explodes and the contestants are all killed. The desperate local organisers put names in a box to find a substitute entry and, who should be drawn out but… So, off to Eurovision in Edinburgh (and a pleasant look at that city). Lars, of course, is vain, obsessed, making all kinds of social and technical gaffes. On the other hand, Sigrit becomes even more radiant. She attracts the attention of the Russian competitor, Alexander (Dan Stevens), vain,. All stops out, with a very camp presentation of his song. So, all kinds of problems with the rehearsals, due, of course, to Lars. Sigrit gets caught up with Alexander. The Greek entrant sets her eyes on Lars (the screenplay giving no real or apparent reason!). Conflict, moods, but they do get their chance to perform – ending in comic disaster (comic for the audience but not for them). And, for fans of Graham Norton, he has an enjoyable time playing himself as a television commentator. A lot of amusement about the voting, some sympathy for Iceland, vengeance for the Danish bank official who dreaded Iceland winning because it would bankrupt them again, some conflict with Lars (and a visit to some elfs whom Sigrit prayerfully enlists for her success), and a finale that seems impossible – but, of course, is possible, a victory of some kind and a happy future, father-son reconciliation, father marrying Sigrid’s mother, everybody assembling to listen to the band plus baby again – only to want that local song, Ding-dong,

played yet again. An undemanding Netflix pastime – which, those who know Eurovision will probably relish and enjoy. THE HATER Poland, 2020, 136 minutes, Colour. Maciej Musialowski, Vanessa Aleksander, Danuta Stenka, Jacek Koman, Maciej Stuhr, Adam Grabowsky. Directed by Jan Komasa. The Hater was released in cinemas in Poland just before the coronavirus outbreak and was almost immediately moved to streaming release, seen on Netflix throughout the world. The director, Jan Komasa, had previously made the arresting film, Corpus Christi, about a young man who was released from a detention centre to work in a mill – but disguises himself as a priest and takes the place of the parish priest, ingratiating himself with the congregation. This film is also about a disturbed young man, Tomasz, played effectively and puzzlingly by Maciej Musialowski. In the first moments of the film, he presents himself as a victim, accused of plagiarism but defending himself to the professors but then expelled from the University. It emerges that he is a pathological liar, mental difficulties in the past, and with his family. The film follows his quest to find himself a substantial job, a place in society, money and comfort. He ingratiates himself with an affluent family who lend him money for his studies, and has a brief relationship with their younger daughter. He applies for many jobs but finally succeeds with a very dubious company which is hired by anonymous clients, investigates targets, especially political, here a mayoral candidate for Warsaw. There is surveillance, creation of stories, fake news, undermining of campaigns. Tomasz ingratiates himself with the target candidate, who is supported by the family, and makes a favourable impression with the candidate himself, only to set up the candidate, about whom there are gay rumours, spiking is drink, persuading him to go into a gay club, film him. However, he also persuades the candidate to stay in the race and he apologises to his staff. Audiences have to pay attention to some of the detail and may miss various steps in the development of the plot, especially Tomasz and his playing computer games and linking himself with a mentally disturbed gamer and primes in to violence against the candidate. Because he looks somewhat innocent and people believe in him, Tomasz is able to persuade most people that he is authentic – but, not only is he a pathological liar but he is a destroyer, an anarchist, with ambitions only for himself. In an age of fake news, of cyber attacks, of ruining reputations, this is a story that is alerting and topical.

I SEE YOU US, 2019, 98 minutes, Colour. Helen Hunt, Jon Tenney, Judah Lewis, Owen Teague, Libe Barer, Gregory Alan Williams, Sam Trammell. Directed by Adam Randall. I See You (ICU – and the house being something of an intensive care unit?. Whether that was intended or not, this is rather intense material. It is the first screenplay of actor, Devon Graye, and the direction is by the Englishman, Adam Randall (iBoy). They can be pleased with their work. The setting is Cleveland, Ohio. An initial sweeping aerial shot introduces us to the woods, the river, the town bridge, the streets, children lining up for ice cream, a young boy and his bike, partners in the woods – and then his suddenly flying off his bike and disappearing. So, an arresting start. Then there is a transition to a very comfortable household, but tensions within, Helen Hunt is Jackie, wife and mother, but she has had an affair and has alienated her teenage son, Connor (Judah Lewis). The injured husband and father, Greg (Jon Tenney) works in the local police force and is part of the team investigating the boy’s disappearance. His co-officer has memories of similar abductions some years earlier. So, on the way to a mystery, detection and solution. Well, not exactly. A number of strange, often very small incidents, occur in the house. There is definitely something off-kilter. Perhaps the suggestion of supernatural influences. They effect each member of the family in different ways. But, there is a further complication when the wife’s former lover turns up, insistent, but suffers injury from an accident, hit on the head with a missing mug falling from the roof, of-kilter again. When he is later bludgeoned in the basement, the screenplay has a household mystery all of its own. Then a completely sudden shift, an extraordinary unexpected twist. The film begins to focus on two teenagers, a young girl, Mindy (Libe Barer) doing a documentary video about home invasion, along with her scraggy, straggly cameraman, Alec (Owen Teague). Some more bizarre events, and the audience puzzling about the two. Then the screenplay begins to come together, a number of other twists, so that the audience is on the alert as perspectives on events and characters change. If you are going to make an offbeat thriller, hoping to put the audience off guard, tantalising their curiosity, then this is quite an effective way to do it. LINE OF DUTY US, 2019, 98 minutes, Colour. Aaron Eckhart, Courtney Eaton, Ben Mc Kenzie, Giancarlo Esposito, Dina Meyer, Jessica Lu. Directed by Steven C. Miller.

Line of Duty is a police thriller, which, one hopes, is very far-fetched, the elaborate chases throughout the city, in the home, Birmingham, Alabama, on foot, by car, crashes, shootouts. The film was directed by Steven C. Miller who directed a number of action films including Arsenal, Marauders. The film offers a star turn by Aaron Eckhart, as a policeman, Frank Penny, who has shot a child in the line of duty, is looked down on by the fellow police. Giancarlo Esposito is the police chief, concerned about the abduction of his young daughter and the time limit for her rescue, hoping to arrest the criminal in an elaborate setup but his escaping. Frank Penny then pursues him on an extensive chase through the city, traps him, the criminal pulling a gun and Frank shooting him. Because of his past, Frank wants to continue the action to rescue the little girl, the criminal’s brother emerging, literally guns blazing, chases and shootouts in the city streets. There is a final confrontation in an old house, explosives, a helicopter rescue, a fight in the helicopter and a fall. The film also focuses on young people with phone cameras, linking up with social media contacts, information also taken on by the networks. Courtney Eaton (Australian actress from Western Australia) links up with Frank Penny, wanting to walk in his shoes, get the footage of the chase, gradually realising the dangers of his work, willing to participate, helping the rescue. Which means then that social media can impede police work – but with extensions, possibilities for research, gathering a wide audience who can come to the aid of police. OFFERING TO THE STORM/ OFRENDO A LA TORMENTA Spain, 2020, 139 minutes, Colour Marta Etura, Leonardo Sbaraglia, Nene, Francesc Orella, Imanol,Arias, Itziar Aizpuru, Benn Northover, Marta Larralde Directed by Fernando Gonzalez Molina.. This is the third film in a trilogy, based on novels by Dolores Redondo, and all directed by Fernando Gonzalez Molina. A recommendation to see the first two films before seeing this one: Invisible Guardian and Legacy of the Bones. There were filmed in northern Spain, the setting for a range of superstitions even in the context of Catholicism, especially concerning evil Demons, sects in the countryside devoted to the Demons, human sacrifice, especially of children. The film’s focus is on an expert detective, Amaia Salazar (Marta Etura) who has been rejected by her mother and brought up by her loving aunt. She trained in the United States with the FBI and has returned and is the homicide chief in her town, also in a relationship and having a young child. In this episode, the focus is on the sacrifice of babies, unearthing secrets in the town, mothers who have sacrificed, their being urged to take their own lives, a sinister midwife, a seemingly

abandoned mansion in the countryside, cemeteries, mausoleums. The local judge (Leonardo Sbaraglia) supervises Amaia’s work but is infatuated with her and, surprisingly for many audiences, she allows herself to be seduced by him. The Catholic element is introduced by the Opus Dei priest who appeared in the previous film and who in this case explains the superstitions background to Amaia and helps her to get final information for her case. And then her mother reappears, not dead as was suggested in the previous film, the mother and daughter having a confrontation on the bridge and the mother slitting her throat. Amaia is very emotional in this film, many weeping scenes, especially with the murder of her loyal Lieutenant, Jonan (Nene). The ultimate solution is one of betrayal leaving Amaia somewhat bewildered, emotionally drained, looking out the window at the audience at the end. THE OLD GUARD US, 2020, 123 minutes, Colour. Charlize Theron, Ki Ki Layne, Mathias Schoonaerts, Chiwitel Ejiofor, Marwan Kenzari, Luca Marinelli, Harry Melling, Anamaria Marinca, Directed by Gina Prince- Blythewood. The Old Guard seems a rather prosaic and unimaginative title for a story about immortal warriors. However, the screenplay is based on a graphic novel written by Greg Rucka who also wrote the screenplay for the film. What might appear credible in a graphic novel and its sketches and illustrations is a challenge for the screen, for realistic characters, for credible action even if it is heightened with immortality. On the whole, the film is successful in the performances for the old guard. Charlize Theron has appeared in a number of action films in the past, including Aeon Flux and the Atomic Blonde. She is joined by an international group, Belgian Matthias Schoenaerts as her long centuries partner, Dutch Marwan Kenzari and Italian Luca Marinelli as two who killed each other during the Crusades. The film indicates their long history, Andy (Theron), Andromeda, coming from the era of Greek history. There are no real explanations as to how these warrior guardian angels of humanity were designated with immortality and military prowess since there is no acknowledgement of God or divine powers. They are just there, discovering that however many times they are injured and killed, sometimes quite devastatingly as we see in an initial episode in South Sudan, they recover and continue on their way. There are some flashbacks, especially concerning two women during the Inquisition, about to be burnt at the stake, one imprisoned alive in a kind of iron lung and dropped to the bottom of the sea (spoiler: she appears moment for the end a sure indication of sequel intentions!). While there were very busy, as indicated by dialogue and by photos and images, they were present in the Napoleonic wars as well as the American Civil War, with quite a lot to do in the crises of the 20th century. A touch different in the 21st-century – a young megalomaniac science entrepreneur (Harry Melling) is desperate to capture them in order to get their DNA,

flesh and blood samples for his laboratory to discover the secret of immortality. His approach is mercenary. However, he is approached by a CIA agent, Copley (Chiwitel Ejiofor), whose wife has died tragically, and his promise of capturing the old guard. We see them in action in the set up in South Sudan. But, there is much more to the plot. Off to Afghanistan, a local confrontation by Marines, the women in the village indicating where the men are hiding, the leading Marine, Nile Freeman (KiKi Layne), capturing the man, but he suddenly slitting her throat. Yes, she heals, she is the new guard of the immortals. There is action in France where the immortals hide in an abandoned village. There are pursued by the industrial company militia. There are scenes in England, in London, at the site of the laboratories, building up to a climax where two of the immortals have been captured and are subject to experimentation. Andy, always the strong leader, gives Nile the opportunity to leave. A chance, but not a chance, as she returns and it is she who will have to confront the villain – and a risky tactic to destroy him, fortunately with her immortality, not destroying her. A Netflix release, directed by a female director, Gina Prince- Blythewood, hugely successful in streaming and, within days of release, serious discussions about sequels. THE PLATFORM Spain, 2019, 94 minutes, Colour. Ivan Massague, Zorion Eguileor, Antonia San Juan, Directed by Galder Gaztelu- Urrutia. Here is a Spanish film that is dazzling to look at, but also ugly and cruel. It is a symbolic film, an allegory about human society and human nature. There are 200 floors in the Platform of the title. And it is a prison. It is a hierarchical prison. On the top floor are more privileged prisoners, the first floor, and then the numbers descend. The prisoners are two to a room. What is significant during the action of the film is the feeding of the prisoners. They can make orders as to what they would like to eat. However, the elaborate administration and kitchen pack the lift which is to take the food from the top down, those on the upper floors greedily devouring the food so that less and less remains as it descends. The central character is Goreng who finds himself in prison – and it is not clear always to the audience or to Goring himself as to how he got there all why. His passion is to read. He shares the floor and room with Trimagasi, an old man who seems to have absorbed and succumbed to the system, who will disappear but later reappear to Goring. As Goring moves to different floors, he encounters a number of strange characters, especially a woman who has been in administration but who turns vicious. In fact, it is expected of the prisoners that they literally devour each other – and receive benefits from surviving. More than a dog-eat- dog situation, it is human-devour-human. While the platform is a symbol of hierarchical human society, authoritarian and control and

manipulation, it is also a story of human nature, often seen at its worst and most cruel. To that extent, The Platform is a film that could be admired but is also an endurance. Many bloggers have gone to great pains to explore the themes and meaning of the film – and a recommendation to look at many of these on the IMDb. Below are some quotations indicating the lines of interpretation. The "Verticle Self- Management Center" is an allegory for society, with those at the top provided the best of everything and a willingness to consume far more than necessary at the expense of those below, while those at the lowest levels of society must suffer and go without. This can apply to society within a country or the worldwide society of first world to third world countries. It also attempts to show this is the case whether there is a capitalist or socialist economy. In either case, those with the majority of the power generally take what they want. Most building floors are numbered from lowest to highest from bottom to top, but the prison is the exact reverse with level 1 at the top, the same numbering system as the Circles of Hell in Dante's Inferno. Inhabitants of the Third Circle, reserved for gluttons, are punished for their exercise greed and appetite above on Earth, and like the prison inhabitants on the higher floors, hoard what they desire at the expense of others. SERGIO US, 2020, 118 minutes, Colour. Wagner Moura, Ana de Armas, Brian F O’ Byrne, Garrett Delahunt, Clemens Schick, Bradley Whitford, Will Dalton, Pedro Hossi. Directed by Greg Barker. This is a portrait of United Nations diplomat, Sergio de Mello. In 2009, director Greg Barker made a documentary about him. A decade later he has returned with a film dramatising his life and some of his political action. Sergio de Mello achieved a great deal in his life. It would probably be helpful for potential audiences to look him up, some Google searching, a look at Wikipedia, to see who he was, his Brazilian background, his academic life, his work with the United Nations – in an amazing range of different countries. In this film, however, the action is limited to a brief sequence in Cambodia, a significant amount of the film in East Timor, the last part of the film in Iraq. The impact of the film will depend on what an audience is looking for. If it is a portrait of the diplomat, there is a great deal about his life and, especially, his relationship with Carolina, his second wife. Throughout the film there are love scenes, a sex scene, her supporting him in his work, her grief at his death. From this point of view, the scenes of diplomacy and international work could be seen just as background, or even interruptions, to the personal story. On the other hand, if audiences expect a drama of a diplomat, his talent and skills, seeing them exercised, then the love scenes may be seen as background or even interruptions.

The film was produced by Brazilian actor, Wagner Moura, noted for his social activities in his own country. He recently appeared, along with his present co-star, Ana de Armas, in the drama about Cuba and Cuban refugees in Miami, Wasp Network. He is a tall, strong, man, genial appearance, friendly manner. He is seen in a number of difficult situations, especially in roadblocks in Cambodia, East Timor, Iraq, cautioned by his fellow travellers but approaching the various authorities, exercising some charm, able to make progress. This is seen particularly in the attention given to the fight for independence by the East Timorese from Indonesia, at the end of almost a quarter of a century of hostilities, domination by Indonesian forces. He represents the United Nations, is warned that independence is too difficult an achievement, especially when he is received in a hostile manner by the military leader, Xenana Gusmao, who rebukes him for wearing a scarf that is reserved for the nation’s Elders. The East Timorese also want an apology from the president of Indonesia. There is a brief telling scene where Sergio has an audience with the president who refuses to back down because of complexities, Sergio challenging him that an apology could be simple. While the campaign for the vote East Timor (and the Australian presence) is not mentioned, East Timor did achieve independence and Gusmao now gave Sergio his own scarf. This means that the screenplay is something of a jigsaw puzzle, moving from the diplomacy to the love scenes, back again, sudden memories, even of his family in Rio de Janeiro. Because the framework of the film is his being sent to Iraq in 2003, not really wanting to go, clashing with the American administrator, Paul Bremer (Bradley Whitford), upset by the action of some of the American soldiers, setting up the UN office, with Carolina on the staff. The Al Qaeda leader targeted the hotel, a bombing – and the reminder that the followers became ISIS – and Sergio trapped in the rubble alongside his chief advisor, Gil Loechser (Brian F O’ Byrne, this character incorporating several of Sergio’s advisors) trapped with him. It is the scenario of facing death and your life passing before your eyes. The actual Sergio appears in the final credits – scenes of his funeral, praise of him by the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan and the suggestion that Sergio would have been a significant nominee for that post. Something of a mixture and success depending upon what the audience was hoping for – and found. SIGNIS REVIEWS SEPTEMBER 2020 BECKY BRIGHT ONES FATIMA KATIE LES MISERABLES MADE IN ITALY SAINT JUDY SWIMMING FOR GOLD NETFLIX

ALL TOGETHER NOW CRIMENES DE FAMILIA/ THE CRIMES THAT BIND PROJECT POWER SLEEPOVER, The UNKNOWN ORIGINS/ ORIGINES SECRETOS BECKY US, 2020, 93 minutes, Colour. Lulu Wilson, Kevin James, Joel Mc Hale, Robert Maillet, Amanda Brugel, Isaiah Rockcliffe, Ryan Mc Donald, James Mc Dougall. Directed by Jonathan Millot, Cary Murnion. Becky sounds rather a folksy title. But, her film is not folksy at all. It is a variation on the not unfamiliar theme of home invasion, brutal criminals menacing a family, the family resisting. On that level, the film works. We are introduced to Becky being interviewed by police and a social worker – only to find that the action of the film is a flashback from that interview. Becky is 13, is upset, looks on her phone at images of her mother dying in hospital and Becky’s complete devotion to her. She is upset with her father, thinking he is not grieving enough, especially when he brings home a fiancee who has a little boy. Becky acts up, walks out from the meal with her two dogs, going to a hut in the bush. The film has a parallel as it opens, a group of convicts bullying and brutalising a man in prison, intercut with the bullying of Becky at school. It certainly raises an atmosphere – making a theme of the underdog rebelling against the bullies. The prisoners escaped from a van, put on police uniforms, commandeer a car (glimpses of bloodshed) and drive to the house where Becky lives. Becky will overcome. The action of the home invasion is, at first, what we would expect, confrontation with the father, tying up the mother and son, brutal towards some of the dogs, assuming at first that Becky was a dog but then finding who she really was. And, then, the confrontations. For audiences who might be in for a home invasion thriller, it needs to be said that the confrontations, some close-ups of torture of the father, the pursuit of Becky, becomes more and more vivid – and prolonged. The eventual sequences where Becky uses her wits, turning the tables on the criminals, become more and more brutal, some brutally shocking moments, and Becky on a rampage. One of the puzzles of the film is the casting of Kevin James as the neo-Nazi brotherhood chief criminal. In some ways he is his comic pudgy self. On the other hand, shaved head, swastika tattooed on top, big beard, ruthless, this is not the comedian, Kevin James, that we are used to. The question is how much do the writers and the two directors want the the audience to identify with Becky and to share, not just her courage and wit, but the vindictive brutality that she displays to defend herself and her family.

BRIGHT ONES US, 2019, 82 minutes, Colour. Peyton Allen, Josie Buchanan, Chloe Elizabeth Vassallo, Asher Hansow, Christian Allen, Sydney Allen, Dominique Coq Vassallo, Fabiano Altamura, Dann Farrelly. Directed by David Norona, Fred Vassallo. Young students audition for places at a school of the arts. The students are rather younger than older, pre-teens, early teens. Which means that this is something of a variation on High School Musical (much more low-key), a kind of junior Fame. Not that the students are any less enthusiastic in their auditioning and performance than their equivalents in the other films. They are enthusiastic. They sing. They dance. They perform. And with zest. And, as will be expected, several of them have their personal and family issues. The screenplay focuses principally on four characters, Jay (Peyton Reed), an earnest young man, Claudia (Josie Buchanan), plagued with self-doubts despite encouragement – but breaking out at the end, Mia, older, a potential model, and Kira who finds her talent in stage management. There are two youngsters who play tricks and are employed by one of the (rather odd) teachers at the school. The principal is encouraging and there are two teachers who conduct the interviews, evaluate the auditions, promote the students. This is the kind of film that encourages youngsters to break out and see if they can discover their talent – and see where that might lead. The film was made under the auspices of Bethel Music. Bethel began as a church of the Assemblies of God in California but in the early 2000s branched out as their own community, company, with a range of singers and recordings, going on tour. The cast of this film also produced a record of the songs from the film which have many lyrics which express the faith and religious aspirations of the community. Australians will think of Hillsong. Here is the statement from the website for Bethel Music: We are a community of worshipers, musicians, singers and writers passionately pursuing the presence of God. It is our privilege to commit our talents and our hearts to give God glory. A Community of Worshipers Bethel Music is a community of worshipers pursuing the presence of God. We exist to gather, inspire, and encourage the global church toward deeper intimacy with the Father. Together, we express who God is and who we are in Him, capturing fresh expressions of worship in every season. FATIMA US/Portugal, 2020, 113 minutes, Colour.

Stephanie Gil, Aleandra Howard, Jorge Lamelas, Joaquim De Almeida, Goran Visnjic, Lucia Moniz, Marco D' Almeida, Harvey Keitel, Sonia Braga. Directed by Marco Pontecorvo. Who would have anticipated a version of the apparitions at Fathima, 1917, in 2020? There had been a Hollywood version in the early 1950s and the British The 13th Day in 2009. But, here is a well-mounted account, filmed in Portugal, an international cast, and a reverential portrayal of the three children, their experience of the apparition of Mary, opposition, devoted pilgrims, the miracle of the sun (including some photographs of the event in October, 1917, and the glimpse of someone filming the event). Older Catholics were brought up in the period of the popularity of Our Lady of Fatima, especially in the 1940s and the early 1950s, with the touring statue, devotions and processions. By this time, Catholics took our Lady of Lourdes and the apparitions to Bernadette for granted (and the popularity of the film, The Song of Bernadette in 1943). But, Fatima was nearer to our own times, just before our own times, the post-World War II years. And, of course, Fatima has become one of the major shrines, Marian shrines, in the world. Lourdes had its sceptics and critics. Fathima has had its sceptics and critics. While there has been a recent increase in popularity of faith-films, audiences who don’t respond to faith-films will not be impressed by miracle stories like this. Interestingly, while the Internet Movie Database has many responses, some of them ridiculing the story as superstitious, many of those responding are older Catholics who are complaining about quite a number of details, you’d favourites for them, the three secrets, the conversion of Russia, the consecration of the world to Mary… which have not been explicitly included. The value of this version of Fatima, for Catholics of a later generation not so familiar with apparitions (except, perhaps, with Medjugorje), is that the story is well situated in the political climate of Portugal in 1917, Republic, secular-minded, oppressive of religion and the Church. It is also well situated in the climate of World War I, the deaths of Portuguese soldiers and those missing in action (including Lucia’s brother). Memory suggests that back in the 1940s and 1950s, we were not so conscious of these real/actual settings. The other aspect, important for many contemporary audiences, for younger Catholics, are the questions about Mary appearing to 3 small children, in the context of devotions of the time, the responses of the time. The screenplay provides a 1989 framework, a professor (Harvey Keitel) visiting sister Lucia at the Carmelite convent of Coimbra, Lucia in her 80s played by Sonia Braga. The Professor asks the expected questions which might be rising in the minds of questioning audiences: the reality of the apparitions in the language and iconography of the visionaries, of the period, the image of Mary and statuary, the language of rosary and prayer. There is also the issue of the penitential aspects of devotion at the time, self-inflicted penances in reparation for sinful offence or for emphasising prayers of petition. The professor also raises the issue of the effect of little children being the instrument of preaching peace and prayer rather than an adult appeal. Stephanie Gil is very convincing as Lucia. And the two actors for the smaller children are also very effective, Jacinta and her spontaneous talk, Francesco and his not hearing the words of Mary. This is shown in the context of their village, poor and hard-working, and of the deaths and injuries during the war, the family support, Lucia to 3’s mother harsh, her farmer father supportive. The local priest does the expected questioning, fearing that they are making

everything up, but eventually believing them. It is much harder for the Mayor, with orders from Lisbon, with his anti-religious and anti-clerical stances (despite the challenges from his wife), trying to suppress the pilgrimage mentality. People from the village are at times sceptical, hostile, believers. They are desperate for miracles. And, even then, there was commercialism, children with their trays of rosary beads for sale to the pilgrims! There is an odd evocative, nightmare sequence where Lucia dreams of a Pope and bishops walking through the devastation of the battlefield with guns firing at the Pope. The 21st-century seems to be an age more sceptical about this kind of religious experience, so hallowed in the past. Here is an opportunity to give some consideration to the credibility, the question that there are more events and experiences than matter-of-fact realism believes in. A number of photos appear during the final credits, a reminder that Jacinta and Francesco died during the Spanish flu epidemic, that Lucia spent many decades as a Carmelite nun, that the Popes have been enthusiasts of Fatima with their visits, that Pope Francis canonised Jacinta and Francesco and that Lucia’s cause is under consideration. KATIE Ireland, 2018, 89 minutes, Colour. Directed by Ross Whitaker. Born to box. This is quite engaging documentary about Irish boxing champion, Katie Taylor. It is clearly a film for boxing fans. It is even more clearly a film for fans who are interested in women’s boxing. Katie Taylor comes from Bray, Ireland, grew up there, a close-knit family. Mother, Bridget, father, Peter, and siblings Lee, Sarah and Peter Peter, this is a portrait of her and her boxing career and success. As shown in this film, the filmmakers following her not intruding on her, she has an agreeable personality, sometimes an Irish twinkle. She excelled at sport while growing up, football, and a talent for boxing, taking after her father. He was her coach, guiding her to many bouts, victories, an excellent reputation. For those interested in the details of her boxing career, the entry on her in Wikipedia has an extensive (to say the least) listing of all her major bouts and their results. Katie Taylor is completely dedicated to sport remarking, as late as 2020, when asked about relationships, that she was too busy to have relationships. There are quite a number of interviews with her family throughout the film, great support from her mother, generous comments from her sister and her brothers. But, for those who do not know her story, there is a great shock when, in the year before the Rio Olympics, her father (who has made a very agreeable impression, so supportive of his daughter) walks out on the family, something of a devastating effect on them all but, especially, Katie as she was training for Rio. And the thing that emerges from this documentary is how popular she is with the Irish people. As an amateur, she won numerous medals in Irish and European competitions. There

is also her training for the London Olympics, her bouts and her eventually winning the gold medal – and many glimpses of an adoring Irish public. In 2016 she moved to the world of professional boxing, giving interviews about this, interviews with her new manager, with her genial American coach, and a stream of successful fights which has continued even after the making and release of this film. LES MISERABLES France, 2019, 104 minutes, Colour. Damien Bonnard, Alexis Manenti, Djebril Zonga, Issa Perica, Al Hallsan Ly Almamy Kanoute. Directed by Ladj Ly. Over the decades there have been so many film and television versions of Victor Hugo’s Les Miserables. This is not another version but, rather, a homage to Hugo, his storytelling, his observation of the struggles of the poor in Paris, movements of revolution. It has been co-written and directed by Mali-born, Ladj Ly. The film is set in the ethnic-mix area of Paris where Hugo wrote is masterwork. The story focuses especially on children and teenagers in the area, glimpses of their home life and their parents, an introduction to mentors, some of whom agitate, others of whom want the best for the youngsters in the Muslim tradition. There are many scenes of the children outside, at games, congregating, fearful and suspicious of police, chasing the police – and an ultimate scene of many-revolution in a high-rise building, on the steps, in the lift. However, the audience is introduced to this atmosphere via a policeman, Stephane (Damien Bonnard) transferring from the country to the city to be near his son, whose ex-wife has custody. He is put in a team with two veterans who have been patrolling the area for years, known by the young people, links with the mentors, and not particularly well liked. The officer in charge, Chris (Alexis Manenti) an anti-who co-wrote the script with the Dir) is brusque, not particularly race tolerant, has absorbed an authoritarian stance. His partner, Gwada (Djebril Zonga), African background, is the driver, but his work in the area taking its toll. Much of the action is centred around a single episode, the stealing of a young lion from a circus, the police getting evidence to identify the thief, discovering it, pursuing him – he running very fast, the police running fast, the youngsters in hostile pursuit. There is police violence in the incident and the discovery that a studious boy from the high-rise manages a drone and that the whole incident has been filmed. Stephane wants to take the boy to emergency. Chris is desperate to get the drone card to avoid trouble with the authorities. Gwada is overcome emotionally by the experience. It is in the pursuit of the drone card that the audience discovers how the older men work, manoeuvring their positions of influence and power. To a disturbing sequence where the line is returned to the lion tamer who takes the boy into the cage to be menaced by the lion. There are some glimpses of the three men in the aftermath, Stephane wringing his son, Chris

going home to his wife and daughters, Gwada going home to his devoted mother. However, there is the final eruption between the youngsters, especially the thief whose face had been injured by a fireball, turning ammunition against the police, bombarding them with furniture and rubbish, and a final image which brings the film to a close but not the narrative: the boy with his fireball instrument, Stephane and his gun, harsh confrontation, and the rest left to what the audience has been watching, experiencing, feeling, and wondering about the possibilities for the future. MADE IN ITALY UK/Italy, 2020, 93 minutes, Colour. Liam Neeson, Micheal Richardson, Lindsay Duncan, Valeria Bilello. Directed by James D' Arcy. This is light entertainment for audiences who want an easy film to watch. In many ways, it is also slight. However, there is quite an emotional underlying theme and audiences will find some emotional satisfaction at the end. The two central characters, Robert Foster and his son Jack, played by real-life father and son, Liam Neeson and his son Micheal. There is a are some echoes in the screenplay of the sadness in their actual lives, the skiing accident of Natasha Richardson, her untimely death. In fact, in 2016, Micheal officially changed his surname to that of his mother. And, through his mother, he is part of the several-generations Redgrave family. (He also acted with his father in the thriller, Cold Pursuit.) Jack manages a gallery in London, is separated from his rather haughty wife whose family owns the gallery. They are going to sell it. Jack, who has invested so much of his life in the gallery, approaches his father, artist Robert, trying to persuade him to sell their family Palazzo in Italy so that he can buy the gallery. The house has not been lived in for 20 years. So, on the one hand, there is all the comedy and drama of finding the house again, assessing its disrepair, making resolutions to improve the property, getting local help, the role of the estate agent (a rather acerbic Lindsay Duncan), potential buyers (who seem rather obnoxious). On the other hand, there is also the story of Natalia, single mother, working in her local restaurant in England, returning to renovate an old building and making a success of her local restaurant. (No need for the gift of prophecy to see where this will lead!). But, at the core of the story, is the relationship between father and son, the audience discovering that the father has protected his son after the death of his wife in a car accident, sending the son, age 7, off to boarding school, trying to protect him by removing all memories of his mother (but, Jack, later finding them all stored in the Palazzo). So, some emotional scenes, recriminations, understandings, reconciliation, love. And, once again, the gift of prophecy is not needed to anticipate what will happen about the gallery and the sale as well as what might happen with the building.

Enjoyable performances, audiences charmed, as Jack is, by Natalia, Valeria Bilello. And, of course, constant vistas of the Tuscan countryside (made more forcibly by some sequences as Jack returns from Italy and walks around London, near Stockwell Underground, the narrow streets and the old cafes. The film was written and directed by actor James D’ Arcy (Hitchcock, Dunkirk). SAINT JUDY US, 2018, 106 minutes, Colour. Michelle Monaghan, Leeba Lumy, Common, Alfred Molina, Alfre Woodard, Ben Schnetzer, Gabriel Bateman, Mykelti T Williamson. Directed by Sean Harnish. The saint in question? Judith L.Wood, Immigration Attorney. The title? In fact, her ex-husband tells her that, while people call her a saint, she isn’t – but she lives and works like one. In a way, this earnest portrait of Judy Wood is something like a promotion for the cause of canonisation. Of course, we see her as an ordinary human being, married but divorced, with the son whom she cherishes but also overlooks because of her commitment to her work and to her clients. But, she is committed to causes – but, more importantly, she is committed to clients. Actually, this is a true story and the actual Judy Wood appears momentarily at the end of the film before the credits. (And, as usual, in a biopic, the star (in this case Michelle Monaghan) who plays the role looks far more attractive and glamorous than the subject in real life!) In many ways, this is a film with a cause, humane treatment of men and women applying for asylum in the United States and held in detention centres. While they do have the right to legal aid, the lawyers tend to be overworked, not well paid, eager to put the final stamp on the documents rather than show a concern and communicate with their clients, learn their stories, share their plight. Which, of course, is what Judy Wood does. Moving from New Mexico to California in 2005 with her son, she is employed by a local immigration lawyer, Ray Hernandez (played by Alfred Molina who also acts one of the producers for the film, obviously committed to its causes). However, he has become jaded, has lost his initial enthusiasm, is irritated by Judy and fires her. Judy does have the capacity (and maybe this is what saints are like, but not always easy to live and work with) and visits her clients. Many of them become quite devoted to her, in the over 200 cases that she takes up, but, and this is a difficulty with the film not providing background to her other work, the screenplay focuses on one case in particular. And, an important case it is. She finds the file of Asefa Ashwari, Leeba Lumy) almost in a catatonic state, drugged, uncommunicative. Very quickly, Judy gets official documents for an African who is selling takeaway hotdogs but is really a doctor. He helps her in her work. Asefa’s physical and mental condition improve and Judy then pursues her case. Asefa’s story is told in vivid flashbacks, a young girl in Afghanistan, intelligent, taught to read by her mother, then setting

up a school for young girls, disapproved of by her father and his strict Islamic discipline, arrested by the officials, treated brutally – something which Asefa prefers to forget but is finally persuaded to speak frankly and truthfully to the judge in her hearing. For audiences around the world who are aware of parallel situations in the many migrants and asylum seekers kept in detention, the sequences where the judge (Alfre Woodard), while listening sympathetically, has to interpret legislation one might say, over-objectively, as does the lawyer representing the government (Common). This is especially the case where she explains that American law considers persecuted groups and minorities but there is no room for women in these categories. Asefa is to be deported. One of the legal aspects that emerges, and offers grounds for an appeal, is that Asefa was brutally treated as a woman, including multiple rape, not just because she was a woman but because she was considered an enemy of the state. Judy finally present an appeal before three justices – and the audience may be again surprised by the legal and legalistic questions and problems that they raise. Audiences who don’t like to be moralised at have found the film too earnest. Mainstream audiences who like a story, who can empathise with good characters, who are disturbed by social problems, especially by the victimisation of women and migrants, will be certainly on side with Saint Judy. SWIMMING FOR GOLD Australia, 2020, 91 minutes, Colour. Peyton List, Lauren Esposito, Daniel Needs, Olivia Nardini, Johrel Martschinke, Ray Chong Knee. Directed by Hayley Mac Farlane. No mystery in the title. This is definitely a film for those who are swimming fans, especially competitive swimming. This is a tale with many familiar aspects, designed for a younger audience, young adults, older teens, younger teens. And, there is a definite appeal to a female audience who will respond immediately to three of the central characters, some initial disapproval, a lot of exasperation, quite a number of hopes, and as expected, there is some reconciliation. And there is also the energy of competitiveness. Not that there is not an appeal to a male audience, an invitation to identify with the very presentable young men swimmers and their stories. In fact, the central character is American, played by Peyton List who has appeared, since she was four, in many American films and television shows. She is Claire Carpenter, a former champion who has developed a phobia about water, has walked away from competition and is idling her time at home. Her patient and considerate father eventually arranges for her to become the assistant coach in Brisbane. Off to Australia. All the action is in Australia, scenes of Brisbane, a swimming camp in quite a mansion outside Brisbane, with its swimming pool, shared rooms, dining room… And an attractive bush excursion to a special waterfall and pool.

Actually, credibility is seriously challenged when we are introduced to the coach, Bodhi, of Indian ancestry (Ray Chong Nee), with humorous overtones, someone we might never associate with training a swimming team. A talent (?) for motivation, reflecting, visualising, and cultivating plants for healthy drinks. He has known Claire’s father in the past. He hands over to Claire – but she is generally disagreeable, reserved, rather indolent. (This is especially highlighted by the character of Annabelle (Olivia Nardini), a hyperactive swimmer, Claire’s fan, with bursts of hysterical enthusiasm.) The two central characters are Liam (Daniel Needs), an agreeable medical student who loves swimming, attracted to Claire, but very disappointed in her – and, thank goodness, challenging her in her attitudes, especially towards coaching. The other character is Mikayla (Laura Esposito), a former rival, and they find themselves sharing a room which adds to Claire’s hostile feelings. One doesn’t need to be a prophet to appreciate what is going to happen – its going along with what happens on the way that is the important part of the film. Will the team win the national competition…?!! NETFLIX STREAMING ALL TOGETHER NOW US, 2020, 92 minutes, Colour. Auli'i Cravalho, Rhenzy Feliz, Carol Burnett, Justina Machado, Judy Reyes, Anthony Jacques, Gerald Isaac Waters, Taylor Richardson, Fred Arneson, C.S.Lee. Directed by Brett Haley. Is there was to be an audience classification for All Together Now, it would be: recommended for older teen and younger teen audiences. It is also has strong appeal for female audiences. Amber Appleton is an enterprising young teen. She is played with vivacious energy by Auli’i Cravalho who supplied the voice and the singing for Disney’s Moana. She lives in Portland, Oregon, goes to school, but is highly energetic and does a number of jobs, including at a diner and work at a home for the elderly. Her father is dead and her mother has taken up with a violent boyfriend. She and her mother, who is a local bus driver, spend many a night camped in the bus depot, in the buses. Amber also has a number of friends, a motley array who drive to school together. She also has another friend and admirer, Ty, from a wealthy family. So, in the first part of the film, we are asked to identify with Amber and all her energy, her friends, her enterprise in arranging the school annual review (to raise money for school cause – this time to buy trombone for the school band). Older audiences will enjoy one of the elderly characters in the home. She is played by Carol Burnett, in her mid 80s at the time of filming. She is acerbic as ever, a crusty old lady, continually sparring with Amber.

It is in the middle of the film, that it becomes more dramatic, with the death of Amber’s mother and boyfriend in a car accident. Amber is bereft, the audience seeing, as do her friends, that while she is generous to a fault, she has and unable to accept help from others. She had been invited to do an audition in Pittsburgh, the plane ticket had bought, but she cancels and withdraws. This is heightened by her beloved dog becoming sick and the price at the vets for surgery is prohibitive. She takes on even more jobs. There is a moral to this story, of course, that we should be able to accept kindness from others no matter how generous we are in helping those in need. The friends band together, Ty persuades her to come to the school review, everyone performing, including a group of older Korean- American ladies and their priest chaplain whom Amber had been helping with language studies as well as singing. And, the appeal for the review is to raise money for her dog’s surgery. And, as Amber recovers a happy outlook on life, there is an extraordinary donation. Audiences won’t be the least bit surprised when they find out who the donor is – and why. A happy ending. A hopeful ending. CRIMINES DE FAMILIA/ THE CRIMES THAT BIND. Celia Roth, Miguel Angel Sola, Benjamin Amedeo, Yanina Avila, Paola Barrientos, Sofia Gala Castiglioine. Directed by Sebastian Schindel. The Spanish-language title focuses on the crimes of the family, family ties – and ties that bind. However, for the most part, the crimes actually force members of the family apart. But, surprisingly by the end, there is some binding and reconciliation for some. At the centre of the film is the mother of the family, Alicia, Spanish actress in Almodovar films, Cecilia Roth. The audience first sees her at aerobics, with her affluent friends. She is not a sympathetic character, arrogant in her manner, yet very tender in her looking after the little boy, the son of the maid, Gladys, a woman who is reserved and does not speak much. The film is very much a focus on Alicia, her devotion to her son whom she had spoilt, wanting to get him out of prison at any cost, hostile towards his wife and her testifying against him. In terms of crimes, there are two major crimes, and two court cases, a lot of time spent in the courts, the role of the judges in Argentina, defence counsel, the attorney for the prosecution who has the opportunity to ask most of the questions of witnesses as well is the accused. The first court case is that of Alicia’s son Daniel, who gives an impassioned account of himself, quite emotional, justifying all that has been done to him, his failure in business, his continued need for money, dependence on his family, his marrying his wife, the birth of their child, his drug dependence, his suspicions of his wife’s behaviour. Later in the trial, his wife has the opportunity to give her side of the story, quite impassioned, and quite different from that of her husband. The second court case is that of Gladys, accused of murder of a relative – the audience has seen the corridor in the house, the closed door to the bathroom, the sight of blood, a mop, but

is not sure what has happened. Gladys is inarticulate, reticent, but, ultimately, linking the two cases as to the behaviour of Alicia’s son and his stealing money and his sexual assault on Gladys. Alicia wants a lawyer who will pay bribes to get her son out of jail, even selling the house, and alienating her husband who leaves. She succeeds with her son – only to find out the truth, a transforming experience, the realisation that she has two grandsons and her taking steps towards reconciliation. In fact, a lot happens and 99 minutes – and it takes time afterwards to absorb Alicia’s experience and her change. PROJECT POWER US, 2020, hundred and 13 minutes, Colour. Jamie Foxx, Joseph Gordon- Leavitt, Dominique Fishback, Rodrigo Santoro, Amy Landecker, Courtney B Vance, Colson Baker, Kyana Simone Simpson. Directed by Henry Joost, Ariel Schulman. What seems like a superhero epic is not quite! This is a futuristic story where unscrupulous scientists have been developing pills, medication with extraordinary transforming powers. They can be for the good, if timing is right for the duration, for enabling those who take the pills to use their power for good. On the other hand, they can be addictive and destructive. And, in desperate situations, they can be used for domination. It is interesting to note that in 2020, the archvillain of the company producing the pills is female, simply called Gardner, played by Amy Landecker. But she does have a crew of big and brutal male thugs. And, in some kind of balance, the heroine of the film is played by a young adult, female, Dominique Fishback, Robin, a school student who wants to be a rap-artist. The setting is New Orleans, a focus on the marketing of the drugs illegally, a ship in the port with huge supplies, young people taking up the challenge (although, to make the point, singer Colson Baker, playing an eager dealer, takes one of the pills and is immediately destroyed spectacularly). On the other hand, Robin has been dealing, and is building up a cache of cash to help her ailing mother. Also in the action is one of the local police, played by Joseph Gordon- Leavitt, who is prepared to take the pills in order to achieve it in his police work, but always careful to check the timing so that it will keep the effect of the power under control. The other principal character, also an African- American, Jamie Foxx as a military man who has been trained in action but also manifesting special powers. His daughter has inherited them and she has been into abducted by the pill manufacturers. So, the action is set, after some suspicions, the hero team of the soldier, the policeman, the would-be rap artist, go into action to confront the criminals, rescue the soldier’s daughter –

with the use of wit, brawn, shrewd action (and with the policeman, some pills and power). Needless to say, after quite some spectacular action on the ship, all is well – or, at least, almost, some self-sacrifice being necessary. Obviously geared to fans of this kind of action: some have enjoyed it, some have said it is the same-old, same-old. So, one might say, it is geared to those who have a tolerance of this kind of story and action. ORIGINES SECRETOS/ UNKNOWN ORIGINS Spain, 2020, 96 minutes, Colour. Javier Rey, Brays Efe, Veronica Echegui, Antonio Resines, Ernesto Aleterio, Alex Garcia, Leonardo Sbaraglia. Directed by David Galan Galindo. In his novel, The Never Game, Jeffrey Deaver has his hero visit a diner in Silicon Valley, all the young customers bent over laptops – and he makes the comment “exuding geek”. One of them takes him to a huge gaming centre, more geek. A quick review of Unknown Origins: highly recommended for geeks. And, not just for those who are gamers, who know the tradition of popular comics, graphic novels, details of characters and plot incidents, like to dress up as characters for conventions or parties, but as a guilty pleasure for those who are familiar with the DC World and the Marvel Universe through the movies. At the opening, there is a sequence of real heroism, a policeman going back into a fire to rescue those trapped and dying in the attempt. That is not quite the image of heroism that follows. The dead man’s father, however, is a skilled veteran, forced into retirement, with terminal cancer. His boss, Norma, is an absolutely dedicated fan of super heroism and dressing up, even skilled at making costumes. The policeman’s son is Jorge, an absolute nerd, looking and acting like a young Jack Black, running a specialist store with all kinds of superhero memorabilia. He is asked by his father to accompany the new investigator, a particularly buttoned up, suit and tie, policeman, David. So far, so geeky. However, the film goes into quite some higher gears, continually revving up as it progresses, some ghastly (understatement) murders with comic book-reference clues which Jorge can interpret. They are all based on comics which portray the origins of their hero. It is all a bit much for David – but, he reveals that his parents were shot as they came out of the cinema and he witnessed their deaths (and we pat ourselves on the backs when we make the Wayne family connection and the possibility for David to be a Batman equivalent.) There are several visits to the morgue, quite some analysis of what went on by the rather jocose mortician, all kinds of suggestions and theories for what has happened. There is also an oddball cameo from celebrated actor Leonardo Sbaraglia as a black market entrepreneur in comics and superhero memorabilia. So, with suspected villains to be tracked down, there is a challenge to David, especially to

avenge his parents. Will he do this in suit and tie? The villain wants him to don a costume and to give himself a comic book name. All building up to a climax involving the veteran policeman who solves the mystery, Norma and Jorge who have to let David do his avenging thing. The screenplay draws its characters credibly enough within this fantasy detective world. While the film is laced with humorous references, especially some Batman jokes, it opts for broad humour, pratfalls and farce, rather than indulge in subtlety. THE SLEEPOVER US, 2020, 100 minutes, Colour. Sadie Stanley, Maxwell Simkins, Cree Cicchino, Lucas Jaye, Malin Akerman, Ken Marino, Joe Manganiello, Harry Aspinwall, Erik Griffin, Karla Souza, Matthew Grimaldi. Directed by Trish Sie. So, it’s going to be one of those nice films where teenage girls enjoy each other’s company on a sleepover. Well, no, not exactly, not even exactly. In fact, this is something of a comic romp, a kids’ own adventure that does take place overnight but, sleep is out of the question. (It is something of a surprise when a number of bloggers criticise the film for its lack of credibility – they seem to have missed the whole point that this is adventure, exaggerated adventure, not the least bit realistic, but highly imaginative and entertaining.) The children, two boys, two girls, are quite young. Sadie Stanley is Clancy, the leader while Maxwell Simkins plays Kevin her somewhat roly-poly younger brother who is mischievous, extroverted, a dancer and a performer. Along for the adventure is Clancy’s friend, Mim (Cree Cicchino) who can be quite assertive but finds some of the adventures rather overwhelming. And then there is little Lewis (Lucas Jaye), Kevin’s friend, but who has a protective mother, ultra-protective in her rules which she has inculcated in Lewis. Then comes the twist which is key to the whole film. Margot (Malin Akerman), Clancy and Kevin’s mother, is revealed as being in witness protection, something which shocks her baker husband, Ron (Ken Marino). And this all happens because Margot’s partners from the past, and she has been a successful thief. running with a pack of thieves, want her to participate in a robbery in Boston. Ron is amazed when they meet Leo (Joe Manganiello) who was in love with well not Margot, as it turns out, but with Matilda. Long story short - because those who would enjoy this kind of romp need actually to see it rather than hear about it. The kids become involved in all kinds of hijinks to discover the clues as to where their mother is, what the robbery consists of. And, of course, in the meantime, there is the robbery itself, at a very fashionable reception, Ron making a fool of himself with false accent accompanying Margot and Leo as a Belgian count and his wife. The writers must have enjoyed themselves working out all kinds of impossible situations – even to Kevin and the others gatecrashing the reception, his directing a cacophony as the kids played instruments but Clancy saving the situation by a performance on the viola.

And, towards the end, there is, at last, a car chase but this time the goodies chasing the baddy! Actually, if parents watch The Sleepover with their family, there is probably quite enough to keep the younger generation entertained and some bonus enjoyable bits for the adults.

SIGNIS REVIEWS OCTOBER 2020

DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: A LIFE ON OUR PLANET

FOUR KIDS AND IT

LEADERSHIP, The

MISS JUNETEENTH

MISS FISHER AND THE CRYPT OF TEARS

ON THE ROCKS

SECRETS WE KEEP, The

SPREE

SPUTNIK

NETFLIX RELEASES

BINDING, The/ IL LEGAME

BOYS IN THE BAND, The

CUTIES/ MIGNONNES

DEVIL ALL THE TIME, The

ENOLA HOLMES

FREAKS… YOU’RE ONE OF US

LOVE GUARANTEED

PARAMEDIC, The/ EL PRATICANTE

ROMANCE ON THE MENU

SOCIAL DILEMMA, The

VAMPIRES vs THE BRONX

DAVID ATTENBOROUGH: A LIFE ON OUR PLANET US, 2020, 83 minutes, Colour. Directed by Alastair Fothergill, Jonathan Hughes, Keith Scholey.

David Attenborough is acknowledged the world over as a key consciousness-raiser about life on our planet, on the significance of biodiversity, on the threats to nature in the 21st-century.

He describes this documentary, encompassing his whole life and mission, as his witness statement. He is now 94. And so the film could rightly be called his last will and testament – his bequeathing to his vast audiences an enthusiasm for mission, to contribute to and work for a better life on our planet.

The David Attenborough we see during this film is not just the venerable octogenarian from recent television programs, now in his 90s. Many sequences from his past have been incorporated here, the enthusiastic explorer setting out in the 1950s, the intrepid visitor to every part of the planet, the powerful yet inviting presence on our television screens.

However, it does offer something of a shock as the film opens when we see the explorer wandering through the remnants of Chernobyl. Here was destruction, poor management, human error and the abandoning of the city. Here was a touch of earth apocalypse at the end of the 20th century. But it turns out that this is a shrewd opening because this is where David Attenborough all the chooses to end his story – back at Chernobyl, but not walking through ruined buildings, but showing the extraordinary natural growth that has occurred since the 1980s, the range of trees and foliage, animals returning to the site, nature regenerating.

Throughout the film there is a chart, indicating world populations from the 1930s to the present, the percentage of carbon in the air, the continually diminishing statistic about wilderness remaining in the world. There is sombre sequences of rainforest clearing, especially in Borneo, and the substitution of palm oil. But David Attenborough, despite the losses he has experienced over 60 or more years, is still a man of hope. And, in that vein, he invites us to relive with him some of his exciting experiences, his charmed experiences, showing as beautiful visuals on land, on sea, in the sea, in the air, the wonders of biodiversity on and in our planet.

David Attenborough is a man of moral stature, a celebrity that the world has welcomed over many years, a man who has invited a world audience to share his passion – and, in this witness statement, in this will and testimony, invites us to continue to share and promote his passion into the future.

FOUR KIDS AND IT

UK, 2020, 110 minutes, Colour. Teddie- Rose Malleson, Ashley Aufderheide, Matthew Goode, Paula Patton, Billy Jenkins, Ellie- Mae Siame, Russell Brand, voice of Michael Caine. Directed by Andy de Emmonny.

Definitely a film for a younger audience. A question is how well will older children identify with the two girls at the centre of the story, Ros (Teddie - Rose Malleson and, British) and Samantha, known as Smash (Ashley Aufderheide, American). Smash comes across often as the wilful and spoilt brat. Ros can be disagreeable in a quietly British way. However, we know that by the end of the film they are going to be friends. The little brother and sister, Robbie, British, and Maudie, American, are much more agreeable.

Actually, the title will remind readers of children’s books and those who saw the 2005 film, Five Children and It, based on the E.Nesbitt story, will soon find that this is, quite simply, a variation on the original book. Four children this time, two parents, and the It, a rather playful small creature, who lives in the sand, swimming, burrowing, collecting all kinds of offerings and storing them in the sand, Psammead – and, for parents watching and listening, quite a surprise that, when Psammead speaks, it sounds like Michael Caine with all his voice and intonations. And it is.

The background of the film is that the British father, David, played by Matthew Goode, is looking after his children because his wife has left them to go to find herself in university life. For the American mother, Alice, Paula Patton, her husband has left her and has taken up life in the Seychelles. When both families arrive at the same destination, for a holiday in Cornwall, the two girls discover to their dismay that the parents have been seeing each other and that this is an experiment to see how well they get on.

The two girls don’t. However, down on the beach, Psammead makes itself known, stealing things, pulling them under the sand. However, he is a pleasant creature and his gift is to grant one wish per day, ending at sunset. Which means then for the delight of the children’s audience, there are the stories of the wishes, Robbie wishing he could climb a cliff and enjoying himself clambering over the rocks and the heights. Smash wishes she could be a rock star, the other children getting a helicopter ride to London, seeing her perform, the adulation of the crowd, and everything evaporating at sunset and the difficulty of getting back home. Maudie would like to fly and the children have a kind of Peter Pan experience. Ros, on the other hand, would like to go back into the past, so there is excursion to 1920.

Naturally, there has to be a villain. This time it is an eccentric in a local Manor, played by Russell Brand, in a very Russell Brand in-your-face kind of way. Ultimately, he has wishes as well – and, as we might expect, while he gets his wishes, they also end at sunset!

The children wish things could go back to what they were and that is the temptation of a wish. But, this is the kind of story that needs a happy ending – and the final wish is a generous one and all’s well that ends well.

(Jacqueline Wilson, the author of this book, has a cameo experience during the credits where she is amongst those lined up to get her book, written by Ros, to be signed by the author.)

Not sure whether the adult audiences will like this film is much as the children will.

THE LEADERSHIP

Australia, 2020, 97 minutes, Colour.

Fabian Dattner.

Directed by Ili Bare.

A must for women. A must for men.

This is an interesting and challenging documentary, written and directed by Ili Bare who has had a successful career in making television documentaries. Here she collaborates with entrepreneur, Fabian Datner, who had been CEO of a clothing company but had moved on to encouraging women in careers.

With this collaboration, The Leadership can be seen as a must for a women’s audience. With the social and financial inequalities in the workplace and in companies between women and men, the film offers a great number of depressing and saddening statistics, The Leadership can be classed as an important must for a male audience. The focus is on STEMM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, Medicine) as striking areas of the inequality.

Fabian Datner created a program, Homewood Bound. It involved advertising for 76 places on a voyage to Antarctica, setting out from Patagonia. The places were all for women but achievement criterion was their professional involvement in science. (The ship’s crew was male – and there were men in the facilitator group.)

There is a play on words in the title of the film, highlighted when the title comes on, an initial focus on leader, then the inclusion of ship. This is a voyage for leadership training and learning.

The structure of the film enables continued interest on the part of the audience. First of all, there is a voyage to Antarctica, striking cinematography of the sea, of the snowclad landmass, of the islands and icebergs, close-ups of penguins, sea-leopard, whales, the participants able to get closer during motorboat expeditions. These sequences are intercut with the details of the 21 day voyage.

And the film continues its interest with a range of talking heads. Fabian Datner is able to give the background to the voyage, her intentions, the progress of the course, the discovery of limits in her communication with the women. There is also a strong range of women from different backgrounds, from Australia, the US, France, China… The women speak quite powerfully, personally and intimately, of their science ambitions and careers, frustrations, of sexual harassment and even assault. They speak well and convince us that they should be listened to. (Included are some enthusiastic male testimonies from colleagues.)

And the third strand throughout the film are the sessions of the course itself. They certainly focus on affirmation, on surfacing hardships and frustrations, the need for proper self-acknowledgement and the consequences. Included in the film are some sessions of frustration on the part of the women passengers themselves, and criticisms of various sessions and of Fabian Datner’s personal style (with sequences, especially the end at her Melbourne home, where she reflects on the voyage and her own styles of communication and leadership). There is added tension when an article appears about the voyage and one of the crew harassing one of the passengers.

Which means that while the voyage was a significant success and important for women, for women from the science fields, to be together, to communicate, to learn, to work together, there are significant directions established for the next Homewood Bound voyage.

And, of course, this challenge must be extended to the worlds of government, business, the churches and religious groups, and other male-dominated organisations.

MISS FISHER AND THE CRYPT OF TEARS Australia, 2020, 101 minutes, Colour. Essie Davis, Nathan Paige, Rupert Penry-Jones, Miriam Margolyes, Daniel Lapaine, Jacqueline McKenzie, Izabella Yena, Kal Naga, John Waters, John Stanton, Ian Bliss, William Zappa. Directed by Tony Tilse.

There were 34 episodes of Miss Phryne Fisher and her cases on Australian television. They were popular. She was popular. She was played by Essie Davis (The Babadook, The True Story of the Kelly Gang), a particularly strong and dominant character, involved in all kinds of detection, and something of a fashion plate.

Perhaps it was inevitable that there would be an attempt to capitalise on her presence on the big screen. Unfortunately, this film was not a critical success and many found it disappointing. However, it provided entertainment for many of the fans of the series.

This adventure opens with a veiled Miss Fisher, being pursued through the streets of Jerusalem – plenty of action in her exploits and, with a lot of derring-do, weapons, ability to fight, skill in escaping, the Indiana Jones comparison comes to the fore. However, looking for a female equivalent in the

action hero genre, the main character who comes to mind is Lara Croft – and, even at the end, some tomb-raiding.

As with the series, the action takes place in the 1920s, memories of World War I, sufficiently glamorous in the flapper age to rely on eye-catching costumes and decor, especially the outfits that Miss Fisher seems to have readily at hand.

The plot involves a Sheikh, his missing niece, memories of the massacre in her village and the death of her mother, eventually the revelation of the theft of jewels from ancient tombs. The initial chase action keeps pace with Miss Fisher being grilled by authorities in Jerusalem, springing the niece from jail, motorbike through the desert, a Butch Cassidy and Sundance leap onto the roof of a moving train, a grim tunnel… And the report coming that Miss Fisher had been killed. A detective love, Jack (Nathan Page) is seen in Melbourne but deciding to go to London for a memorial to her. Friends and family are assembled, with some glimpses of Aunt Prudence (Miriam Margolyes) and a spectacular gatecrashing entry by Miss Fisher, landing her plane on the lawn where the memorial ceremony is taking place.

There are a number of mysterious characters. There are a number of mysterious killings. Members of a family are involved in the mystery of the jewels, especially the rather alcoholic and disreputable Lord Lofthouse (Daniel Lapaine) and his wife (Jacqueline McKenzie) and the much more respectable brother, Jonathon (Rupert Penry-Jones). But, it is back to Jerusalem, the visit to the crypt and the revelation of the mystery.

There are some cameos by veteran Australian actors, John Waters as a professor in Jerusalem, John Stanton as a prim butler, William Zappa as a police chief.

The screenplay was written by Deb Cox, veteran of the series but also a wide range of television series, directed by Tony Tilse who also has an extensive list of credits for television and cinema.

MISS JUNETEENTH

US, 2020, 99 minutes, Colour. Nicole Beharie, Alexis Chikaeze, Kendrick Sampson, Lori Hayes, Marcus M Mauldin, Liz Mikel. Directed by Channing Godfrey Peoples.

A prospective audience looking at the title for this film might think it is a misprint. But it is not.

Fortunately, the explanation comes early in the film – and quite an interesting explanation, important for African-Americans and their history, the ending of slavery, slaves in Texas, their getting the application of the abolition of slavery two years late, June 19th 1865. And, in Texas, a commemorative celebration, especially with a pageant, a beauty pageant for the teenage girls at school, their aspiring to be Queen of the pageant, wearing the crown, Miss Juneteenth.

This is very much an African-American story (only a few small roles for white actors). It will certainly appeal to its target audience and, one hopes, will be seen by the wider American audience. For audiences beyond the United States, it is something of a curiosity item, a reminder of American slavery and abolition, and the situation of the African-American communities in contemporary Texas towns.

It is also a film about mother-daughter relationships and, this is one of its great strengths. Turquoise (Nicole Beharie a strong screen presence) was Miss Juneteenth 15 years earlier (but she still has the crown and the pageant dress in her wardrobe). She has a number of jobs, an assistant manager at a diner, cleaning the toilets, serving customers… And she has skills in cosmetic preparation of the deceased at the local funeral home. Her life is not quite what she imagined.

However, her whole attention is given to her daughter, Kai (Alexis Chikaeze Wrenn, about to turn 15. As we might expect, Turquoise gives all her attention to Kai, preparations for the pageant, saving for a dress, paying the deposit, the text of the poem that she recited and hopes her daughter will recite. There is a husband in the background, Ronnie, whom she loves, but is unreliable, comes and goes, not a great financial support, getting himself in trouble with the law.

Kai is a genial young girl who loves her mother but, as with girls that age, clashes with her mother’s expectations and discipline. However, she prepares very seriously for the competition.

The narrative consists mainly of episodes, Turquoise and Ronnie and their love and their clashes, the attentions of the manager of the funeral parlour, Turquoise looking disapprovingly at Kai’s friends and Kai and her rap and dancing, and relying on her phone, the manager of the diner having a heart attack, visits to the hospital, a social to raise money for his hospital expenses…

And, there are scenes of the Juneteenth celebration, processions and floats in the street, the rehearsals for the competition (and Turquoise unable to pay for Kai’s dress) and the performance of the contestants, Kai wrapping and dancing rather than reading the poem – and her mother’s acceptance.

And, fortunately, an ending, not quite what we were anticipating, but happily upbeat.

ON THE ROCKS US, 2020, 96 minutes, Colour. Rashida Jones, Bill Murray,) Marlon Wayans, Jenny Slate, Jessica Henwood, Barbara Bain. Directed by Sofia Coppola.

On the Rocks could indicate a glass of scotch. On the Rocks, on the other hand, could be a marriage in danger. While Bill Murray’s character in this film enjoys more than a drink or two, the subject of On the Rocks is a marriage in trouble.

The film has been written and directed by Sofia Coppola, from the film-making Coppola family (with a final credit including mum and dad), and it is very much a woman’s perspective. Sofia Coppola has

experienced a divorce. She has been married again since 2011 and has two children. It is clear that she knows what she is talking about – but, there is an extraordinary warmth in her creation of her central character, Laura, and a wonderful relationship between mother and daughters.

The early sequences, marriage and honeymoon, are full of zest and enthusiasm. There is a collage, of the early years, the birth of the first child, then the birth of the second, and then plunging into the realities and routines of everyday life, at home, the older child going to school, ordinary life, comfortable life, in New York City.

Laura is played with great warmth by Rashida Jones.

Yes, we have seen Dean (Marlon Wayans), loving husband, but very busy about creating a company, away from home, travelling a great deal, but isn’t this a phenomenon of many marriages?

The trouble comes when Laura’s father, Felix, Bill Murray, comes back into his daughter’s life. He is 70ish, more than a touch of the past playboy, having walked out on his wife, travelling extensively, and now being chauffeur driven around the city. He still has an eye for women and articulates his evolutionary theories about a man’s attraction to a woman. At first, the audience accept him, and Laura is lovingly genial taunts him though not without reminding him of his irresponsible past. He starts to sow the seeds of suspicion about Dean.

At this stage of her life and marriage, preoccupied with her children, writer’s block about her work at home, feeling the absence of her husband, she is susceptible towards her father’s suggestions (as the audience is as well). What follows is a series of mean suggestions from Felix, his having Dean followed, seemingly providing the evidence that Dean might be having an affair with his associate, innuendo about Dean’s neglect, and even persuading Laura to go on and excursion which ultimately falls flat on its face. Laura realises, as does the audience, that Felix is drawing on his own bad behaviour from the past and nastily extrapolating it on to Dean.

But the question does remain for a long time for Laura and the audience about Dean, innocent or not.

The film has quite a lot of dialogue, especially conversations between father and daughter, a lot of incidental episodes which build up quite a picture of each of them, symbolic in Laura’s name after the song in the 1944 thriller, Laura, and Laura’s inability to whistle.

In many ways, On the Rocks explores the triumph of niceness over nastiness.

THE SECRETS WE KEEP

US, 2020, 97 minutes, Colour. Noomi Rapace, Joel Kinnaman, Chris Messina, Amy Siemetz, Scott Jackson Dean Vincent. Directed by Yuval Adler.

The secrets of this title come from experiences at the end of World War II, German soldiers, drunk, assaulting a group of Gypsy women at the time of the liberation of a camp. However, these are seen in rather shadowy flashbacks throughout the film.

The setting is the late 1950s, the US. We see a typical town of the period, homes, doctors’ offices, shops. There is also a huge industrial plant. So far, so ordinary US.

The audience is introduced to Maja (Noomi Rapace), the wife of the local doctor. They have a son. Her story is that she came from Romania, was liberated from the camp, met her husband, Lewis, a doctor (Chris Messina) and she goes with him to the United States. However, it emerges that she has been very edgy, has been having nightmares, consulting a psychiatrist. The way the film indicates her edginess is through her continued heavy smoking.

One day, she notices a stranger and is suspicious. When she sees him again, she follows him, sees that he works in the factory, is married with three children.

By this time, the audience will realise what is happening. She suspects him of being one of the German soldiers who assaulted her and killed her sister. She is vengeful, wants to confront him, to destroy him – but she also wants to know whether, in the confusion of the assault, she abandoned her sister and ran away.

In many films, this kind of scenario becomes highly dramatic, political. While these elements are here, most of the action takes place in the basement of the house, Maja dragging her husband into what she has done, his bewilderment in not knowing the full story in the past, disapproving of what she has done, but yet compliant.

The main drama of the film is the gradual expose of the secrets – but, more, whether Maja remembers the events properly, whether she has identified the correct assailant, whether she is emotionally and psychologically confused. And, with the holding of the man, who says he is Swiss and worked in an office during the war (Joel Kinnaman), the question is whether he is guilty or whether he is in innocent and a mistaken victim.

As counterbalance to the intensity in the basement and the search for the truth, Maja goes to visit his wife, befriends her, her son happily playing with the daughters, a whole lot of domestic scenes – some genuine warmth between the two women but mile all the time Maja searching for clues as to the truth and identity of her husband.

Dramatically, the truth, about which the audience was uncertain, does emerge with quite some emotional power. However, in the last 15 minutes there is quite another dramatic twist which makes the resolution of the story even more difficult and challenging.

The film was directed by Israeli director, Yuval Adler, who made the 2013 film, Bethlehem, about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as well is the espionage 2019 film, The Operative.

SPREE US, 2020, 93 minutes, Colour. Joe Keery, Sasheer Zamara, David Arquette, Kyle Mooney, Mischa Barton, Frankie Grande, Joshua Valle. Directed by Eugene Kotlyarenko.

In 1963 there was a comedy movie, It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World. Almost 60 years on, after watching Spree, we would think: It’s a Madder, Madder, Madder, Madder World. It’s a world where the central character tells us right from the beginning, ‘if your life is not documented, you don’t exist’.

Here we are plunged, along with the central character, Kurt (Joe Keery) into a world where the virtual world takes pre-eminence. Kurt does live in a real world (questioning the meaning of ‘live’), drives the equivalent of an Uber car, picking up passengers, but it is only a context for a virtual world. He has several cameras in his car, looks to camera all the time, speaks to camera more than to his customers, has organised his site, KurtsWorld 96 (the year he was born) to be streamed by a friend, Bobby, whom he babysat years ago. Bobby is an entrepreneur, gives Kurt a go, but throughout the day becomes increasingly impatient with Kurt, so few people watching him, deciding to cut him off – but Kurt literally cuts him.

So, how are we reacting to Spree? Especially when we realise that Kurt is on a spree of killing his passengers?

If we are an older demographic, we are probably put off, puzzled about Kurt and his narcissistic preoccupations, his growing sociopathic behaviour, his need for acknowledgement, “not just admirers but “followers” and, until his behaviour becomes more outlandish, their lack of recognition for him.

For a younger demographic, Kurt’s world is approximating to a real world, the world of social media, the world of being preoccupied with what is on a screen rather than in reality, spending te whole day so screen-focused, a communication by tweets (sometimes hero-worship, otherwise just trolling), an assumption that this is how life is and will be into the future.

There are some dramatic moments for those who need drama (as does this reviewer), some strange cases in the fares he picks up, a self-important racist speaker, a young strutter who thinks he is God’s gift to everyone, some thrill-seekers looking for more than a trip. But, more interestingly, there is also a stand-up comedian, Jessie, who escapes from Kurt, uses him in her stand-up routine (streamed to thousands of followers), is critical of him – and, ironically, becomes his fare later in the film. It is she who confronts him – but he has no lessons to learn. This is his life.

Kurt is a celebrity in his own mind. But he craves more recognition, more followers. He is always camera-ready. But, no actual social skills. Many of the followers think he is boring and he and they want to build up to more excitement. Real life is considered trivial. The value of life depends on the number of likes.

Ironically, the title for Jessie’s act is ‘All Eyes on Me’.

So, an emotional jolter. A great deal of challenge (but the fear that many audiences may well be identifying with Kurt and his dreams and goals).

The makers enjoy more irony with the song over the final credits, endowing it with different meaning, “I will follow him…

I will follow him, follow him wherever he may go There isn't an ocean too deep A mountain so high it can keep me away. (As long as there is a signal in the mountains.)

SPUTNIK

Russia, 2020, 113 minutes, Colour. Oksana Akinshina, Pyotr Fyodorov, Fedor Bondarshuk, Anton Vasili. Directed Egor Abramenko.

Older audiences will remember the first probes into space by the Russians, the flight of Sputnik in 1957. Most audiences will remember that there was a long tradition, prior to the Americans, of missions into space, and in the 1960s, the flight of Yuri Gagarin. This film begins in that vein.

All seems normal. Two veterans are returning to earth at the conclusion of their mission. There is tension as well as anticipation of their arrival home. One a family man, the other, the leader of the mission conscious that he has abandoned his young son in order to train and go on the mission. Suddenly, red lights, a malfunction, landing in Kazakhstan, and death and a seriously ill astronaut. Where will this go?

Then, the introduction to the central character, a risk-taking nurse, called before a tribunal to be condemned for her unorthodox methods (even though they succeeded). And the connection? She is met by a colonel who invites her to an elaborate facility in the countryside.

The characters begin to come together, Tatyana invited by the colonel to examine Konstantin, the astronaut, who seems physically well at times, quite unwell at other times – and the screenplay then moves into Alien territory, science-fiction, alien intrusion and taking over humans with dire results.

For those who enjoy this kind of science-fiction, there are some grim and gory moments, but, in Russian mode, it is all to be taken very seriously. How to treat Konstantin? To enable him to remember what had happened in the spacecraft, the use of hypnosis to which he is resistant, Tatyana’s examination and conclusions, the role of doctors, the need for tight security guards, the intentions of the colonel in charge of the process (jingoistic, the alien a possible weapon).

For some audiences, this will be quite absorbing. For others, it may be an experience of simply observing. However, as the revelations continue, there is certainly an invitation for audiences to become involved, as does Tatyana. This is particularly true with some of the revelations of what the colonel is up to in terms of experimentation with the Alien. And, it is interesting how Konstantin is the home for the Alien, it protruding from his mouth, seeking prey, but the astronaut and the alien physically and psychologically connected, sharing and identity.

So, here is a Russian perspective on popular space and monster films of recent decades, tension and drama, some grim moments, but all presented very seriously – no irony, no light touches. And, finally, a shift from scientific observation to a humane involvement, Tatyana and her care for Konstantin but his future thwarted.

NETFLIX RELEASES

IL LEGAME/ THE BINDING Italy, 2020, 93 minutes, Colour. Riccardo Scarmacio, Mia Maestro, Giulia Patrignani, Mariella Lo Sardo, Federica Rossellini, Raffaella D' Avella. Directed by Domenico Emmanuelle De Feudis.

The Binding is a contemporary horror film, capitalising on the atmosphere of southern Italy, its people, its traditions, superstitions. It is also something of a throwback to the Italian thrillers of the 1970s and 80s, the work of such directors as Dario Argento, Mario Bava.

In many ways, the narrative is fairly straightforward although there is a prologue where a woman screams, and group are participating in a ritual, the cutting of the woman’s back, her blood, and her looking into the mirror and the mirror cracking. This will be explained later in the film.

Riccardo Scarmachio is Francesco, bringing his fiancee Emma, Mia Maestro, with her young daughter, Sofia, Giulia Patrignani, to his ancestral home and to meet his mother. Needless to say, she appears somewhat sinister as does her close friend who lives in the house. On the one hand, the interior of the house is dark with a creepy atmosphere. On the other hand, while there is a cheerful meal outside, some of the action takes place in the woods, ancient trees, some trees dug up.

The house is cursed and the curse falls on the daughter, bitten by a tarantula, treated with potions, caught up in the atmosphere of the old trees, the family dog, becoming worse, her mother trying to escape with her but the car crashing.

The last part of the film is the ritual, Sofia and her being the victim, Emma becoming more involved, believing in the superstitions, participating in the rituals – and some healing when the blood flowing from Sofia on the floor combines with that of the blood of her mother. As with this kind of film, when it seems to be a resolution, there is a final growl from the ghost and a shudder – the curse continues.

THE BOYS IN THE BAND

US, 2020, 121 minutes, Colour. Jim Parsons, Zachary Quinto, Matt Bomer, Andrew Rannells, Charlie Carver, Robin de Jesus, Brian Hutchison, Michael Benjamin Washington, Tuc Watkins. Directed by Joe Mantello.

The Boys and the Band was a celebrated drama of 1968, written by Mart Crowley, a venture into gay themes, not to the fore in mainstream American theatre the time. It proceeded the Stonewall demonstrations of the next year. AIDS was more than a decade away. Then a film version was made

in 1970, directed by William Friedkin. It was a signal that gay themes would emerge in American cinema during the ensuing decades – and, of course, beyond.

Here is a remake which keeps close to the play and to the first film version – and, interesting to realise, that this first film version was released before all but two of the present cast was born. They have worked together, an overtly gay cast and Dir, with theatre presentations of the play in 2018, winning the Tony for Best Revival of a Play, and now the performances and the drama are on the screen.

Audience perspectives have changed powerfully over the half century between the two versions.

In many ways, The Boys in the Band could be described as a drama of the gay male psyche – especially in Western cultures. The film and its treatment would still be under suspicion (or even ban) in a number of other cultures and religious traditions.

The two-hour running time is divided almost equally in two parts. The first part, as might be expected, introduces all the characters, the screenplay opened out for street scenes, subway scenes, their characteristics and eccentricities, each of them as individuals, but their all gathering for a party, a birthday party, for their friend Harold, at the apartment of their host, Michael. The initial focus is on Michael, played by Jim Parsons, sympathetic but fussy, harried and caught with a problem when his roommate (Brian Hutchison) from college days phones and wants to call in. As the guests arrive, some of them quite flamboyant in manner and camp style, the audience has time to get to know them, begin to like them or dislike them, and get caught up in quite some embarrassment as the friend actually turns up and is repelled by some of the camp behaviour, leading to a fight, but the friend deciding to stay.

Just when the audience might be wondering where this could all be going and, perhaps, already finding it a bit repetitious in the behaviour of the characters, the guest of honour, Harold arrives. He is played with intensity by Zachary Quinto (looking and acting in a very similar way to Leonard Frey in the original film). He dominates. He is idiosyncratically supercilious. He is mysterious.

Then the change in tone and the film becomes much stronger. It moves in the vein of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf and other dramas where assembled party guests are invited to play the psychological game of Get the Guest. Michael is drinking, becomes exceedingly mean-spirited, dares the others to phone someone and declare their love for that person. It is here that the performances, especially of the ethnic characters, Emory (Robin de Jesus) and Bernard (Michael Benjamin Washington), come into their own, very moving attempts to find someone they love. The drama is intensified by the relationship between the seeming straight man (Tuc Watkins) and his very free-spirited lover (Andrew Rannells).

It all comes to a head with Michael’s denunciation of his college friend, demanding that he ring a mutual friend from those days, forcing him to declare his love. Which is not quite what happens.

This makes the last half of the film much more interesting and powerful as drama, intensity of friendships and hatreds. And, Michael left at the end with his Catholic background, humiliated by the failure of his game as he intended, going out to Mass, some exploration of his Catholic guilt, compounded by his orientation, initially closeted, coming out, the consequences in the 1950s and 1960s.

This version is being released on Netflix, available for audiences at home – not only in Western countries and cultures but throughout the world.

MIGNONNES/ CUTIES France, 2019, 96 minutes, Colour. Fathia Youssouf, Medina El Aidi- Azouni, Esther Gohourou, Ilanan Cami - Goursolas, Myriam Hamma. Directed by Maimouna Doucoure.

This picture of 11 year old girls in France might have passed comparatively unnoticed except for the raising of controversy, labels of “perversion”… And the controversy might not have arisen except for the fact that this film has been distributed, worldwide, by Netflix. The English title does set a tone – but it is actually the name of the group that the young girls have organised for a dancing competition.

In the minds of the filmmakers, it is clear that one of the main issues is the sexualisation of girls pre-puberty. There is also the issue of clash of cultures, the girls coming from France itself as well as from Senegal. There is also the struggle of African traditions to maintain themselves in contemporary France. If one looks at the numerous comments on the Internet Movie Database, a lot of protest will be found, with words like exploitation, disgust, even suggesting the film is for “pederasts”.

Perhaps best to look at the film as a film. It is a substantial drama, focusing on children, focusing on education and school, issues of family. The film has strong performances, especially by the young Fathia Yousouf as the central character, Amy. The screenplay has many sequences of the Senegalese traditions, women and their groups, their discussions about decency, home life and respect for the elders, the training of young girls to be women in their tradition, and, to the dismay of Amy and her mother (who put on a brave face), the man of the house has decided to marry a second wife and bring her to France.

As regards the scenes at school, the dancing and the twerking, a Western audience would rather take it for granted (like the judges for the competition and some of the audience watching). However, clothes, often scanty clothes, the dancing and moves, the provocative poses, are shown to be challenges to culture and religion. What is decent? What is not? (And are the dance sequences too long and too explicit in the movies?)

And this is the context for the exploration of what is happening for 11 year old Amy. She has led a sheltered life. Her community shelters her. But, when she sees another 11-year-old dancing provocatively at the laundromat, her curiosity is aroused. She is at an impressionable age, she has moments of rebellion, she experiences her first period. She keeps her dancing secret from the family, she has to work hard to ingratiate herself into the group of peers, relishes acceptance by them, is excited by this world of greater openness and the dancing. And the point is being made that while the girls gyrate, provocative lips to mouth, like the women in magazines and on television, the girls are still rather inexperienced 11-year-olds - and are puzzled by their encounter with a condom.

For this reviewer, the ending is dramatically sudden, Amy pushing a rival into the river, avoiding her father’s wedding, putting on her dancing outfit, participating in the competition – but the sudden stopping, leaving, the audience wondering what is going on, what is motivating this change of heart.

As regards the controversy, it seems important to state that there is no limit to human experiences, no matter how difficult, even how repugnant, that cannot be the subject of art. There is no limit on what can be presented. The challenge is always in asking questions about how the material is presented, how it meets differing sensibilities (and some sensibilities do differ widely from culture to culture), differing sensitivities (age sensitivities, gender sensitivities, delicacy or crassness of sensitivities). This is evidenced in the range of comments on the IMDb, for Cuties and against it.

The film does present a world we live in, a highly sexualised media world, more sexualised behaviour, the use of social media (and, indeed, an alarming sequence of Amy with her camera and transmitting an image, which actually shocks her peers). And the film brings the realisation that these young girls behave in this way without necessarily understanding it at all.

Which means then that this is a film for mothers and teachers, for carers – and with the young girls helped by strong female sensitivity. And, fathers need to respond to films like this sharing the perspectives of their wives.

THE DEVIL ALL THE TIME US, 2020, 138 minutes, Colour. Tom Holland, Robert Pattinson, Bil Skarsgaard, Haley Bennett, Riley Keogh, Harry Melling, Sebastian Stan, Mia Wasikowska, Eliza Scanlen, Jason Clarke, Douglas Hodge. Directed by Antonio Campos.

Just in case someone looking at the title thinks that it is light, even flippant title, beware. This is quite a serious piece of Americana, taking us back to the end of World War II and the beginnings of the war in Vietnam, 1945-1965.

And, it should be said, the Devil receives only one explicit mention, one of the preachers giving a homily about Jesus and his being tested by the devil. The Devil is a tester and an accuser. However, by contrast, here are many mentions of God, quite a lot of God language throughout the film.

While the main settings are in West Virginia and adjacent parts of Ohio, somewhat isolated in those years, the film opens in the South Pacific, a group of soldiers on patrol, suddenly confronted by one of their fellow GIs impaled on a cross, bleeding and tortured, a jolting experience for them as well as for us. No missing the symbol. But, it sets something of a tone about good and evil, about God and suffering, the cross and prayer, faith and loss of faith.

The audience identifies with the GI, Willard, Bill Skarsgaard, affected by the experience, returning home, and experiencing at a diner where he encounters a kindly waitress giving food to a derelict man. After getting home, greeting his mother, a very religious woman, a churchgoer, he returns to the diner and marries the waitress. They have a young boy. Willard recovers his faith, goes into the woods where he has planted a cross, sometimes praying desperately, eventually commanding his young son to pray, especially when his wife, the boy’s mother, has terminal cancer.

While this review has so far focused on Willard and his son, who will grow up to be at the centre of the latter part of the film, there are several other narrative strands throwing different light on life in West Virginia, one strand religious, the other strand secular and immoral. In fact, of the principal characters, six are murdered and two commit suicide. But the thing is, that most of these take place in a religious context.

The religious communities at this time in West Virginia and Ohio were evangelical, small local communities, a local preacher, reliance on sermons, prayer, strong prayer of petition, a basic faith in Jesus. (There is not the kind of fundamentalist assertion of faith and beliefs that is more commonly found in these churches in the 21st-century.) But the contemporary audience is challenged to think about faith, the impact of genuine faith, delusions of messianic faith, the hypocrisy of faith as a context for violence and sexual abuse.

Willard loses his faith with his wife’s cancer. His son inherits no faith though accompanies his grandmother to church. One of the alarming characters in the early part of the film is a self-proclaimed preacher and mesmeric healer, Roy, Harry Melling in a sinister and frightening performance, who marries a young woman in the town, Mia Wasikowska, and they have a daughter. However, Roy believes that God will answer all his prayers – even to his killing someone and praying in desperate belief that they will resurrect. And he meets a sad and brutal fate.

In the next generation, in the 1960s, the local preacher, ailing, invites a younger man from Tennessee to take over the parish, suave, presentable, talking the language of faith, claiming integrity and leadership. His played by Robert Pattinson. It is he who is the hypocrite, religiously seductive, ultimately a coward in the face of a challenge to his beliefs and behaviour. And the challenge comes from Willard’s son, played by Tom Holland.

The secular strand in the story turns out to be an alarming one, serial killers, killers for sexual thrills, photographing their victims, caught up in some local electioneering for the sheriff – illustrating, certainly, the devil all the time in their lives.

Ultimately, all the strands are interlinked.

(Glancing at the names of the actors in the film, portraying Americans in this area and period, three British, two Australian, one Swedish, one of Romanian origins – certainly an international mixum gatherum of performers in American cinema.)

One of the principal interesting features of the film is that it is narrated by the author of the original novel, Donald Ray Pollock. He is able to make commentary on all the characters, on the situations, to do a lot of the explicit moralising. A frightening and pessimistic collection of moral fables.

ENOLA HOLMES UK, 2020, 124 minutes, Colour. Millie Bobby Brown, Henry Cavill Sam Claflin, Helena Bonham Carter, Louis Partridge, Burn Gorman, Adeel Akhtar, Susan Wokoma, Hattie Morahan, David Bamber, Frances de la tour, Claire Rushbrook, Fiona Shaw. Directed by Harry Bradbeer.

Quite a delight! One might almost say, a treat. At least for those who enjoy being immersed in the Holmes family, admirers of Sherlock, critical of Mycroft, and relishing the imagination of those novels and films and television series over the decades that have brought them all alive, exploring the Young Sherlock Holmes as well as seeing Ian McKellen in Sherlock’s later years. And now, the discovery of Enola, the teenage sister who has stayed at home with their mother, and, we discover, quite a mother! Well, perhaps the Conan Doyle purists may not be so tolerant of all these imaginings – but most of us are.

Millie Bobby Brown makes quite an impression as the 16-year-old Enola – and, Enola is an anagram for Alone, Enola and her mother being experts at anagrams and codes and intricate scrabble variations. Those encountering Millie Bobby Brown for the first time might think that she has quite a future ahead of her – only to find that she has an extensive past in both film and television, especially Stranger Things. She is a vital and dynamic screen presence and the screenplay provides her with wonderful opportunities to look straight to camera, to make comments, to raise eyebrows, to engage us in all her moods, her aspirations, all her plans and activities. I would have liked even more!

And Helena Bonham Carter plays her mother, obviously a suffragette before her time, the widow who takes active pleasure in training her daughter in all kinds of fields, reading and

history, science and engineering, delighting in codes and words, training Enola to defend Herself, to take initiatives, all seen in enjoyable intercut flashbacks.

And, well we might ask, where is Sherlock? And, to a lesser interest and extent, where is Mycroft? They have long since left home, Mycroft in business, politically conservative (to say the least), enjoying his club, but, with the disappearance of their mother, Enola becoming his ward. Sherlock has already made his mark in the world of detection. Sam Claflin plays Mycroft, communicating his insufferability. Sherlock is played by Henry Cavill. (This reviewer always has problems with Henry Cavill, usually giving rather stolid performances, even as Superman, more suited to Clark Kent – although he has the looks of the genial Christopher Reeve.)

Yes, there is an adventure, there is detection, Sherlock involved, of course, but Enola discovering and developing her talent. It concerns a young lord, the Marquis of Tewkesbury (Louis Partridge), a soft -looking youth – with Enola remarking that he is looking like the nincompoop he was born to be! (Yes, she does have a way with words.) The mystery involves the death of his father, a seemingly menacing uncle, his detached mother, his strong dowager grandmother, and a sadistic assassin with a bowler hat. And, it is the time for votes in the House of Lords, for women’s rights, for women’s demonstrations (including stashes of gunpowder).

And, there are some wonderful cameos. Helena Bonham Carter, always distinctive, Fiona Shaw as the bombastic headmistress of the school for ladies and proper manners (but with some heart flutters for Mycroft), Frances de la Tour as the dowager, Burn Gorman as the assassin. Throughout the film, there is ethnic groups are represented in London, Inspector Lestrade (Adeel Akhtar with Pakistani father, Kenyan mother; cafe owner and martial arts instructor, Edith (Nigerian parents) and many incidental characters played by West Indians and Asian actors.)

The film is based on a Young Adult novel by Nancy Springer – though, interestingly, the screenplay is written by Jack Thorne in the film directed by Harry Bradbeer.

Advice is – surrender to the Holmes family, their adventures, and the atmosphere of 19th-century London and country estates.

FREAKS: YOU'RE ONE OF US Germany, 2020, 92 minutes, Colour. Cornelia Groschel, Tim Oliver Shultz, Wotan Wilke Mohring, Nina Kunzedorf, Frederic Linkemann, Finnlay Berger. Directed by Felix Binder.

The title sounds like something from a comic strip and, there are quite some references to comicstrips. This is a German film, but it could have been a story from anywhere.

The film opens with a desk thrown through a cement/ brick wall and a little girl sitting inside the apartment, fearful, and a doctor coming to treat her. This is Wendy. The film then cuts to the present day, Wendy married, a devoted husband, a young son, a comfortable home although there is a threat that they will be evicted. The husband is a security guard. Wendy has been working for some years at a diner linked with a service station.

So far, so ordinary. We see that Wendy is on medication and that she has interviews with the doctor from her childhood. She is rather meek in her work at the diner, wanting a raise but dominated by her bossy boss. There is a reticent young man also working there, Elmar. On the way home Wendy is taunted by drunken men, the young son is bullied by the local kids, Wendy is rather meek and retiring. However, she does encounter a vagrant looking for chicken scraps in the rubbish – he tells her that she is “one of us”, a select group of people with superior powers. He demonstrates this rather dramatically and, ultimately, Wendy flushes the tablets down the sink and begins to assert herself.

She discovers that she does have superpowers, extraordinary strength.

The basic idea of this story is very similar to the tales of the X-Men, only much lower key and taking place in the suburbs. In fact, the film is like a pop-allegory about discovering one’s inner self, one’s inner strengths, acknowledging putdowns, authorities trying to control rather than to understand and encourage.

Which means that we see Wendy in action, powerful assertion towards the drunken men, the bully kids, the boss.

Just as there was Magneto in the X-Men stories, here we have the transformation of Elmer, nerdish, no ambition, listening to Wendy, discovering his power, electric power. However, he has disappointed his ambitious father, is an avid reader of comics, buys his own superpower costume, but turns to evil.

While there are stunts and special effects, they are comparatively quiet compared with those in the familiar blockbusters. But, the moral is the same. And there is a teaser at the end of all the credits which should not be missed!

LOVE GUARANTEED

US, 2020, 90 minutes, Colour. Rachel Leigh Cook, Damon Wayans Jr, Heather Graham, Caitlin Howden, Brendan Taylor, Sebastien Billingsly-Rodriguez, Sean Amsing, Denise Durupt, Alvin Sanders, Jed Rees, Kandyce Mc Clure. Directed by Mark Steven Johnson.

So, “they don’t make them like they did anymore”. Well, Love Guaranteed certainly puts paid to this objection. This is a love story, old-style in a modern setting.

While the title assures us that there is going to be a happy ending, Love Guaranteed actually is the name of a huge dating company, massive modern building, lush interiors… And, it is managed by a self-made glamorous CEO, Tamara Taylor, a comic touch performance by the glamorous Heather Graham dressed accordingly, quoting Buddha – not always accurately. And when a lawsuit comes up, she has a large table full of legal representatives.

And a case does come up.

Going back a little, the audience is introduced to Susan (Rachel Leigh Cook) rehearsing a speech (appealing to the jury to let Justice take off the blindfold and really see!) And then delivering it in court. She is a modern professional woman, focusing on building up her company, no time for any personal life except caring for her sister and her family who live next door.

On the way to work, she impedes a reticent gentleman, Nick (Damon Wayans Jr) at a takeaway trolley but then learns that he is her client. Nick must be one of the most charming leading men of any romantic comedy (and the quietest of any of the performances by the many Wayans family of whom Damon is a member).

And his case? Against Love Guaranteed. He has been on almost 1000 dates and has not found love at all! He offers a big cheque so Susan, along with her two comic assistants she works within the office, feel they must investigate. Nick who has been on all these dates – and eventually gets to 1000. Susan interviews a number of them and they will have only nice things to say about Nick. She and Nick venture to Love Guaranteed who want to do an out-of-court deal. No deal.

Of course, as Susan investigates and meets with Nick, love will be guaranteed. There are nice sequences with Susan’s sister, rushing to hospital to give birth. As Susan investigates Nick, she finds he works for the elderly at an Institute for rehabilitation, again charm personified. She meets Nick’s former fiancee – who also speaks well of Nick.

But, Love Guaranteed’s lawyers plan to prove that Nick found love, not on his dates, but because he was involved with the company in the case against them, in love with Susan!

Court scene, everybody speaking well of Nick, Nick behaving like a gentleman – and a happy (profitable) happy ending for all concerned.

Maybe too nice for many contemporary hard-edged tastes.

EL PRACTICANTE/ THE PARAMEDIC Spain, 2020, 96 minutes, Colour. Mario Casas, Deborah François, Guillermo Pfening, Celso Bugallo.

Directed by Carles Torras.

Mario Casas is one of Spain’s most prolific young actors (as witnessed by so many of his films streamed by Netflix). He can be both hero and villain – but has made strong villains in many of his films. As regards plot, this is a fairly straightforward thriller, Casas as Angel, a paramedic with a touch of the obsessive (keeping souvenirs of all those he encountered in his work). He is in partnership with a young woman who is studying. They are trying for her to become pregnant – but it seems the limitations are with him. Wherever this plot thread might have led, situations are drastically changed when a truck crashes into the ambulance, Angel’s friend, Ricardo, not being injured, Angel becoming a paraplegic, confined to a wheelchair. Whatever his previous obsessiveness, this is enhanced by his injuries, becoming more suspicious of his girlfriend (Deborah François, French actress of the Dad then Brothers L’Enfant? and star of The Page Turner). He even installs surveillance camera technology in her phone. As, might be expected, and discovering this, she walks out – and actually begins a relationship with the driver, Ricardo, – and becomes pregnant. The main development, of course, is Angels way of trapping his girlfriend and confining her to the apartment – and the dire consequences for her, for Ricardo, and, surprisingly, for the old man upstairs whose dog has barked continuously early in the film (and, indicative of Angels attitudes, his putting needles in meat which he feeds the dog). The film builds to a climax, a confrontation between Angel and his girlfriend – and something of a surprise at the end, the girlfriend and her ultimate vengeance on Angel. Effectively done in its way, but something of a conventional psychological thriller.

ROMANCE ON THE MENU Australia, 2020, 95 minutes, Colour. Cindy Busby, Tim Ross, Naomi Sequeira, Peter Bensley, Marita Wilcox, Barbara Bingham, Perry Mooney, Joey Vieira. Directed by Rosie Lourde.

What is wrong with a predictable romance? Aren’t romantic comedies meant to be predictable, the entertainment in seeing the two characters, meeting, the encounters, falling in love, clashes, the happy ending?

And this is what happens here – except that this is an Australian film, made in Queensland, with an Australian cast including some Americans living in Australia except for the leading lady, Canadian Cindy Busby.

So, this is a sit back, relax, an undemanding experience, following the step-by-steps of the predictable romance.

Hypercritics beware!

THE SOCIAL DILEMMA US, 2020, 94 minutes, Colour. Directed by Jeff Orlowski.

This is a documentary alert to the impacts of social media. One blogger remarked that it was five years too late – but yet on time.

For those concerned about the impact of social media, this is a film to be seen and discussed. While it is a film of talking heads, very intelligent and well-informed talking heads, it also uses, less effectively, some dramatic recreations, especially of a family and teenagers dealing with the technology. There is a telling scene where the mother puts all the mobile phones into a sealed jar and the teenage daughter, absolutely desperate, hacking away to get her phone out.

While this sets something of a tone, with some drama, most of the film is an appeal to our minds as well is our emotions.

There is a cumulative effect from the experts in explaining the origins and developments, especially in Silicon Valley, and the rapid impact on consumers. The speakers offer a challenge to the public, to consider the impact of their use of social media and the question of how much it controls them. There is the amount of information gained about users and how it is used, guiding choices without the users necessarily realising this. Profiles are gathered and information and advertising geared because of the profiles.

Amongst those speaking are hands-on technicians, inventors and creators, who have seen the results of their work and are in a position now to appeal to the public to be cautious. While one can’t turn back the clock, one can be wary, critical, making assertive choices rather than simply willingly or unwittingly succumbing to choices made by the social media companies.

In one sense, this documentary is not surprising. These are the kinds of discussions that have been increasingly prevalent over recent years. But in another sense, the documentary is quite surprising, the extraordinary developments of the technology, the spread of social media, the extraordinary influence, and the possibilities for indoctrination, forced choices, social media taking over our lives.

This is the kind of documentary that should be seen and discussed.

VAMPIRES vs THE BRONX

US, 2020, 85 minutes, Colour. Jaden Michael, Gerald Jones III, Gregory Diaz IV, Sarah Gadon, Method Man, Shea Whigham, Coco Jones, The Kid Mero. Directed by Os Rodriguez.

There could hardly be a more direct title for any film. And yet, there is a difference here. This is, in fact, a 21st-century New York Boys’ Own Adventure story, three heroes in their early teens. And, while the film is geared to this audience (and probably needs some Parental Guidance because of the theme and ways of getting rid of the vampires), it is engaging enough for some adult audiences. (Including this reviewer.)

In fact, the film is something of a fable, the gentrification of a neighbourhood and the consequences for the inhabitants as businesses and homes are bought out and the more exclusive inhabitants take up residence. But, in this case, it is age old vampires looking for a secure home where they can be themselves and get rid of any unwanted locals with impunity. And the fable has racial overtones because the age-old vampires are white and the Bronx people we see are African- American and Hispanic. (And, in a touch of gender equality, the supreme commander of the vampires is a white young/ageless woman, Vivian, Sarah Gadon.)

We see at once what the vampires are up to when a young woman who runs a beauty salon sells out but then is overcome by a vampire. But, then it all moves to something cheerier, the three boys, Miguel, Bobby, Luis, are busy putting up posters for a celebration for their local hero, Tony, who runs the Bodega, the general store. Actually, the impact of the film is very strong because of the screen presence of the boys, Jaden Michael as Miguel, Gerald Jones III as Bobby, Gregory Diaz IV is the bespectacled Luis, rather short and nicknamed by others as Potterpuerto. Miguel is a determined leader and Jaden Michael makes him most credible. There are also some girls in the neighbourhood, especially Rita, from Haiti who says her upbringing has prepared her for vampires!

Audience emotions are sad when Vivian comes to Tony’s Bodega and he realises that she casts no image – and she returns, destructively.

Vampires look sinister, have bought up the local courthouse to form their nest (and the boys find them suspended from the roof!). When they realise the threat of the vampires to their families and to their livelihoods, Luis provides them with background information and so they collect all the means to destroy them. This includes going to Mass – with a strong Fr. Jackson who keeps an eye on the boys (Method Man) and, while no offence is intended by the filmmakers, the boys add a host and holy water to their resources of stakes, garlic, and garlic powder.

Ultimately, the community support the boys and it is Fr. Jackson who strikes the final blow against Vivian.

The screenplay owes much to a number of vampire films and there are quite some resemblances to the 1987 The Lost Boys. Only 85 minutes, serious material, the light touch, and we are on the boys side in their own adventure!

SIGNIS REVIEWS NOVEMBER 2020

ALONE

BABY DONE

HONEST THIEF

HUBIE HALLOWEEN (Netflix))

IP MAN, KUNG FU MASTER

JAY AND SILENT BOB REBOOT

LUCKY GRANDMA

MY OCTOPUS TEACHER (Netflix)

REBECCA (Netflix)

SAVAGE

SOMEONE HAS TO DIE/ ALGUIEN TIENE QUE MORIR (Netflix)

SOUL OF AMERICA, The

TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 (Netflix)

WAY BACK, The

ALONE US, 2020, 98 minutes, Colour. Jules Willcox, Marc Menchaca, Anthony Heald. Directed by John Hyams. Alone is a thriller but a male audience and a female audience will respond quite differently. The central character, who is alone, is female, recently widowed, leaving the city and driving north in the forests of the north-western Pacific states, where the action was filmed. She is chosen as a victim – but a victim who will gain strength, assert herself and survive. Women in the audience will identify with her, so will the male audience, empathetically as it is hoped, in their own way. There are a number of criticisms of the film, that it had been done before – and that is truer than some of the commentators know because it was a remake of a Swedish film, Gone, and Mattias Olsson, the writer and co-director of the original film has written the screenplay here. But, to say that it has been done before is not necessarily strong grounds for criticism. This review takes the stand that the experience of watching Alone has a strong effect on us.

The audience is introduced to the central character, Jessica (strongly played by Jules Willcox) moving home. We later learn some of her situation, her husband dead, alienation from her mother. The film has several chapter titles charting Jessica’s experience. The first is The Road, the scenery beautiful, then a car driving slowly in front, preventing Jessica from overtaking, reminding audiences who know Steven Spielberg’s 1970s film, Duel, of how frightening cat and mouse tactics on the highway can be. We are then introduced to the man, Marc Menchaca (only in the final moments do we learn his name is Sam), who has plausible explanations about his road behaviour but then he reappears, an ordinary -looking person that you might not give a second glance to, but insinuatingly sinister and threatening to Jessica. So, we know that this is going to be an abduction story. There are some eventual revelations about the man’s misogynistic persecution of Jessica, suggestions rather than any explanations. Which means that the latter part of the film is internment in a basement, an unexpected escape, Pursued through the forest, the river, an encounter with a friendly hunter who might have been a help, but all building up to the expected final confrontation, the man losing his cool, making a taunting speech to the hidden Jessica, speaking of his despising of cowards and challenging her to confront him. Well, the confrontation does take place, not quite in the way expected – but Jessica’s vindication nonetheless. Yes, this is a genre film, an abduction by an aggressive male, with the various conventions of intimidation, imprisonment, escape, a final battle.. Of course, it is contrived, that is the nature of this kind of psychological thriller entertainment.

BABY DONE New Zealand, 2020, 90 minutes, Colour. Rose Matafeo, Matthew Lewis, Emily Barclay, Madaleine Sami, Rachel House, Ryan O'Kane. Directed by Curtis Vowell. At one stage, there is a listing of what women were expected to do in life: marry, have a house, baby – and, with that achieved, baby done. This is a pregnancy film. There is plenty of comedy. And there are serious themes. In fact, quite a pleasing combination. (And, the executive producer is Taika Waititi with his celebrated sense of humour.) The film depends on audience response to Zoe, the central character. She is played with quite some zest and sense of humour, with an appeal to pathos, by Rose Matafeo. Zoe is an arborist, working with her partner Tim in various parks and gardens. She has a particular skill in climbing trees – and, there is a worldwide competition for tree climbers in Canada and she is determined to go, winning a heat and qualifying. But, Zoe is something of a hard case, Tim mentioning marriage at various times and Zoe having firm stances on no marriage. They go to a baby shower with all the mothers and fathers billing and cooing, Zoe rather put off. In the meantime, she has gone to have a pregnancy test – and she is pregnant. (This sequence introduces us to Madaleine Sami as, according to the credits, the Birthing Nurse – a down-to-earth woman of solid common sense who has no hesitation in giving straight and blunt answers and reappears, to the pleasure of the audience, in further sequences but, most especially, at the birth itself. And she is played by Madeleine Sami who co-wrote/directed and starred in that eccentric New Zealand comedy, The Breaker-Upperers.)

Tim is a very nice man, played by Matthew Lewis (English actor who was in all the Harry Potter films). It is only when Zoe hesitates at a bungee jump and the technician twigs that she is pregnant, that Tim becomes aware of it and, of course, transforms into that protective, over-protective, perpetually caring about-to-be father. Which Zoe likes, but doesn’t like, especially when she insists on going to the competition in Canada. Of course, there are quite some ups and downs. Tim likes going to the birthing classes and becomes very friendly with another mother. Zoe gradually lets her friends know and Tim and Zoe visit Zoe’s parents, white mother, Maori father who is a gynaecologist and surgeon. Zoe also makes a list of what she and Tim want to do before they have the baby – and Tim foolishly mentions a threesome with the Zoe’s best friend. When Zoe sets it up, it is an almost-immediate disaster. Zoe also encounters a man whose fetish is pregnant women. Zoe appreciates the attention but, ultimately, when he does a plaster cast of her body, it is too much. No prize for guessing how the film ends but, of course, that is the delight, Tim so happy, Zoe loving her baby, the birthing nurse having laid down the law for both Zoe and Tim, Tim’s video of highlights of the pregnancy, and happy photos of mother and father and baby, celebrating life. HONEST THIEF US, 2020, 99 minutes, Colour. Liam Neeson, Kate Walsh, Jai Courtney, Jeffrey Donovan, Anthony Ramos, Robert Patrick. Directed by Mark Williams. An agreeable title. How does a thief become honest? The answer is that, when dealing with the FBI, it is not so easy. This is a film for 2020 audiences, especially older audiences looking for some kind of easy entertainment in difficult times. So, a thriller which is not too violent (although there are some shootouts and car chases). A thriller which actually has romance built in – romance certainly being a motivation for a thief to be honest. And, we have Liam Neeson. Neeson has played many serious roles (we remember Schindler’s List, Kinsey, Silence). And for more than 10 years he has built up quite a catalogue of action shows. With his height, his speaking voice, his strong presence, he brings something of gravitas to any character he plays. And, this is especially the case here, with Tom – a former Marine, demolitions expert, family crisis, and a series of bank robberies. But, especially when he encounters divorcee, Annie (Kate Walsh very sympathetic), it is time for honesty. The trouble is that when he phones the FBI, they have heard all kinds of confessions before, encountered all kinds of hoaxes. They are not particularly enthusiastic. This is the case with the senior agents, played by Robert Patrick and Jeffrey Donovan. They hand on the mission to the younger agents, played by Jai Courtney and Anthony Ramos. They meet with Tom, they go off to recover some of the money. All could go well in furthering their careers. But, of course, it doesn’t. In finding some of the money, quite easily, there is a huge temptation to steal it – dishonest thieves. Unfortunately, the brains behind the stealing, Nivens, Jai Courtney, is strong on impulse rather than planning which has dire consequences. But it brings back Tom into serious action, handy with the gun, skilled in making bombs, expert driver. So, this is where the action comes in – and some emotions because of Nivens attack on Annie (who managed the storage where the money has been kept and has possession of security footage). The filmmakers keep a fairly good balance between the action and the romance (and, possibly, only one brief instant of swearing, which is a surprise). The comments on the film from your average audience have been very favourable. They enjoyed it. However, the fans of Liam Neeson’s earlier

thrillers are begging him to insert much more action – and one of them suggests very earnestly that he cut out much of the romance! Honest Thief was never intended to be a great cinema experience – but, most older audiences will find interest and entertainment. HUBIE HALLOWEEN US, 2020, 102 minutes, Colour. Adam Sandler, Kevin James, Julie Bowen, Ray Liotta, Steve Buscemi, Rob Schneider, Maya Rudolph, Tim Meadows, Michael Chiklis, June Squibb, George Wallace, Kenan Thomson, Shaquille O' Neal, Ben Stiller, Jackie Sandler, Noah Schnapp, Sadie Sandler, Sunny Sandler. Directed by Steve Brill. A comedy starring Adam Sandler. The comedy with cameos with quite a number of his close friends and associates over the years. Direction is by Steve Brill who directed five Sandler comedies. Sandler co-wrote the screenplay with Tim Herlihy who collaborated with Sanders in 12 screenplays over 25 years. The setting is Halloween in the city of Salem, quite lavish and ostentatious Halloween celebration – where Hubie Dubois, Sandler’s character, is the monitor. He is one of those man-child characters, living with his mother, easily scared, but also venturesome and bold in his trying to help people. Actually, most of the people in Salem show an extraordinary mean-mindedness, bullying attitudes and behaviour, an ugly US. Obviously, this is a film for those who enjoy Adam Sandler film is. Again, obviously, this is not a film for those who do not enjoy Adam Sandler films or who are rebelling against him. Best to illustrate this by opinions for and against from the Internet movie database – audiences will know whether they should watch Hubie Halloween or not as they identify with the opinions. A staunch Sandler supporter: “In 2020 you would think people would know what to expect from Adam Sandler's (effective yet slightly hated) brand of raunchy and quick witted humor. But still there are so many smug types that somehow ridiculously expect some huge swings into left field for his Netflix original comedies. Obviously he's shown incredible versatility in his career but people should be able to gauge by the trailer and it being part of his Netflix contract that these aren't Punch Drunk Love, Reign Over Me, or Uncut Gems. Know what you're getting. The snobs that hate Sandler are the types that would go into an Applebee's and expect a five star meal. This film sticks to classic Sandler formulas which isn't an issue imo. A humble basic story about an odd yet lovable main character that finds himself in the middle of a series of hilarious problems. Along the way he runs into other weird zany characters and maybe a few villains that join in on or his hilarious antics. The actors are the usual Sandler friends that he's had in other films. Overall its just a nice comfort Halloween themed Sandler comedy that shouldn't be taken so seriously by snobby critics that can't grasp the point of these films after all these years. Throw it on and forget about the world.” A staunch Sandler condemner:

“Another in a long list of disappointing recent movies. In a continuing attempt to find something worth watching in the last few years I was hopeful here. I like Halloween, and typically I have liked Adam Sandler. I couldn't agree more with the other reviews that his stupid voice almost ruined the movie immediately. It is so obvious fake, and often hard to understand, ruining the whole movie before it starts. Tried to fight past that to see some really gross stuff that wasn't funny and clearly just looking for lazy laughs. Usually in these movies there is a good turning point where things start to go better for the main character, until ultimately the movie finishes with a conclusion making you feel like the main character "won". In this movie, everyone loses. The performers, the director, and certainly the audience. This isn't a spoiler, just a fact.” (Both comments from IMDb bloggers) So, there you are! IP MAN, KUNG FU MASTER

China, 2019, 84 minutes, Colour. Yu-Hang To, Michael Wong. Directed by Liming Li.

Ip Man has a hallowed place in Chinese memory. He has a reputation as being a master of Kung Fu, setting up schools in mainland China, later in Hong Kong, clashing with the Japanese presence before World War II, involved in justice after the war. An important part of his reputation is his having Bruce Lee as one of his students.

For audiences wanting to see the life and career of Ip Man, there is a series of four films starring Donnie Yen in the title role, Ip Man, Ip Man 2, Ip Man 3, Ip Man 4, The Finale. (In fact, the star of this film,Yu-Hang To, had supporting roles in some of these films and seems to have been chosen for the present film because of his resemblance to Donnie Yen.)

There have been a number of spin-offs dramatising the story of Ip Man. This is one of those films, contributing to the biography but, especially, to the legend.

The setting is mainland China, the city of Foshan, before World War II. The screenplay is particularly hostile to the Japanese, their presence in China before the war, their superior intentions to incorporate China into the Japanese Empire. Definitely the villains of the drama. In the background are gangs in Foshan itself, especially a militant group, The Axes, who dominate but are opposed to the importation of opium which some of the Japanese support.

Almost immediately, there is a spectacular martial arts battle between Ip Man, surrounded by what seems to be 100 members of The Axes, all with their axes, and led by the daughter of the head of the gang. Intercut with the battle, one against 100 and winning, the audience sees the leader of The Axes playing checkers with another gang leader who is importing the opium. Their moves in the game make commentary on what is happening in the martial arts. A similar device is used later for a fight within Ip Man’s house as his wife is giving birth, intercutting the fight with Ip Man’s attempts to bring hot water to the bathroom.

The film introduces an eccentric character, a drunken man in the street, then in Ip Man’s house, who turns out to be the brother of theIp Man’s trainer. He is something of a comic character, but more than adept in fighting, becoming involved in the fights, and even becoming a power attacker on the Japanese, a mask, the Black Knight.

There are also complications in the police force, Ip Man resigning, the inauguration of the new chief seems to accommodate to the Japanese. The principal Japanese presence is a bespectacled businessman, seeming respectable but ruthless, especially in his support of the Japanese major, skilled in karate, who is to challenge Ip Man to a fight.

Which means then that the culmination is another spectacular fight, Ip Man and the Japanese, the Japanese soldiers with guns trained on the fighter, but then the turnaround with the arrival of the police.

Obviously, an entertainment, for martial arts enthusiasts.

JAY AND SILENT BOB REBOOT US, 2019, 105 minutes, Colour. Kevin Smith, Jason Mewes, Harley Quinn Smith, Matt Damon, Jason Lee, Ben Affleck, Joey Lauren Adams, Fred Armesen, Diedrich Bader, Melissa Benoist, Jason Biggs, Aparna Brielle, Adam Brody, Tommy Chong, Keith Coogan, Rosario Dawson, Michelle Edmund, Shannon Elizabeth, Dan Fogler, Chris Hemsworth, Val Kilmer, Justin Long, Joe Manganello, Craig Robinson, Stephen Root, Jennifer Schwalbach Smith, Molly Shannon, Method Man, James Van Der Beek, Alice Wen. Directed by Kevin Smith. Clerks, Mallrats – IN! Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back – INNER! Jay and Silent Bob Reboot – INNEST!

Jay and Silent Bob have a history over 25 years, 1994-2019, a collaboration between Kevin Smith as writer, director, editor, starring as Silent Bob (and making some appearances, as here, as a rather loud Kevin Smith himself) and his slacker star, Jason Mewes. If you don’t know anything about Jay and Silent Bob, there is no need to read any further – the screenplay and its shenanigans depend on how well you know them, like them, love them. If you are a fan of Kevin Smith, know his range of films including Chasing Amy, Dogma, Jersey Girl and the more eccentric horror thrillers of more recent times, Yoga Hosiers, Tusk, then you are really IN. So, if you want to be up-to-date as Well Is have a recapitulation of Kevin Smith’s career, then you will respond to the invitation to watch the reboot. Actually, there is some discussion about the difference between a remake and a reboot – and whether there is something new and fresh about a remake or whether all the old gags get another chance at life, a reboot. The present film is basically a reboot. Jay and Silent Bob are much the same as they always were, Jay loudmouthed, and foulmouthed, drugs, the kind of person you would want to meet only on screen and definitely not in real life! And, Silent Bob is much the same, miming, wide-eyed expressions, much more genial. And, somewhat lighter after Kevin Smith suffered a heart attack. When they are busted for drugs, they are then banned from using their names, their lawyer having trapped them. They decide to go on a quest to Hollywood to stop any remakes and reboots. They stopover in Chicago and, this is where something new happens, Jay discovers that he has a daughter. In fact, much is made of this theme, Jay forbidden to tell Millennium Millie (played by Kevin Smith’s own daughter, Harley Quinn Smith) that he is her father. There are quite some shenanigans on the way to Hollywood, and they arrive to go to, not Comicon (where Smith always appears) but to Chronicom has made,. The film gives an opportunity for Smith to reminisce about the various films that he is made (critical of Copout) and his favourite themes, especially of Star Wars and science-fiction. And there is opportunity for some of his friends and stars to explain themselves, Matt Damon about his angel Loki from Dogma, Ben Affleck to reminisce about Chasing Amy and Jersey Girl, an encounter with Jason Lee, with a panel of actors from Clerks. And, finally much is made of the father and daughter theme. The final credits take us through most of the film again, a chance to see some of the many stars and friends with their cameos – and a final, amusing one, with the late Stan Lee. A lot of discriminating fans have been very disappointed with this reboot, feeling that it went over old times too much, that many of the jokes were familiar, too familiar, that they wanted something new. Be that as it may, here are Jay and Silent Bob after 25 years. LUCKY GRANDMA US, 2019, 87 minutes, Colour. Tsai Chin, Hsiao- Yuan Ha, Michael Tow, Woody Fu, Mason Ya allm.. Directed by Sasie Sealy. How lucky is lucky? And, who is Grandma? This is a Chinese story, a story in the Chinese community in New York City, quite a vivid portrayal of the neighbourhood, the families, speaking Mandarin and Cantonese (but many of the next-generation becoming more Americanised), the range of customs, food, and the domination of local protection gangs. Quite a context. Grandma is 80. However, this review needs to offer some praise for the actress who plays Grandma, Tsai Chin, from a classic Chinese acting family, training in London, entering her film career with the voice of Tokyo Rose in The Bridge on the River Kwai, making several Fu Manchu thrillers with Christopher Lee, twice a Bond Girl, and a career of over 60 years in film and television in and the

United States including The Joy Luck Club! And, her age at the time of portraying Grandma, a vigorous 85. During the opening credits, Grandma goes to a fortuneteller with her various signs, cards, symbols – and the judgement that October 28 will be a very lucky day for journalling. Of course, it is and it isn’t. Her family want to move out of her apartment and live with them but she wants independence and withdraws all her money from the bank and goes on a bus expedition to a casino. She presumes on her luck and bets on the number eight, the lucky number, and plays all the games, winning until…. Tsai Chin plays Grandma as a tough cookie (perhaps an understated description for this cantankerous, determined old lady or, rather, old girl). And much is made of her characteristics symbol – the perennial cigarette, defiantly lit, inhaled, dangling from her lips. She makes quite an impression – and you might not like to encounter her in a dark alley on a dark night! Actually, on the bus home, her luck changes but you will need to see the movie to find out how this could be. Gangsters threaten Grandma and she goes to one of the local gangs to bargain for a bodyguard for a week, $5000 but cut rate to $2000 for the tall big softy she gets, Big Pong, Hsiao Yuan Ha, affable but often enough earning his fee! The local thugs are rather leering and presumptuous about dominating Grandma. Which means that there are some tough sequences, some funny sequences, some slapstick. One presumes that there is an eager Chinese audience all around the world who will enjoy encountering Grandma – even though they might avoid her in real life! And, for wider audiences who might enjoy something different, they might be in luck in going to see Grandma. MY OCTOPUS TEACHER South Africa, 2020, 85 minutes, Colour. Craig Foster, Tom Foster. Directed by Pippa Erlich, James Reed. Within weeks of its being released on Netflix, this striking documentary was receiving high praise. For those audiences who watch the Discovery Channel and other outlets which feature nature documentaries, one will be greatly prized. And for those who follow, and have followed for many decades, David Attenborough, this is a must. It is a South African production. The focus is on cinematographer, Craig Foster, who, along with his brother Damon Foster, directed and photographed eight documentaries starting in 2000. Such is the attention to meticulous detail, some of the films torque several years to photograph. Foster then said he tired from the pressures of so much energy for film-making and moved away to recuperate. However, after some years, living on the Western Cape of South Africa, he began to explore under the waters of the sometimes turbulent coastline. He took his camera and discovered a most unusual subject for his film. Very few of us will have thought immediately of an octopus as the star of a nature film. It is not the most attractive-looking of creatures, quite primaeval in its way, eyes, body, tentacles – though it does look more streamlined as it takes off, darting and swimming through the water. Over a period of almost a year, Craig Foster went into the water, discovering a particular octopus, following the details of its life and activity, underwater close-ups. He certainly got to know the octopus and understand it – and this he shares with his audience. The film uses the interesting device of interviewing Craig Foster as a “talking head” and his narrative of his year’s activities. However, as he speaks, we watch him underwater, and not only him, the vast range of fish and sea creatures, including sharks, who inhabit this rarely seen underwater kelp forest.

The visit with the octopus become very personal, personalised, and this is true as we see how the octopus feeds on the sea depths, but it is also threatened by the shark and is ingenious in its way of defending itself (it is female and Foster continually refers to it as she and her). There is also some pathos at the end of the journey, the mating, the laying of the eggs, the end of her time. There can be various responses to this film. First of all, of course, there is just the delight of the photography, the beauty and colour, the variety of undersea life. Then, it follows that we develop our sense of wonder, what we often call the beauty of creation, and appreciate that for the last 10 years, 100 years, 1000 years, 10,000 years and more, there has been this life, this vitality, nature evolving, all unseen by human eyes. We can be overwhelmed as we realise the range of nature on earth, under the water, and the intelligence of its evolution. Because Craig Foster speaks very personally about his own life and career, for younger audiences watching the film, it is a challenge as they watch his achievement as to what they want to do with their lives, the call to participate in this, an enjoyable play of words on the photographer’s name, to “foster” the development of nature and, in the era of climate change, to prevent its destruction. And for those for whom this is not a career, it can be a creative hobby, a significant cause, but always the perennial hope that nature will not only survive but flourish. REBECCA UK, 2020, 121 minutes, Colour. Lily James, Armie Hammer, Kristin Scott Thomas, Sam Riley, Tom Goodman- Hill, Briony Miller, Keeley Hawes, Jane Laportaire, Bill Paterson. Directed by Ben Wheatley. Rebecca is probably the most celebrated of Daphne du Maurier’s novels – a number of which were filmed: Jamaica Inn, My Cousin Rachel, The Birds. The first film version, by Alfred Hitchcock, won the Academy Award for the Best Film of 1940. It starred Laurence Olivier and Joan Fontaine as the central couple and Judith Anderson memorable as the housekeeper, sinister, Mrs Danvers. It is always a risk to go back to the source material of a celebrated film. There had been two television versions of Rebecca. This present version was financed by Netflix. Perhaps unsurprisingly, many of the immediate comments were very unfavourable, disappointed in the rendition of the novel, making comparisons with Hitchcock’s film, derogatory remarks about Lily James and Armie Hammer (although praised by many others) but a consensus about the striking performance by Kristin Scott Thomas as Mrs Danvers. The setting is the 1930s, opening in Monte Carlo, wealthy society, class distinctions, and a snobby American matron played by Ann Dowd with Lily James as her maid and companion. She attracts the attention of British widower, Maxim de Winter, Armie Hammer. There is romance – and some sexual behaviour, more 21st century 20th century, and the two are married. Rebecca is the name of Maxim de Winter’s first wife, now dead, hallowed in the memory of many people in the ways she is talked about, put on a pedestal by Mrs Danvers who had cared for her since she was a child, not talked about by her husband. Lily James’s character has no personal name but is the second Mrs de Winter. The setting is Manderley in Cornwall, the vast property, mansion, grounds, going to cliffs and down to the beach and sea. Everything is seen from the perspective of the second Mrs de Winter. She has led a fairly sheltered life before travelling with the American, comes from a family of moderate means, is not savvy in this Manderley world. She is awkward in managing, is dependent in her learning, is curious, makes mistakes, and experiences the severity of Mrs Danvers’ memories of Rebecca and her treatment of the new wife. Busy about many things and business, her husband tends to neglect her.

A key event is the preparation of the traditional ball and Mrs Danvers getting her revenge, promising to help, advising the new young maid to suggest a dress for the wife – which is a disaster because, when the young woman comes down to the ball, everybody is aghast because that dress was one of the features for Rebecca’s presence. In many ways, complications are resolved but further complications arise when the boat carrying Rebecca when she drowned comes ashore – revelations about Rebecca’s life, a visit to a doctor, a visit from a cousin who has had an affair with her (Sam Riley), suspicions that Max had murdered his wife. It is here that the young new wife comes into her own, rising to the occasion, taking initiatives, checking out information about Rebecca and visiting the doctor. There is quite a melodramatic ending, melodramatically satisfying, involving fire and a climax with Mrs Danvers. For those who have not read the book or seen the Hitchcock film, probably an enjoyable two hours of romance and melodrama. And, perhaps enjoyable, for those who try to avoid comparisons with the past. SAVAGE New Zealand, 2019, 98 minutes, Colour. Jake Ryan, John Tui, Chelsie Preston Crayford, Seth Flynn, Haan'z Fa'avae- Jackson, James Matamua, Jack William Parker, Alex Raivaru, Olly Presling, Lotima Pomes. Directed by Sam Kelly.

It is. It is grim. It is often brutal.

Initially, this is a portrait of New Zealand gangs, in the setting of 1989. For the first 15 minutes the audience is immersed in the group, the details of its behaviour, attitudes, spirit. The intention of the director would seem to be to show the gangs, no holds barred, four-letter-word-spattered, but asking us, the audience, to stay with this impact because there is much more, more background, more explanations, more challenge…

The 1989 events introduce us to gang called Savages. The enforcer in the group is Damage, a tattooed mask on his face, big, burly, enforcing. There is a particularly harsh sequence where he punishes one of the members with an axe. Along with Damage is his close friend and gang leader, Moses, one of the many Maori men in the gang. These are characters that most audiences have never experienced except through the media, frightening characters. Damage is played by Melbourne actor, Jake Ryan. Moses is played by John Tui.

It is something of a relief when, after the 15 minutes of brutality, the audience is taken back to 1965. Damage is actually Danny, a young boy in a large family, living on the edge of town. The children, boys and girls, play, come in to meals – while their mother spends a lot of the time hanging clothes on the line, cooking the meals, with not enough food to go round, Danny offering her some of his. Their father comes home, a silent and sullen man, prone to violent outbursts.

It quickly becomes clear that the screenplay is going to develop the theme of how Danny became Damage, the ugliness and severity of domestic violence. When Danny steals some food for the family and he is caught, the family letting him go, the police take him to a juvenile hall. And, this hall has quite a number of young ‘offenders’, many Maori. Danny shares a room with one of them, Moses, a

young lad with energy and initiative. The experience in the juvenile hall is as might be expected, severe disciplinarians, humiliation and beatings, a seemingly benign counsellor who initiates sexual advances (though these scenes quickly fade and there is no reference to them later). The two boys decide to escape.

With the 1965 sequences, it is clear that this film is not just a savage presentation of the gangs, but a social commentary.

And this is the case when the screenplay moves to 1972, the two teenagers, Danny and Moses, bonding, drifting, links with the gangs, and the dramatisation of the motivations – that these young men need to bond, that they need to have a substitute family, that they need to feel that someone is backing them up. The emphasis is not so much on gang aggression towards outsiders but strong fighting for turf, for the formation of gangs, forming the Savages, trying to find one’s place in this marginalised world. Complications arise for the two young men, especially with another gang, Danny confronting his brother Liam, appreciating his brother, then choosing gang over brother.

Which brings the audience back to 1989. Is Damage the same Danny as of the past? Is he in any position to understand himself and what has happened to him? And what of the memories of his father’s brutality, the suffering of his mother? Damage is also challenged by a young man, eager to become part of the gang, aping the older men, but attracted to a young woman and wanting to leave with her.

It is fair to say that there is some humanity at the end of the film. And quite some pathos. The screenplay achieves this, especially in the final four minutes, where there is no verbal dialogue, emotion communicated by body language, by eye contact, by long silent takes. This is such a contrast with what has gone before that it makes the ending quietly moving and hopeful.

THE SOUL OF AMERICA

US, 2020, 80 minutes, Colour.

Directed by K.D.Davison.

This is an excellent American documentary. It was released in 2020, seen widely at the time of the US presidential election campaigns. It offers an opportunity to listen to the ideas of an eminent American journalist, formerly editor of Newsweek, Jon Meacham. He had published his book, The Soul of America – at the Battle for our Better Angels. And this documentary dramatises not just his opinions but he episodes in American history that he sees as keynote challenges, challenges for change.

Directed by K.D.Davison (Katie Davison), the structure of the documentary is exemplary. It is personalised initially by seeing Meacham at his home, getting ready to go on lecture tours, a pleasant introduction to him as a person ready to listen to his opinions). Throughout the film we see him at studios being interviewed, at universities and other institutions giving lectures, some

encounters with the audience afterwards. He is talking head that we are interested in – and, probably, like.

There is a summary of his historical background, early years as a journalist in Chattanooga, his moving to Newsweek, becoming Editor in Chief, his books and writing. A Republican supporter at the time of Ronald Reagan’s election in 1981, an observer of the American ethos in the four decades which follow, some implicit criticisms of Donald Trump and his presidency rather than an attack on him.

The Soul of America capitalises on the advantages of images, moving images, historical footage, to give more reality and meaning to the words and commentary. Several episodes in American history have singled out, well illustrated by the footage of the times, with some expert and personal comment from witnesses. They range from the suffragist movement in the United States, the leaders, the demonstrations, the hostility, the role of Woodrow Wilson to contemporary American life and the frightening statistic that in the 1960s, popular support for government leadership was 77% while the contemporary statistic is a mere 17%.

The film shows the aftermath of the depression, result and his vision, his collaboration with interested parties, his handling of the transition from neutrality in World War II to the post Pearl Harbor declaration of war. One of the very interesting episodes dramatised, with quite a lot of footage which elicits audience compassion and grief is the internment of the Japanese Americans during World War II (something which the Liberal Roosevelt ordered). The witnesses about their experience include the Star Trek activist, George Takei.

The Kennedy years, brief as they were, illustrate Meacham’s points, Eisenhower advising John F. Kennedy, after the Bay of Pigs, to do consultation before making decisions, seen with the 13 Days and the missiles of October. There is also the Civil Rights legislation, Lyndon Johnson’s decision to follow through, collaboration with Martin Luther King, the defiance taunts slavery turned into segregation in the South, and many alarming pictures from the 1920s to the 1960s Ku Klux Klan members marching, even along Pennsylvania Avenue.

An interesting illustration is, surprisingly, from George H.Bush, not rushing to the Berlin wall as people thought he should, but, rather, giving Gorbachev and Glasnost some space so that the two could sign agreements after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Meacham makes us realise that the 21st-century present situation has had many parallels in the past, some even worse than the present divisiveness in the United States. So, this is an intriguing, interesting and challenging documentary. And Meacham quotes Mark Twain stating that history does not necessarily repeated itself – but it rhymes!

THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 US, 2020, 130 minutes, Colour. Eddie Redmayne, Alex Sharp, Sasha Baron Cohen, Jeremy Strong, John Carroll Lynch, Yahya Abdul Mateen II, Mark Rylance, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ben Shankman, J.C.Mc Kenzie, Frank Langella, Danny Flaherty, Noah Robbins, Kelvin Harrison Jr, John Doman, Michael Keaton, Caitlin Fitzgerald. Directed by Aaron Sorkin. July, August, September, 1968 were, in retrospect, tumultuous times. There had been student rights and protest at the Sorbonne, Paris. There were significant battles in the Vietnam war. There was the ill-feted Prague Spring. There was controversy in the Catholic Church with the issuing of the papal encyclical, Humanae Vitae. And there were protests in the United States, protests against the draft, the 1968 elections. Some of the characters involved in the protests at the Democratic convention were significant figures of the time but have lived on in memory, Tom Hayden, Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, and the inclusion of Bobby Seale of the Black Panthers who spent only four hours in Chicago, sustained a false murder accusation against him in Connecticut, and was, for political reasons, included in the group who were indicted, The Chicago 7. Their long trial at the end of 1968, caused controversy – and became something of a pattern for protests in the ensuing years as well as political trials (think In the King of Prussia, the trial of Daniel Berrigan SJ and other protectors against nuclear armament – and who all appeared in the film version.) This film has been written and directed by Aaron Sorkin. He is possibly best known for his creation of the television series, The West Wing. However, he was also responsible for such films as A Few Good Men, The Social Network, Moneyball, Molly’s Game, the series, The Newsroom and, on a lighter note, The American President. Clearly, these historical events are important for his historical American memory and evaluation. The audience is invited to have sympathies for the protest leaders rather than for Mayor Daley of Chicago and his orders to forbid any protest, for the exercise of police brutality, for the status of the judge who is prone to bullying the defendants and their lawyers, prone to citing for contempt. The major part of the screenplay is set in the court. However, the film introduces its theme with three symbolic talking heads, Lyndon Johnson on Vietnam and the draft, Martin Luther King and his vision (and his assassination), the hopes of Robert Kennedy (and his assassination) and close-ups of the exercise of the draft and its effect on the young men who are to go to Vietnam. The screenplay also introduces the characters of the seven, brief sketches so that we know who each of the men is and something of their style (and appearances). Eddie Redmayne reminds us of his versatility and performance, playing the young Tom Hayden, with his friend Rennie Davis, played by Alex Sharp. Then there is the middle-aged conscientious objector, seen with his wife and his admiring young son, David Dellinger, played by John Carroll Lynch. There are two younger objectors who do not feature so strongly, played by John Froines and Lee Weiner. The two characters who stand out immediately are Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin, long hair, hippie-style, Hoffman with a talent for wit and repartee, Rubin committed but a touch of the comic. It comes as quite a surprise to realise that Abbie Hoffman is being played by Sasha Baron Cohen, Rubin by the star of Succession, Jeremy Strong. Yahya Abdul Marteen II stands out as an impassioned Bobby Seale. They are the seven. However, particularly striking are the performances of the judge and the lawyers. Frank Langella is absolutely convincing (and frequently obnoxious) as the presiding judge (whose dealing with the case is heavily criticised afterwards). Joseph Gordon Levitt is the suit and tie, always standing and buttoning his coat, counsel for the prosecution. Mark Rylance, less dapper, is the effective counsel for the defence. So much of the courtroom drama is in their hands. There are scenes of the protests, a variety of flashbacks inserted throughout the film, groups demanding the right to protest, being denied, being attacked by the police, shields and batons and gas, to combat them.

In handling the case, the idea comes that the previous attorney general, Ramsey Clark, disliked by the Nixon attorney general, John Mitchell (who has to face his own legal challenges with Watergate) who had initiated the indictments, should testify in the case. His played by Michael Keaton, willing to testify, stating that investigation into the riots and protests indicated police brutality. (The judge will not allow the jury to hear this testimony.) And so, a film of 2020, looking at divisive American past experience, released during the campaign for the 2020 presidential election. A great deal to interest, performances and dialogue to enjoy, and plenty to challenge.

SOMEONE HAS TO DIE/ Alguien tiene que morir Mexico/Spain, 2020, 149 minutes, Colour. Cecilia Suarez, Ernesto Alterio, Alejandro Speitzer, Isaac Hernandez, Ester Exposito, Carlos Cuevas, Carmen Maura. Directed by Manolo Caro. Appearing on Netflix, this film was divided into 3x50 minute sections, presenting it as a miniseries. While the film is basically Mexican, it is set in Spain in the last years of Franco’s regime. It does highlight class distinctions in Spanish society – and also the snobbery of Spaniards towards the colonial Mexicans. The tone is quite Hispanic, melodramatic, even operatic, especially in its culmination. This may be too much for some sensibilities but, allowing for cultural styles, the film has much going for it. The film focuses on a family. The son has spent 10 years in Mexico, from the time he was a little boy, and has now returned to Madrid, accompanied by a Mexican friend who is a successful ballet dancer. The father, a successful businessman, doing deals with intrigue, intends his son to get his life in order and become a businessman like himself. The father is also dominating of his wife, quite brutal, especially in sexual encounters. His mother is very glad to see her son and also welcomes the dancer. For a complication, the grandmother also lives in the house. She is an extraordinarily strong and dominating personality, her husband having died 10 years earlier in a shooting accident. She is played by Spanish actress, Carmen Maura, notable in Spanish films over the decades, especially in filmed by Pedro Almodovar. There is a surprising episode at the beginning of the film, women working in a prison like factory, 14 hour shifts, all lined up and harangued by a priest, especially condemning two women for their lesbian relationship. This introduces the same-sex theme. Many presume that the son returning from Mexico is in a relationship with the dancer. Gossip goes around, homosexuality is legislated against and homosexuals should be reported to the government – where they are interned, tortured to get further names. Meanwhile, the focus is also on another family, and the occasion of shooting competitions, pigeons, their wings clipped, released and shot. There are official competitions, highly social events. One of the champions, from the other family, is a literally buttoned up, suit and tie, businessman, playing football, macho, but, it is clear, about his closeted sexual orientation and his attraction towards the friend coming back from Spain. There is a past. At some stages, concerning relationships, there are some comedies of errors. There is a lot of gossip, jealousy, manipulation, cover-up. However, ultimately, there are some tragedies of errors, the father denouncing and imprisoning his son, the fact that the dancer is heterosexual and is attracted towards his friend’s mother, the sister intended for marriage to the son coming back from Mexico, gossiping, drawing false conclusions, malicious.

And, there is the truth about the grandmother, her husband, her hold on her son, her manipulation of a household servant whose communist husband is in jail, destroying documents… The climax, with rifles and guns, involves all the central characters, confrontations, deaths, pathos – and a critique of self-involved families, consequences of repressive homophobia and sexual legislation, a retrospective on the strictness of the Franco regime.

THE WAY BACK US, 2020, 108 minutes, Colour. Ben Affleck, Al Madrigal, Janina Gavankar, Michaela Watkins. Directed by Gavin O'Connor. There are several nuances in the title of this portrait of a man and his failings. There is the way back to his self-esteem. There is a way back to his rehabilitation from alcoholism. There is a way back to his better self, to some kind of redemption. On the one hand, this is a basketball film, with many of the familiar conventions of the sports story. On the other hand, this is a very personal story about a man and his failings, comeback and continued failings, about the need for some kind of redemption. For those who enjoy basketball, there are scenes of practice, a losing team becoming better, the creation of a spirit in the team, the exhilaration of competitive matches, the ups and downs of the particular members of the team and the demands of the coach, the final match full of energy and tribute to the coach. But, overall, the film is the portrait of the coach. He is played by Ben Affleck, a mature performance showing a man whose self-esteem has lowered over the years, especially in the face of a tragedy. He works on a building site, lives alone estranged from his wife, does visit his mother and his sister and her family, admired by his nephew, but has few prospects in bettering his life and himself. A step towards the way back and was redemption comes from the parish priest, Fr. Devine, who invites him to come back to his school where he was a basketball champion in order to coach the team. He is quite reluctant, spends time brooding, but actually does go back to accept the job. Interestingly, this is a Catholic high school and the basketball competition seems to be an inter--Catholic schools’ competition. (And, there are standards at the school, zero tolerance towards alcohol in the school and a language norm, which Jack, with his four-letter outbursts, needs to tone down – and the assistant priest, Fr. Whelan, who attends practices and the matches, keeps insisting.) Gradually, the reasons for Jack’s collapse emerge, the untimely death of his son, his inability to communicate his grief and his feelings, his lack of support for his wife and their separation. The film does not offer Jack any easy way back. He has to go through quite a moral and physical collapse, losing his job, a drunken accident, hospitalisation. And then, we see the first steps towards rehabilitation. But, we know that Jack has failed previously and can only hope that this time he will be more successful in his redemption.

SIGNIS REVIEWS DECEMBER 2020

AFTER WE COLLIDED

ANTEBELLUM

BABYTEETH

BILL AND TED FACE THE MUSIC

CHRISTMAS GIFT FROM BOB, A

COMEBACK TRAIL, The

CORPUS CHRISTI

FATMAN

FREAKY

GIRL ON THE BRIDGE, The

HAPPIEST SEASON, The

HOPE GAP

HOW DO YOU KNOW CHRIS?

LAST FULL MEASURE, The

LET HIM GO

MISBEHAVIOUR

MONSOON

MY SALINGER YEAR

MYSTERY OF DB COOPER, The

NEVER RARELY SOMETIMES ALWAYS

NEVER TOO LATE

PINOCCHIO

POSSESSOR

RAMS

RHYTHM SECTION, The

TENET

TROUBLE WITH BEING BORN, The

UNHINGED

WORDS ON BATHROOM WALLS

AFTER WE COLLIDED

US, 2020, 105 minutes, Colour.

Josephine Langford, Hero Fiennes Tiffin, Dylan Sprouse, Louise Lombard, Shane Paul Mc Ghie, Candice King. Directed by Roger Kumble

The key word is “After”. This is the second instalment of a series featuring the word “after” in the title. And this film presupposes the first film, After, from 2019. The audience can manage the narrative of After We Collided but, certainly, the first film provides a great deal of background.

One of the problems, one of the challenges, is whether we find the central characters and their relationship attractive, or even interesting. He, Hardin, is one of those dark and brooding characters (and, there is a reference to Wuthering Heights). He is sullen, surly, sulky, spiky. He has an instant temper, sometimes physically lashing out. He has an angry, swearing mouth. And, it is worse when he drinks, which he does a lot. He is played by Hero Fiennes Tiffin (member of the British Fiennes acting family). He has been spoiled by his mother to whom he is devoted. And he has angry memories of his father’s relationship with his mother, walking out on the family, marrying again. He has a tenuously positive relationship with his half-brother.

She, Tessa (Josephine Langford who, in fact, hales from Perth) has more potential. While she is committed to her studies, reading, her becoming part of a publishing firm, she is erratic in her behaviour, on-again passionately with Hardin, off-again passionately from Hardin, also prone to drinking and behaving irresponsibly, tauntingly, and then backtracking.

The original books were written for a younger audience, 20 somethings who could identify with the characters and their turmoil. However, it is instructive to have a glance at the bloggers on the IMDb, many of them of the same age as the characters, who really do not identify with them, are critical of their immaturity, nominate the relationship as toxic.

There is some other plotlines in the background, especially with Trevor, a financial wizard who works for the publishing firm, rather nerdy, supportive of Tessa and attracted to her (and gets a needless comic insertion during the final credits). There is also the development of the publishing firm, a party to persuade a millionaire to invest, a visit to the frat house and another party, a visit from Hardin’s mother, his violent confronting of his father after 10 years, a possible reconciliation.

Will the relationship last? Could it last? Actually, there are two more films in the making that will take the series on further: after We Fell and After Ever Happy (and that twisting of the phrase sounds rather ominous!)

ANTEBELLUM US, 2020, 103 minutes, Colour. Janelle Monae, Eric Lange, Tongayi Chirisa, Jena Malone, Jack Huston, Keirsey Clemons, Marque Richardson, Robert Aramayo, Gaby Sibouore. Directed by Gerard Bush, Christopher Renz.

Antebellum rings with that sound of the old American south, the spirit of the South before the Civil War.

This film goes in quite some unexpected directions.

For the first half hour, it is a re-creation of life on a plantation, the descendants of the African slaves, still in slavery, picking the cotton, living in rather squalid conditions, sternly supervised as they work in the fields, verbally abused, severely punished if they run away and are re-captured. One of the main supervisors is Captain Jasper, a cruel man played by Jack Huston. His arrogantly snobbish wife is played by Jenna Malone. There is also the general, played by Eric Lange, who dominates the men, urges them to patriotic spirit, the Confederate spirit, to win the war and preserve the South. There are quite a number of soldiers present, dining with the General, ready to keep law and order.

We see a female slave return to the plantation, tortured and shot. There are quite a number of women slaves, working in the fields, waiting at the tables, but also to be made available to the men after the meal. One slave, Edan, is the possession of general. Another slave, brought from North Carolina to Louisiana, is made available to the young soldiers. Desperate, she hangs herself.

And then, we are suddenly in the 21st-century, an affluent home, an academic, Veronica, about to go to a conference on the status of women. She is an expert, has published. She has a devoted husband and child. We are hundred and sixty years on from the Civil War. This is a very different United States – or is it? Veronica has a successful conference – but, there are hints of racism from the concierge at the hotel, she and her friends being placed at the table near the entrance to the kitchen… On the whole, Veronica and her friends live a very comfortable life.

Veronica is played by Janelle Monae. She has woken up to a nightmare where she is Edan.

It would be too much of a spoiler in a review to say anything more about the remainder of the film except to say that it is surprising, dramatic, melodramatic, quite disturbing to the audience.

But, for a film released in 2020, it is very much in the vein of Black Lives Matter. It is a condemnation of those who have preserve the racist attitudes of the past – where white supremacist violence can erupt. There is a critique of theme parks and those popular re-enactments of battles and events in the Civil War, dressing up, uniforms, weapons, seen as preserving and legitimising the racism.

It would be interesting to know more how Antebellum was received in the United States and the effect on audiences. For audiences outside the United States, it is quite a jolting and unsettling experience.

BABYTEETH

Australia, 2019, 118 minutes, Colour.

Eliza Scanlon, Toby Wallace, Ben Mendelssohn, Essie Davis.

Directed by Shannon Murphy.

Despite…

Better to leave that word till the end of the review.

Here is a slice of life from Sydney, characters that one might recognise but also characters that one might not always identify with. The impact of this film will depend on whether one connects with the characters, most reviewers and bloggers really being taken by them, others commenting that they felt that they were observing, rather detached, not quite connecting with the characters. Which means that there will be different responses to the situations and issues.

This is a story about a teenage girl, still at school, Milla, but diagnosed with terminal cancer. It is a story about how she deals with her illness, acknowledging it, ignoring it, her parents love and care, an encounter with an addict terror away young man and his effect on her. She is played by Eliza Scanlen, a subtle performance. (Eliza Scanlen had appeared as Beth in Greta Gerwig’s version of Little Women, was also seen in The Devil All the Time.) In many ways, this is a close-up of Milla, the complexity of her personality, the twists and turns in her behaviour, ultimately unpredictable, and the touch of the tragic.

It is also the story of Moses, a striking performance by Toby Wallace. Often high, often reckless, he knocks Milla on the Sydney railway station as he rushes to crash into the wall of a carriage. However, this is the beginning of a friendship, on and off on his part, unreliable. But, Moses is attracted to Milla and the interactions are complex, liberating her from her suburban way of life, invited by her parents to live in to support her, but his being challenged at the end by her wish to die.

Milla’s parents are played by Ben Mendelssohn and Essie Davis, each character quite idiosyncratic, the father a psychiatrist, loving, frequently exasperated by his moody wife, her need for affection and affirmation, her constant need for medication. Their daughter’s illness is a challenge to them, something that they are not always able to respond to despite their wanting to.

Rounding out the characters is a young woman, played by Emily Barclay, single, pregnant, moving in across the street, engaging the father’s attention and regrets. There is also a music teacher, fond of the mother, teaching Milla violin, urging her mother to resume her piano playing. (There are also two young boys, a youngster learning the violin, and Moses’ admiring younger brother.)

We realise that we are watching a cross-section of people who are ordinary in many ways, eccentric in many others, challenging our responses. There are deep personal issues. There are challenges in moral issues.

There is an unexpected sequence before the final credits, a beach scene with everybody present, taking photographs, playing and happy, even mucking around.

Which means then that, ultimately, there are some hopes, despite…

BILL AND TED FACE OF THE MUSIC

US, 2020, 91 minutes, Colour.

Keanu Reeves, Alex Winter, Kristen Schaal, Samara Weaving, Bridgette Lundy- Paine, Holland Taylor, William Sadler, Erinn Hayes, Jayma Mays, Hal Lindon Jr, Kid Cudi, Jillian Bell.

Directed by Dean Parisot.

It is not as if Bill and Ted have been absent from cinema and television consciousness for the 30 years since their very popular excellent adventures and bogus journeys. During the decades there have been series, animated series, documentaries, spoofs. So, in many ways, it is not surprising to find them returning in the 21st-century.

Obviously, this is a film for their many fans (now three decades older) as well as those who have enjoyed the re-runs on television. However, the anticipation has led to disappointment for many fans, their finding that this film did not recreate the buzz that they felt on first encounter. Of course, many have welcomed this sequel.

In many ways, it depends on how audiences responded to Bill and Ted in the first place, their personalities, their way of communicating, “most excellent”, their being adventurers of the 1980s, not exactly stuck in their time because they could time travel, perhaps stuck in the music of the time despite their ambitions to do more and better.

And, in many ways, it all depends on how an audience responds to Keanu Reeves after all these years. He takes on some stilted mannerisms in his presentation of Ted, often an awkward kind of presence. On the other hand, Alex Winter (who has devoted much of his subsequent career to direction and documentaries) seems rather more relaxed in his resuming the role. They do have plenty of opportunities to portray variations on their characters, various ‘Us’s’ seen in the near future, as irresponsible nerds, as fake POMS, as more genial bed-ridden oldies in a nursing home, and at various times in a much more distant future.

There is opportunity to meet their wives again, who themselves come from the past, who are in group counselling, the two couples trying to manage with counsellor Jillian Bell. But, a touch more excitingly, there are their two daughters who show a lot of vitality, eagerness for music, admiration for their fathers – and contributing to the quest for finding the music that will unite the world.

So, Bill and Ted go on time travelling adventures again, trying to discover the music they composed (taking it from the future back to the past where they haven’t composed it and finding this difficult), and being pursued by a robot from the future (who humanises in shame for his bad behaviour) as well as the leader from 700 years hence and her daughter, time travelling to fix the situation.

Actually, the daughters take the situation in hand, doing quite a lot of time travelling themselves, deciding to assemble the best band ever, back to the 60s for Jimi Hendrix, back to the 1920s for Louis Armstrong, back to the 1780s for Mozart, back to ancient Chinese times for a flutist, back to prehistoric times for a literal rock drummer. And, would you believe, yes, of course, they finish up in the hellish nether regions with another encounter with Death and his musical ambitions and frustrations (William Sadler being a good sport and appearing again).

So, Bill and Ted contribute to saving the world as they face the music.

A CHRISTMAS GIFT FROM BOB UK, 2020, 92 minutes, Colour. Luke Treadway, Nina Wadia, Anna Wilson-Jones, Christina Tonteri- Young, Tim Lister, Stephen McCole, Celyn Jones, Phaldut Sharma, Poppy Roe, Sheena Bhatessa. Directed by Charles Martin Smith.

For many audiences, especially cat-lovers (and maybe even dog-lovers), the book and the film, A Streetcat Named Bob, based on the writings by James Bowen, another visit from Bob and James will be very welcome. And, it is set in London at Christmas, not always full of good cheer, but, especially by the end, a happy time for all.

Once again, Luke Treadway is James Bowen, former drug-addict, clean, going through the process of cold turkey with the help of Bob. They now live in a flat in London, James going out with his guitar, busking in Covent Garden or selling The Big Issue at Angel Station. Bob, generally present, perched on James’s shoulders. And, it being Christmas, somebody kindly gives Bob a little Santa jacket and cap.

James encounters the Animal Welfare patrol harassing a young busker. James defends him, brings him home, despite his surliness, gives him a meal and tells him stories about Bob. Flashbacks and away we go.

The film is a reminder of life on the streets in London. Another sympathetic character is Bea (a touch of romantic interest) who works at a soup kitchen, in full preparations for hosting those in need at Christmas. There are some rough reality when the food kitchen is robbed. In the meantime, the villains of the piece turn out to be the Animal Welfare authorities, concerned about Bob’s well-being, suspicious of James, making all kinds of investigations, character references, talking about his history and reliability.

Another sympathetic character is Moody, a man with Indian background who runs the local store. He is a good listener for James, supplying sardines for Bob, able to help when Bob gets sick and needs a vet (and we have seen a very sympathetic vet, Dr Becky, associated with the soup kitchen). With all the persecution, Moody goes on line, setting up a petition for signatures in favour of James and Bob. Which rather overwhelms the animal welfare people!

When word gets around, Lets people know where Bob is and they gather in crowds, bringing gifts, especially a lady who had been knocked down on the street and whom James had helped, who turns out to be a television chef (and, perhaps a touch gooey, on TV she shows the biscuits he has made in Bob’s shape and with the Santa clothes!).

On the whole, a very cheery show, full of feeling, and a glint of a tear in the eye at the end.

THE COMEBACK TRAIL US, 2020, 104 minutes, Colour. Robert De Niro, Morgan Freeman, Tommy Lee Jones, Emile Hirsch, Zach Braff, Patrick Muldoon, Eddie Griffin, Kate Katzman, Vincent Spano. Directed by George Gallo.

The Comeback Trail offers a mixed bag of entertainment. It takes us back to Hollywood in 1974, the era of exploitation films, an era of shonky producers (well, perhaps, that is always with us), deals with and insurance scams.

The dominant presence in the film is Robert De Niro, as Max Barker, long grey curly hair, cap, sunglasses, a way with words, but ready for a deal if it suits him. De Niro certainly gives it his energetic best but, his insistent presence and performance may grate on some audiences. Trying to provide some kind of emotional and ethical balance, is his nephew, played by Zach Braff. We first see them watching outside of the cinema playing Killer Nun (perhaps a title now taken for granted on Netflix!), with a group of clergy and sisters protesting with placards. (The screenplay has its cake and eat it as well by providing a rather lengthy trailer for the film, a touch of the salacious, during the final credits, gangsters, drug dealers, vigilante nuns prizing funds for their orphanage!).

The principal gangster here is played by Morgan Freeman, deep baritone as usual, but obnoxious, a gangster with a fund of knowledge and reference to old movies, an odd performance.

Complications arise when an upstart producer who used to work with Max, James (Emile Hirsch) offers $1 million for a screenplay that Max prizes dearly and wants to make whatever the cost. When the star of the projected film, preening himself for publicity, actually overbalances and falls to his death, there is a revelation – $5 million on his insurance policy.

Max sees a marvellous way for a comeback. He has an old script about the Oldest Gun in the West and realises that an ancient, grizzled Western star, Duke Montana, in an aged home and now suicidal, would be the ideal to play in the film – but for him to die on set quickly into the filming and Max and the gangster who subsidises the costs, get rich quick.

Actually, the film seems to get better and more entertaining once the filming starts. Tommy Lee Jones is at his best as Duke Montana, depressed and regretting his life, but remembering his success and career, expert at stunts, though not without apprehension at times. Once the group go on location, there are some very enjoyable sequences with Duke’s stunts, as well as Max’s attempts to kill him.

The gangster threatens to come to the set and does, revolver in hand. However, he is highly entertained by the footage they have shot, what else but a happy ever after comeback for everyone concerned.

Mixed blessings.

CORPUS CHRISTI Poland, 2019, 115 minutes, Colour. Bartosz Bielenia, Aleksandra Konieczna, Eliza Rycembel. Directed by Jan Komasa.

Corpus Christi, the Latin for the body of Christ, has found a place in the English language, a city in Texas, a religious celebration, a reference to the celebration of the Eucharist. It is an apt title for this quite intriguing story of a Polish parish and the young priest, Daniel (Bartosz Bielenia) who serves some time ministering and having quite an effect on the parishioners. But, we know right from the beginning, that he is not a priest. There is a certain curiosity in wanting to see this film because it was one of the five nominees for the 2019 Oscars category of Best International Film (won by Korea’s Parasite). It seems a strange selection for the award and seems even stranger that it finished in the top nominees. It will be of particular interest to Catholic audiences who might be intrigued as to the situation, the character of the young man, how he manages in the parish and the impact that he has on people. On the other hand, some Catholic audiences might be repelled at his character, his presumption in taking on the role of parish priest, think that it is somewhat sacrilegious. But, it is interesting, especially in terms of so much of the dialogue where everybody says “Blessed be God” in their frequent greetings to one another, and some homily reflections on the presence of God everywhere, especially in strange situations and circumstances. Daniel has committed some violent crimes when young and is imprisoned in a juvenile detention centre, a Catholic Centre, with priests on the staff, including a chaplain. Daniel discusses a desire to enter a seminary with the chaplain but is told that with his convictions he has no chance. And, as we see some of the behaviour of the inmates, cocaine, drinking, sexual activity, some brutality towards each other, we are not surprised. However, it is Daniel who prepares the altar for Mass, does the serving, intones the hymn singing. Sent on parole to a sawmill in a remote town, he wants to avoid the mill, goes into the church, encounters a young woman, says he is a priest and shows her the black shirt and clerical collar that he has taken from the institution. He meets the local parish priest, an elderly and sick man who is taken to hospital – and the people ask Daniel to hear the confessions, say Mass.

One of the features of this film is that it is not anticlerical. It takes for granted the church, Mass, sacraments, anointing of the sick, funerals, pastoral care of people, and it is accurate and respectful in most of its details. One of the main questions, of course, is what is the reality of priesthood. Daniel has some non-exemplary moments, especially with the young girl in the parish, and is pressurised by one of his fellow inmates to hand over the parish collection. But, Daniel is imbued with a sense of reverence, all kinds of moving words and sentiments coming from him as homily, as encouragement for behaviour, his challenging the parishioners to overcome quite some bigotry concerning an accident in which a number of the teenagers from the village were killed. In fact, with some contemporary and eyebrow-raising detail, there is the temptation to remember the novel by Georges Bernanos and Robert Bresson’s film, Diary of a Country Priest. Daniel is very young, his life ahead of him, and we wonder what impact this priestly episode will have on his future. But, for audiences who have responded favourably to the film, there is much to consider about God, prayer, sin and guilt, forgiveness, the role of the priest in the church. (It is interesting to speculate what would happen in a sequel…)

FATMAN

US, 2020, 100 minutes, Colour. Mel Gibson, Walton Goggins, Marianne Jean-Baptiste, Chance Hurstfield. Directed by S John Nelms, Ian Nelms.

Probably best said at the beginning of a review, the plotline and the developments of this comedy/thriller are bonkers. Who would have imagined a plot like this!

First of all, Fatman is Kris Kringle. For Miracle on 34th Street fans, he was happily embodied as Edmond Gwenn, even winning an Oscar for his performance, then by Richard Attenborough. He is a jolly old man, Ho-ho-ho, recognisable as Santa with his beard.

On the contrary, Chris Kringle is played here by a bearded and grizzled Mel Gibson. No dapper Chris Kringle this one. Rather, he lives in Alaska with his wife, Ruth, Mrs Kringle (Marianne Jean-Baptiste, memorable for film fans for her role in Mike Leigh’s Secrets and Lies). They have a motley crew of elves who work in a factory, preparing the gifts. But, Chris Kringle has fallen on hard financial times and, who would believe it, has signed a contract for the elves to start building planes for the Defence Force, military personnel on what is now the equivalent of a base.

So far, so different.

However, it is even more different! With the touch of the bonkers!

Billy (Chance Hurstfield) is a spoilt brat, dapper in suit and tie, something of an inventor and presuming that he always wins the school invention competition but comes in runner up this time. His father is absent, he lives with a doting grandmother. He writes to Santa but it is extremely disappointed in the lump of coal that he receives.

What else is a young lad to do! Clearly, contact his favourite hitman and put a contract on Santa. It should be said that Walton Goggins does his best to make the hitman a memorable character, absolutely sinister, absolutely ruthless, absolutely committed to his contract, a fund of weapons, going shopping for even more, driving through Canada to Alaska in search of his target.

It should be said that the body count, anybody who gives information to the assassin and knows too much is immediately dispatched. And there are a lot of military casualties.

Which brings us to a kind of High Noon situation in the Alaskan snow, Chris Kringle facing off the assassin, knowing who the assassin is and his unhappy childhood and resentment about the small toy his father organised. Quite some shooting and it looks as though Santa is lost forever. Perish the thought.

And for those of us who are wanting some kind of justice on that boy, Billy, who seems to be a young Blofeld in the making, a satisfying confrontation with Santa.

Clearly not a film for the children’s audience. Is it a film for the adult audience? Well, it is certainly is something for those who want difference in their entertainment. But, in retrospect, it does seem rather bonkers!

FREAKY US, 2020, 102 minutes, Colour. Vince Vaughn, Kathryn Newton, Celeste O'Connor, Misha Osherovich, Dana Drori, Katie Fineran, Uriah Shelton, Alan Ruck. Directed by Christopher Landon.

Sometimes they refer to this kind of film as “Body Swap”. At other times it is one soul, one personality, exchanging with another. Family audiences remember Freaky Friday. And there have been a whole lot of variations on the theme. This one is quite a variation! And it takes place as the opening indicates on a freaky Wednesday the 11th, continues on a freaky Thursday the 12th and culminates on a very freaky Friday the 13th.

This is a production from Jason Blum and his Blumhouse company,, becoming more and more prolific in recent years. They are mainly horror films. Sometimes they are quite high and and get critical response like Get Out, The Invisible Man. Otherwise they plunder all the old genres and conventions, frequently tongue in cheek, not minding moments of bloodshed and gore.

This one is aiming rather high, especially with its leads, veteran Vince Vaughn and Kathryn Newton (Big Little Lies). It is not without some gory deaths – those who dislike gory deaths will be put off, perhaps very much put off, by the first five minutes which has four teenagers splattered in a reminder of the Scream franchise. And there is a masked killer.

The murders raise quite an alarm in the local community. The film focuses on a widow and her two daughters, one who is a member of the police force, the other, Millie, Kathryn Newton, still at school. She is picked on at school, treated very badly by one of the teachers, still said that to be death of her father and worried about her mother’s growing dependence on alcohol.

Which is the situation for the Body Swap, the killer approaching Millie, armed with dagger with supernatural powers, each of them stabbed and, lo and behold, killer Vince Vaughn having to act (quite entertainingly) as a teenage girl and Kathryn Newton embodying the killer. Which means that everybody is terrified at school especially when the killer in movies body turns up and has to persuade people that he is Millie. On the other hand, the Killer Is Millie insinuates himself into the school, reading a bit of gory vengeance.

The two have until midnight to get their bodies exchanged so there is a bit frantic behaviour, as the killer infiltrates the school and the alternative to the homecoming dance, while Millie’s friends do their best to save the day, save the night.

Clearly, this is Blumhouse horror for the fans, making sure that it has its quota of gore but, not intending to be taken deadly seriously, lots of tongue-in-cheek dialogue and quips. However, unlike some other films, it does spend some time on some more emotional family and friendship conversations.

The film was written and directed by Christopher Landon who made a strong impression with Happy Death Day 2 U and who wrote several of the Paranormal Activity films.

THE GIRL ON THE BRIDGE

New Zealand, 2019, 90 minutes, Colour.

Jazz Thornton.

Directed by Leanne Pooley.

A significant film.

This is a New Zealand story but it is also a universal story. Its theme is suicide, especially suicide by the young, the pressures, their motivations, their desperation, as well and is the impact on those they leave behind. While this theme has been explored in documentaries and in feature films, this treatment is quite distinctive. It is due to a young woman, Jazz Thornton.

We are introduced to Jazz and learn immediately that she had made 14 suicide attempts. But, taking her life seriously, she moved on but not only for her own life but for all those in similar situations, launching a personal crusade. She set up an organisation, Voices of Hope. She also set out to make a web series, based on her contact with a young woman, Jessica, who did take her own life, Jazz caught up but unable to save Jessica. Ultimately, she did produce the web series – which is available online.

Jazz Thornton is quite a screen presence. She is immediately engaging, the audience responding well, liking her, appreciating her directness and candour, but also charmed by her genial and outgoing personality. We are compelled to listen to her, to take her concerns very seriously, to being involved in her crusade.

While, we learn Jazz’s story, this is not a narrative about her life, her suicide attempts and the reasons for her changing her life. Rather, it is a documentary showing her collaborating with media producers, discussing a web series called Jessica’s Tree, the planning, how it would work, the communication issues, the ethical issues, the legal issues… In fact, the narrative of the film and its style is something like fly-on-the-wall observation of Jazz and her co-workers, but with also some talking straight to camera.

We are carried along by Jazz’s enthusiasm, her way with words, her extremely expressive face, seeing her giving various talks, to school children, a Ted Talk, articulate, authentic. Jazz is also a convincing fundraiser.

Quite an amount of the film is given to interviews with Jessica’s parents, sometimes overcome with emotion, sad memories and regrets, but believing in Jazz and what she is trying to do, ultimately present at the screening of the web series. There are also interviews with a number of young people who knew Jessica.

Throughout the film, in her talks, in discussions with the producers (especially the two women who not only give her support but clarify her thinking and contribute to her ideas), in her observations about her own experiences, Jazz makes a lot of sense. She declares she is not trying to modify behaviour as such but enable a person to change their belief, their belief about themselves, about life. And she is very strong in condemning those who want to reassure by saying “it’ll be okay”.

Suicide, mental illness, depression, seem to be increasingly prevalent in the world today. Some statistics are frightening. But, here is a young woman, speaking from experience, becoming both an educator and a crusader promoting more knowledge, more understanding about suicide.

This film is certainly a significant resource for any group involved in suicide prevention. It is also a strong resource for parents, educators, and, hopefully, by anyone with depression and contemplating suicide who might get the opportunity to watch it. (It is worth Googling Jazz Thornton as well as Jessica’s Tree for articles and video material.)

The energetic Jazz Thornton continues her work, her vocation.

HAPPIEST SEASON

US, 2020, 102 minutes, Colour. Kristin Stewart, Mackenzie Davis, Mary Steenburgen, Victor Garber, Alison Brie, Mary Holland, Daniel Leay, Burl Moseley, Aubrey Plaza, Jake McDorman, Ana Gasteyer. Directed by Clea DuVall.

In so many films, Christmas is the happiest season. And, in so many films, it is not always the happiest. It is one of the times, like Thanksgiving, when families gather together to enjoy one another’s company, to have meals, to share the spirit of the season, but also when tensions arise, harsh truths are told or truths concealed and revealed.

This is one of those family gatherings at Christmas – and quite some revelations.

This is a personal drama of two women in a relationship. Mackenzie Davis plays Harper, a writer. She is in a relationship with Abby, played quite persuasively by Kristin Stewart. They have their own lives, are open about their love for each other. And, as so often in the movies, they have a gay friend, John. He is played very entertainingly by Dan Levy (who created the Canadian award-winning television comedy series, Schitts Creek). Harper persuades Abby to travel home with her to meet her family (John will stay at home to look after the pets that Abby cares for).

On the way home, Harper confesses that she has not come out to her parents – but will do so after Christmas. Abby reluctantly agrees. When they arrive, they are welcomed by Harper’s exuberant mother, Mary Steenburgen, and the rather proper father, Victor Garber, a town councillor who is campaigning to be mayor and his using Christmas engagements, dinners and parties, to exemplify his credentials. The older daughter, Sloane (Alison Brie) arrives with her husband and twin children. And, there is the daughter who has stayed at home, always cheerfully erupting into the conversation, probably autistic, Jane (played by Mary Holland to co-wrote the screenplay with director, Clea Du Vall).

As anticipated, there will be quite some difficulties in concealment, and the parents inviting Harpers College boyfriend to dinner, disconcerting Abby. There is the room situation and Abby put upon by Sloane’s twins, shopping, slipping an item into her bag and her being arrested. While the parents do

their best, it is clear that they are finding Abby somewhat of an embarrassment. Abby, in the meantime, encounters Harper’s friend from school days (Aubrey Plaza), now a doctor at Johns Hopkins, but who knows the secret.

John then turns up to help with the situation, providing enjoyable touches of camp comedy. Abby, on the other hand, is deadly serious, dismayed at Harper’s overt denials.

The buildup is to one of those American family squabbles, or more than squabbles, where secrets come out, mother coping better than father who comes to realise how he has treated his daughters, favouring Harper for her intelligence and expertise, not acknowledging Sloane, and treating Jane in such offhand ways.

So, acceptance, resolution, happy photos, which makes the Christmas season happier than might have been expected.

HOPE GAP

UK, 2020, 100 minutes, Colour.

Annette Bening, Bill Nighy, Josh O’Connor.

Directed by William Nicholson.

Hope Gap is a place – near the Kentish Town of Seaford, close to Dover, the striking white cliffs. At English Channel level, when the tide goes out, there are rocks and rock pools. It is a walk where Jamie, and his parents, Edward and Grace, used to take him when he was young.

But Hope Gap is also symbolic. This is a story of a marriage, 29 years, but ending – although it may have ended years earlier.

If an audience wanted to find a film that showed a marriage in close-up, moments of extreme close-up, and increasing awareness of the gaps between husband and wife, then this is a film to recommend. It is not an entertainment in the genial sense. Rather, it is a compelling drama that is often quite disturbing.

It stars Annette Bening and Bill Nighy and they are at their best. They also have the advantage of a strong screenplay by writer William Nicholson (whose range extends from Shadowlands, the C.S.Lewis story, to Gladiator). Nicholson also directs the film.

One of the difficulties in writing a story about a marriage breakup is how much the writer takes sides with each protagonist. How much sympathy should there be for each? Can the screenplay be judgemental? And this is a particular difficulty for Hope Gap. It has to be said that Annette Bening’s Grace comes across as very unsympathetic, rather obdurate, dissatisfied, forever asking questions, quibbling with words and, as her son Jamie (Josh O’Connor) requests her, to stop having a go at her husband. Grace is Catholic and goes to Mass, believes in the insoluble bond of marriage, cannot accept what is happening to her. And, she does focus on what is happening to her, dismissing what is happening to Edward even as she wants him to stay and then to come back.

Because Grace is so hard, difficult to identify with, it is a challenge for the audience, not so much for the heart, but for the head, to acknowledge intellectually how hurt she must be by the experience while finding the hard to empathise.

On the other hand, it is not difficult to be sympathetic to Edward, Bill Nighy playing a quiet man, touch of the scholar, trying to avoid conflict, but finally deciding to leave – and the revelation that he has been in a relationship with a student’s mother, Angela, for a year.

Jamie, who has something of a lonely life of his own, is brought in as mediator, conveying messages questions – fond of his father, but his mother then beginning to treat him in the same way as she treated her husband.

So, while this is life-threatening and life-changing to the protagonists, it is a hard (important) challenge for the audience to share these experiences.

There is a strong moment of dialogue when grace confronts Angela, who says that she has seen them there were three unhappy people – and now there is only one.

HOW DO YOU KNOW CHRIS? Australia, 2020, 86 minutes, Colour. Luke Cook, Lynn Gilmartin, Travis McMahon, Rachel Kim Cross, Lee Mason, Jacob Machin, Ellen Grimshaw, Dan Haberfield, Susan Stevenson, Tatiana Quaresma, Stephen Caracher.

Directed by Ashley Harris.

Fair question? Especially as Chris has invited significant characters from his past to a party at his flat, Melbourne, the year 2000 (and some comment on the Olympics).

In fact, the film opens and closes with a 19-year-old a young woman, Emmy (Tatiana Quaresma). She goes into a laundromat, has forgotten coins, asks a friendly man there to mind her bag, he finishes his laundry, has asked her about the music she was listening to and gives her, from his laundry, a T-shirt

of the band. He introduces himself as Chris, has been writing in a notebook, invites her to his flat for the party that evening. She is hesitant. She has assignments.

The main part of the film is actually the party. It is reminiscent of those many films and plays where guests gather, interact, happily, unhappily, even savagely – memories of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf, The Boys in the Band. Chris is late so absent in the first 30 minutes or so. The film might have been called “Waiting for Chris”. But, that enables Emma to arrive, to meet two guests, very formally dressed, Mike and Dot, not sure what they have been invited. Inside, Emmy and the audience is introduced to Justin, close friend from school days, and his wife, Claire, also from the school days. By contrast, and again from the school days, is Tim Bluck, nickname Blucker , now in a wheelchair after an accident, but the sports champion in those supposedly good old days. There is Chris’s boss at the company, Shane, dressed like Sherlock Holmes. And, all in black, Gothic make up, his Crystal who seems to be Chris’s girlfriend. There is some ambiguity because the flat seems to be shared by Chris and Frank (and some comments about sexual relationships).

The main audience for this film seems to be twentysomethings, the audience who are the same age as the main characters (Chris is 28), who identify with them, share their interests and behaviour and relationships. Which makes it a bit harder for older audiences to do the same kind of sharing, to find the same kind of interest.

When Chris does eventually arrive, he does make the rounds of each character. However, his behaviour seems uncertain, ambiguous, different memories and different places where he encountered each of the characters – and his mother finally arriving.

The question all the way through, for the guests and for the audience, is why the party. Alert audiences will perceive a clue early in the film but will not be sure whether it is a clue or not. In fact, it is a strong clue leading to a climax, Chris addressing the group, remembering the impact of each of the persons, expressing gratitude (except for a savage reminder of what Blucker was like as a school bully).

Going back to the title, the audience could be asked how well they got to know Chris. And it is something of a sad story.

THE LAST FULL MEASURE US, 2020, 116 minutes, Colour. Sebastien Stan, William Hurt, Samuel L.Jackson, Christopher Plummer, Ed Harris, Peter Fonda, John Savage, Linus Roache, Bradley Whitford, Dale Dye, Jeremy Irvine, Amy Madigan, Diane Ladd, Alison Sudol, Lisa Gay Hamilton, Ser’ Darius Blain, Asher Miles Falica. Directed by Todd Robinson. Cinema release in the US in February 2020, just as Covid-19 hit. Then to Netflix. A Vietnam story, a very strong cast. The title is a quotation from Abraham Lincoln, from the Gettysburg Address, a reference to self-sacrifice in war, “the last full measure of devotion”.

This is a very moving film about men fighting in Vietnam, young men, out in the fields, ambushed, sudden deaths, injuries, helicopter rescue. But they are flashbacks because this is a story of 1999, an attempt to persuade the American government to award a Medal of Honour to a young man, Bill Pitsenbarger, who had given his last full measure of devotion in the field. A true story, from 1966-1999.

The screenplay uses a powerful device to draw in audiences. There has been a 32 year gap between action and this final request for the medal. There have been barriers, silences, cover-ups. And, once more, a weary application. A young man in a Pentagon office, Scott Huffman (Sebastian Stan), finds that he is assigned to this case. He is not particularly interested. There is to be a change of Secretary for his office. He is concerned about his own career and future, his wife and son. We are not particularly impressed by him.

But, as he meets some of the veterans, meet the parents of the hero, is touched by his experiences in his encounters, thes audience begin to identify with him much more, want to get to know the situation more, and, as each of the vets has nightmares, important flashbacks, we begin to appreciate who the young man was, his actions and decisions, his motivations, his willingness to give up his life for others. The whole narrative becomes something of a mission, of a quest.

Once again, the cast. Quite a collection of veterans, solid actors for the 1999 sequences, Samuel L Jackson, withdrawn and fishing with his grandchildren; Ed Harris, looking rather emaciated, surviving; a shellshocked Peter Fonda, unable to sleep at night because of his memories and frightening dreams; William Hurt, part of the helicopter rescue squad, haunted by his efforts to persuade the young hero to come back to safety; John Savage, now retired to Vietnam, creating a sanctuary on the very grounds where the fatal operation took place.

And, most movingly, a dignified performance by Christopher Plummer as he was turning 90, the young man’s father, battling terminal cancer, hoping for some kind of honour and vindication, Diane Ladd playing his wife.

A blogger remarked that they wanted more detail about the heroic young man. Rather, it seems better that we share the experience of Scott Huffman on his quest, gradually learning more and more, building up a final, more rounded, picture which made sense of the heroism.

But, at the end, we come back to the bureaucracy, political ambitions, neglect by officers in bringing forward the truth, some snobbery concerning mere ordinary soldiers. The screenplay is certainly no advocate of ambitious bureaucracy which lacks a sense of humanity.

A significant re-visiting of American action in Vietnam, irrespective of whether one was in favour of the war or not, a story of men in war, limitations and strengths, responsibilities, suffering, injury and

death, heroism in rescue, heroism in bonding with men under fire, willingness to die. The final award ceremony is significant but is highly emotional. Many bloggers mentioned their tears.

LET HIM GO US, 2020, 113 minutes, Colour. Diane Lane, Kevin Costner, Lesley Manville, Kayli Carter, Boo-boo Stewart, Jeffrey Donovan, Wil Brittain, Ryan Bruce. Directed by Thomas Bezucha.

The him of the title is a little boy. The speaker who says, let him go, is the boy’s grandfather, George, a quietly genial Kevin Costner. He is speaking to his wife, a feisty and determined Diane Lane, Margaret, absolutely devoted to her grandson.

The setting is the American West in the 1960s. George has been a lawman for 30 years. He and Margaret have one son, James, who has married Lorna and have a little boy, Jamie. Sadly, at the beginning of the film, James is thrown from his horse and dies. The action moves a couple of years, the grandparents doting on the child (Margaret unwittingly edging Lorna out so often). Lorna remarries and she and Jamie move out. But, all is not well, Margaret seeing the new husband hitting wife and son in the street.

Margaret cannot let him go. She persuades George that they should travel to visit their grandson and bring him back home. They travel, find that the family has moved to North Dakota where the husband comes from, a son in a matriarchal family called We boy. It is not going to be a happy journey.

The Weboys live out in a rather desolate countryside, both mountainous and open plains. They live in a rather Gothic mansion – which gives the tone to the rest of the action, Gothic Western..

The messages about the Weboys are grim. This is communicated powerfully when the couple arrive and encounter the matriarch herself, Blanche, a frightening performance by British Lesley Manville. She is dominating. Her sons and nephew support her. There is high tension at a meal. And, the tension continues, Blanch ousting the couple.

The fact is that Lorna and her son are virtually imprisoned in the old mansion, Lorna allowed to go into town to work in a store. Her callow husband seems neglectful. George and Margaret arrange a meeting and a possible plan.

This, of course, builds up to determination on Margaret’s part, George supporting her, and their getting some kind help from a Native American who lives out in the countryside by himself, Peter (Booboo Stewart).

The United States has a gun culture, and problems in the west of the past were solved by the gun. It is not exactly a heroic shootout at the end but, rather, a doomed shootout. We are left to wonder whether there was any alternative.

MISBEHAVIOUR

UK, 2020, 106 minutes, Colour.

Keira Knightly, Jesse Buckley, Gugu Mbatha Raw, Rhys Ifans, Keeley Hawes, Greg Kinnear, Lesley Manville, Phyllis Logan, John Heffernan, Loreece Harrison, Suki Waterhouse, Justin Salinger.

Directed by Philip Lowthorpe.

Once upon a time, there was a very popular pageant, Miss World. Most people took it for granted that their country should have its own Miss… And, she would have the opportunity for the worldwide competition. But, in the last half-century, the world has had to rethink (gradually) about how appropriate it is to have young women paraded, especially for the male gaze, and to be judged on how they looked (swimsuits and measurements).

Misbehaviour is set 50 years ago and is a record of the first challenge to the competition, and the beginning of Women’s Liberation activities in the United Kingdom. Things have certainly changed over the decades, and, of course, there has been the #Me Too movement, often grim reminders of sexual harassment and abuse..

In 1970, the organisers of the pageant, Eric and Julia Morley (played here by Rhys Ifans and Keeley Hawes) have set up the occasion for a London theatre, negotiating, successfully, for Bob Hope to be the compere (as he had 10 years earlier). However, there is a group of women who meet, opposed to the pageant, with plans and strategies to disrupt the event, buying tickets rather than simply placarding outside but able to disturb from within.

Misbehaviour is based on actual events and characters – with, the principal characters themselves, appearing at the end of the film, older women 50 years on, making some comments on what it happened, and what their lives have been subsequently.

At the centre is a history teacher, Sally, who wants a place at the University and is subjected to all-male boards, who does get a place but finds at tutorials the professor as well as other students, male, talk over her, criticise her research subjects… She is played earnestly and strongly by Keira Knightley.

When she sees a young woman spraying graffiti on posters, she warns her that the police are pursuing. The young woman, Jo. is played, vigorously by Jessie Buckley. Sally is invited to some of the discussions, does not immediately identify with the ragtag group, but is persuaded to join the protest.

It is a surprise to see Greg Kinnear playing Bob Hope, and a jolt to the memory with his innuendo jokes. Lesley Manville plays his long-suffering wife, Dolores.

So, much of the action takes place at the pageant itself, some taking the audience behind the scenes, especially the negotiations by Eric Morley to have not just Miss South Africa but Miss Africa South, a black competitor with some conversation about apartheid. There is also Miss Granada (Gugu Mbatha Raw), also a black contestant who is proud of her selection.

Protest, police, arrests, Sally having a conversation with Miss Granada, the women getting out of jail and their sense of achievement. And information follows about women’s liberation marches which soon followed.

An entertaining cast, some vigorous dialogue, but a reminder of how attitudes towards the place of women in society have been (too gradually for many) during the last half-century.

MONSOON UK, 2019, 85 minutes, Colour Henry Golding, Parker Sawyers, David Tran, Molly Harris. Directed by Hong Khaou. The title of the film comes up on screen 13 minutes into the narrative. And the rains and the suggestions of monsoon come only at the end. However, monsoon describes weather in south-east Asia, in Vietnam, the possibilities for destruction, but the rain and cleansing, and then recovery and efforts in building up again. The audience is invited to gaze initially at the traffic in Vietnam, from above, the cars, the myriad bikes, the intersections and vehicles crossing. Then the streets, travel in taxis, travel on the backs of motorbikes – which audiences who have visited Vietnam will easily identify with. But, the screenplay invites the audience to identify with Kit (Henry Golding from The Gentleman, Crazy Rich Asians). He has sold up his business in the UK where he has grown up. He is bringing his mother’s ashes to Vietnam, and his brother will bring the father’s ashes and they will scatter them. But, for Kit, it is a journey into the past (though he was six when his parents left Vietnam). It is a search for his heritage, wandering around Ho Chi Minh City, absorbing the atmosphere, visiting the young man who is like his cousin from the past, who now has his own business, built on the money that Kit’s mother had lent him. The two do some searching together. It should be emphasised that this is a very introspective film. While we travel and share with Kit, we are continually invited to identify with his questing, his reflections, the range of moods, although he is a very genial and gentle character (and Henry Golding is blessed with a very genial smile and

personal composure). It is probably best to suggest that the film is “unhurried” – which means that it will not appeal to audiences who are in a hurry, were anxious for plenty of narrative development, for action, like quick editorial cuts and pace. Some audiences, inpatient, will not take the time (or realise, perhaps), that they need to sit back, share in the introspection, discover some subtleties of character, some nuances in Kit’s story. While Kit is a loner, we see that he does crave companionship, going to bars, encountering men who are congenial, some one night stands – although, in Ho Chi Minh City, he encounters an African- American businessman (Parker Sawyers who played Barack Obama in Southside with You). There are enjoying each others company, talking, sharing their life stories – and with Lewis conscious of his father fighting in Vietnam and the tragic consequences. This may be the companionship and relationship that each of them is seeking. In the meantime, the audience shares a train journey from Ho Chi Minh City to Hanoi with Kit, looking at the countryside, passing through towns and cities. The director, Hong Khaou, was born in Cambodia, has worked in the UK (in a sense, his previous film, quilting, serves as something of a prelude to Monsoon). He has directed many short films exploring and dramatising homosexual relationships. For audiences who are prepared to sit back, observe, reflect, empathise, appreciate different cultures, this is quite a personal journey.

MY SALINGER YEAR Canada, 2020, 101 minutes, Colour. Margaret Qualley, Sigourney Weaver, Douglas Booth, Seana Kerslake, Jonathan Dubskyy, Colm Feore, Theodore Pelleriin. Directed by Philippe Falardeau. Most Americans may know the name, Salinger, the tradition of reading and studying J.G.Salinger’s famous novel Catcher in the Rye (and also Franny and Zoe). In the past he would have had a great following outside the United States but it is many decades since he published his novels and he has lived as something of a recluse. Which means that someone considering watching the film may well be puzzled by what a Salinger Year could possibly mean. The setting is in fact the mid-90s, New York City. It is based on a book of reminiscences by Joanna Smith Rakoff, her Salinger year. This is one of those films that may delight quite a wide audience, light in touch, serious implications. But it is also thinkable that audiences may dismiss it as too light, even trite. It is that kind of film for which there are two camps – which was rather evident in responses when it was the opening film for the Berlinale 2020. Joanna is played by the up-and-coming actress, Margaret Qualley (who appeared in Once Upon a

Time in Hollywood, Seberg, Native Son, Adam, and as Ann Reinking in Fosse/Verdon during 1919). At times, she speaks directly to the audience, a likeable presence. She applies for a job at an agency, leaving her boyfriend in Berkeley, staying with friends in New York City, encountering a would-be rather socialist writer (Douglas Booth) and they move in together. She is not exactly equipped to do the job at the agency, even typing (the boss having a huge suspicion of computers and their temporary popularity). Margaret Qualley doesn’t have the opportunity to dominate the film. That is left to Sigourney Weaver as Margaret, the longtime head of the agency with a strong reputation amongst authors, although it is clear that she operates from the head and is not empathetic to authors who operate from the heart. It is an impressive performance by Sigourney Weaver. And Salinger? It emerges that he is one of the clients of the agency, phoning now and again, responding rather well to Joanna. But one of the main jobs in the office is to send out formula replies to Salinger fans that he does not respond to their letters. In the office, there is a whole lot of shredding going on, a vast amount of letters coming in addressed to the author. Part of Joanna’s Salinger year is her decision to answer some of the letters – half a dozen of the characters visualised, their stories, the motives for writing to Salinger. Joanna goes against policy and sometimes makes big mistakes. However, this is the year that Salinger has decided to republish a piece from The New Yorker, engaging the agency, with Joanna able to persuade Margaret that she should go to Washington DC to oversee a meeting between Salinger and the intended publisher. Only glimpses of Salinger. Towards the end of the film there are some emotional challenges, especially for Margaret and the suicide of a genial presence around the office, bi-polar, (Colm Feore). Margaret is touched by Joanna’s concern – and happy if Joanna were to continue working in the agency. But, Joanna has further ambitions, especially writing – including the story that is the basis of this film.

THE MYSTERY Of DB COOPER US, 2020, 85 minutes, Colour. Directed by John Dower. Most of us enjoy crime investigation – just looking at the range of channels on Foxtel reminds us that we all seem to be sleuths at heart, enjoy the police procedural investigations, have our favourite detectives, or are fans of investigations of real-life crime. In the 1970s and 1980s, the crimes of DB Cooper were popular and mysterious. There was a feature film in 1981 featuring Robert Duvall and Treat Williams. But, the point was, that nobody knew who DB Cooper really was. Actually, that’s not quite exact. There were various theories as to who Cooper was, the FBI pursuing them, some of the claims very persuasive, others excluded for contradictory evidence. Even some of the money was found by the Columbia River in 1980, raising even more questions. But, eventually, the FBI closed the case. No identification of DB Cooper. This documentary reminds audiences of the audacious crime that took place almost half a century

ago. A seemingly ordinary citizen boarded a flight in the Northwest US, made contact with one of the flight attendants (who was interviewed for this film as well as one of the pilots). He seemed polite but made a demand for $200,000. The plane landed, the money was supplied, it took off again – and with surprising audacity, the man, giving the name DB Cooper, parachuted out over the Northwestern forests. Writer-director, John Dower, takes up the investigations, interviewing various people who had made claims that they knew who DB Cooper actually was. John Dower has a strong reputation for making 17 documentaries over two decades. He certainly involves his audiences here, listing a number of potential candidates, tracking down contacts and relatives, also making contact with the author of a book about Cooper and the hijacking and his disappearance. The number that John Dower chooses to explore is five. Those who enjoy research might find it interesting to check with the Wikipedia entry on Cooper – with 13 possibilities, including the five from this film, listed with details of the investigation, arguments for and against. We are introduced to a number of people who are very strong in their claims. One claimant, the widow of Duane Weber, is certain that her husband, who had served time, made a deathbed confession. The probability of a man who did a copycat hijacking and robbery, Ronald Floyd McCoy? Jr, is enhanced by his resemblance to the witness sketch. McCoy? was caught soon after the Denver hijacking but escaped from prison. The name, Cooper, was an advantage in the suggestion that the criminal was Lynn Doyle Cooper, his niece giving testimony about him, his past and plans to do similar kinds of escapades. The most surprising of the five nominees in this film is Barbara Dayton, born Robert Dayton, recreational pilot, merchant Marine an army service, post-war working with explosives. The director uses a deal of archival footage to help with the dramatics of the incident, footage of the forest terrain, footage of some of the suspects from the period. Because of the situation and the claims, the talking heads included throughout keep audience interest. And there are some re-creation of characters and situations. Of course, the word mystery is in the title – and so, the emphasis is on investigation because there has been no solution.

NEVER RARELY SOMETIMES ALWAYS US, 2020, 101 minutes, Colour. Sidney Flanigan, Talia Ryder, Theodore Pellerin, Ryan Eggold. Directed by Eliza Hittman. The list in the title comes from a questionnaire presented to a young client by a counsellor wanting to gauge whether the client has experienced sexual violence. It certainly draws attention to issues of sexuality, violence, relationships, emotional damage. In many ways this is a very plain film, some commentators calling it a return to neo-realism. It does not draw attention to itself in flashy style, rather presenting the characters, their situations, their

dilemmas, their challenges, decisions and action. We are introduced to Autumn, a 17-year-old from Pennsylvania, participating in a talent show. She is not particularly good and there are some hackles from the audience, applause from her family. At the celebration afterwards, she is very moody. The young man at another table taunts her with some lewd gestures. She throws a glass of water over him. So, this is Autumn. Autumn works as a checkout assisted in the supermarket, along with her cousin, Skylar. At home, Autumn gets on well with the rest of the family as can be except for the taunts from her father. Skylar notices something wrong – and the theme of the film emerges. Autumn is pregnant. Which leads the film into considerations of abortion, Autumn going to local help centres, having a pregnancy test, ask questions for and against abortion. She decides her, however, to go to New York City to a more professional centre and is accompanied by Skylar who has taken a wad of money from the supermarket takings she was handing in. The film is very matter-of-fact in its presentation of the situation, not taking any particular moral stances, perhaps a reflection of the secular society in which the Western world lives. Autumn is treated well by the women who interview her, counsel her, explain the procedures, offer the chance to her to withdraw from the process. The process actually requires the couple to stay overnight in New York City and they try to find ways of surviving of getting some money. Nor does the film dramatises the abortion experience in any sensational way. Whether people approve or not, this is a process, this is the experience, these are the consequences, these are the effects. Which means that the film, which supports abortion, can be viewed by audiences who approve of or disapprove of abortion, an opportunity to look at the human experience side as well as the moral principle side.

NEVER TOO LATE

Australia, 2020, 98 minutes, Colour. James Cromwell, Jack Thompson, Dennis Waterman, Roy Billing, Shane Jacobson, Jacki Weaver, Renée Lim, Max Cullen, Zachary Wan. Directed by Mark Lamprell.

The title is obviously a signal that this is a story about old age. And, an unexpected story it is. While there are very serious undertones, it all plays as pleasing comedy.

The setting is Adelaide, the city looking good at the end of the film. But the main location is Hogan Hills (Paul Hogan or Hogan’s Heroes or both!), a retirement home. And, inside the home, is an entertaining cast. Jack Thompson gives a very enjoyable performance as Angus, memory slipping, his denying it, always a mischievous sparkle in his eye. And, in a wheelchair, is Roy Billing as James, doing his familiar somewhat deadpan style, but always enjoyably. And, with an international touch, there is Dennis Waterman, migrated from the UK.

Actually, the main star is American James Cromwell (memories of the Babe films). At the opening, he is trying to infiltrate into the home, pretending to be incapacitated, but wanting to link with his comrades from 50 years earlier. So, an underlying theme is involvement in the Vietnam war, special squads train for break-ins and breakouts, who have experienced imprisonment and escape. Cromwell is Jack Brosnan, the leader come to involve his old friends in a 21st-century mission. Also in the home is Hank, played by Max Cullen, an old veteran on his last legs.

There is opening voice-over for the film spoken by Jacki Weaver who plays Norma, moving into Alzheimer’s, who worked as a nurse in Vietnam, had farewelled Jack Brosnan on the jetty, is going into action, but she had expected a proposal. Well, as the title says, never too late!

The old codgers, who have a good way with Aussie colloquialisms and larrikin style, have happy memories but also get tangled in their memories. And they find a new recruit for their exploits, a young lad from school who goes to the home each afternoon because his Vietnamese mother works there (Zachary Wan). He is eager for mischief. And he puts his talent for mischief to good use in helping the cause.

There is a complication because the head nurse, also Vietnamese, turns out to have a connection with the veterans through her father back in the day.

While the breakout happens, as we would expect, it doesn’t work out in the way that they had expected. They steal a hearse, go to a football match because James wants to reconnect with his son, Bruce, to whom he had written for years but whose response is “return to sender”. And Bruce turns out to be Shane Jacobson, shorts and singlet and off to the footy and AFL style barracking). It turns out that Angus had won the Brownlow medal in 1973 and it is on display. The Englishman has terminal cancer but has a yacht and would like to die on his yacht.

Will Norma be on the jetty? Will she be lost in Alzheimer’s? Will she remember the past? Will she get a proposal? Perhaps the title is a spoiler: never too late!

A pleasing Australian comedy, easy to watch, a film for the younger generation to take their grandparents to!

PINOCCHIO Italy, 2020, 124 minutes, Colour. Roberto Benigni. Directed by Matteo Garrone.

For older audiences and for younger audiences who watch television or DVDs, Pinocchio is the character from Disney’s 1940s celebrated animation film (with its key song, When you wish upon a

star, playing behind the beginning of every Disney program and its logo). Pinocchio is the wooden puppet, created by the carpenter, Gepetto, who encounters all kinds of adventures as he wants to become a human boy, famous for his nose getting longer every time he tells a lie. And, there is his advisor, Jiminy Cricket. Italian audiences may be well familiar with the Disney version but, in the early 2000’s, there was a version with Roberto Benigni – which was not received well. However, here is Roberto Benigni again, with a chance to show his comic talents as well as his capacity for pathos, playing the role of Gepetto. While that makes a lot of sense, it is a surprise, especially for serious film buffs and critics, that this version has been directed by Matteo Garrone, best known for his serious dramas and exposes of the Mafia, Gomorrah and, more recently, Dogman. In many ways, this is a lavish production. It recreates an atmosphere of the 19th century, elaborate sets for a local village, homes, shops and a visiting circus of marionettes. It goes out into the countryside, explores a mansion, rounds up the lost boys and takes them to an island where they become donkeys, takes us to a farm, takes us into the sea. No question that a lot of detailed attention has been giving to sets, costumes and décor. What needs to be said is that it is very, very Italian in its style, emotions, and more emotions. While an Italian sensibility will respond well, it may well be too much for audiences which with more restrained sensibilities who may feel it goes over the top many times in its action, in its dialogue and humour. The main ingredients of the traditional story are certainly present – though the cricket advisor is rather more serious, no Jiminy Cricket from Disney. There is the young Princess who befriends Pinocchio. There are the comic villains of the piece, Fox and Cat, con artists with smooth tongues and no moral values. The master of the marionette circus is sympathetic as is a farmer later in the film where Pinocchio works the waterwheel to earn his living. The man who rounds up the boys with the pretense that they will find a land where they can play forever but who turns them into donkeys and sells them in the market is a dastardly type. And, there are strange creatures, the other marionettes who come to life, the dowager who is also a large snail, the friendly tuna trapped in the shark. So, in this context, what is Gepetto like? His rather like Roberto Benigni, poor, trying to persuade the locals to hire him for wood repairs, entranced by the idea of creating a puppet, of becoming a father figure, searching for his lost puppet. And, main question, what is Pinocchio himself like. As regards the visuals, his wooden face, his limbs (carelessly burning of his legs with his feet in the fire), his clothes, he is believable given the context. But, he is continually wilful, easily led, truant going to the circus, on his adventures, deceived by Fox and Cat, charmed by the Princess but still walking away, with the lost boys, discovering how to earn his living on the farm, wanting some coins to recompense Gepetto, finally realising that Gepetto is a father figure.

One hopes that a wide audience will enjoy this re-telling of the story – but, there is the reserve of wondering how the Italian sensibility will travel worldwide.

POSSESSOR Canada, 2020, 103 minutes, Colour. Christopher Abbott, Andrea Riseborough, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Rossif Sutherland, Tuppence Middleton, Sean Bean. Directed by Brandon Cronenberg.

How can personality be manipulated in the future? That is one of the key features in this bizarre exercise in science-fiction and horror. And how can this manipulation be used criminally and destructively?

There is an alert in noticing that the director-writer is Brandon Cronenberg. He is the son of Canadian director, David Cronenberg, who emerged during the 1980s with similar themes before branching out to a very successful and varied directing career. Brandon, with Possessor, is definitely in the line of his father.

The audience has to pay quite some attention to what is going on, the danger of being lost, in trying to work out how the controlling mechanism, the Possessor, actually works with the insertion of the consciousness and control of a special agent, lying in the machine, into another person and the transformation of the host of this new consciousness moved to murder.

So, almost immediately, we are shown a woman’s head being drilled for the insertion, her going to a social event, suddenly attacking one of the key guests, a vicious and bloody killing. She attempts to put a gun in her own mouth but cannot do it and is killed by the police.

Transition back to the staff, especially the control, Girder (Jennifer Jason Leigh). She debriefs the agent, Tasya (Andrea Riseborough in another offbeat performance), looking pale and gaunt. There are some moments of peace went Tasya goes home to visit her former husband Michael, Rossif Sutherland) and her young son, Ira. But, she feels a compulsion to go back to work in the Possessor.

Most of the film is actually about the second murder and the host. His story and motivation are quickly established (but one has to pay a lot of attention). He is Colin Tate (a strong performance from Christopher Abbott), two-timing with his fiancee, Ava (Tuppence Middleton), hostile to her father, a business magnate, who humiliates him (Sean Bean). Once again, there is a vicious killing but things seem to be going somewhat haywire. Which raises the dramatic issue in question of who is in control, Tasya aware that something going awry with the insertion and manipulation, or is it Colin who is disturbed by the violence of what has happened and its consequences for him?

The drama becomes more eerie, assisted by a special effect blurring sequences, indicating what is happening to Tasya inside Colin’s brain. Which leads to more violence, attempts by an agent to rectify the brain situation, and the question of who is trying to destroy whom.

Not a drama for popular taste. Rather, for those who are interested in some of the weirder aspects of human behaviour, scientific control of the brain, consequent violence.

RAMS

Australia, 2020, 118 minutes, Colour.

Sam Neill, Michael Caton, Miranda Richardson, Wayne Blair, Asher Keddie, Leon Ford, Will McNeil, Travis McMahon.

Directed by Jeremy Sims.

A story of two brothers who have not spoken for 40 years despite the fact that they live on adjacent properties. They breed sheep.

Cinemagoers with international interest will remember that there was a film of the same name, Rams, from Iceland in 2015. Characters and plot have been transferred to Western Australia. There is something grim about Icelandic landscapes and big bearded men, reminiscent of Vikings, hostile to each other. It is not quite so grim in the West Australian landscapes – even though there is a bushfire crisis at the end of the film.

While there are many stories about rival brothers, there is a particular focus here. An epidemic. As the film opens, there is a local Rams competition in the town of Mount Barker, down near Albany, a small community, rather close-knit (except for the brothers!). But, there are difficult times, one local is raising alpaca, another is considering moving. Prominent in the community is the official who judges the sheep, a migrant from England. At the end of the competition, one of the rams is discovered to have a contagious disease.

The more sympathetic brother, Colin (an affable if reserved bachelor, played in his inimitable way by Sam Neill), burns his flock. The less sympathetic brother, Les (gruff, slob in dress and behaviour, resentful that he did not get the inheritance that was given to his younger brother, Michael Caton) lets his flock be removed from the property. Everything in the sheds has to be disinfected. There is a fine supporting cast with the Wayne Blair and Asher Keddie.

The film has a go at government bureaucracy, a completely unsympathetic interfering officer who turns up regularly (Leon Ford) but has to be restrained by the more sympathetic Kat, the inspector

(Miranda Richardson). He turns up again, interfering at the end, encouraging the audience to have a hiss and boo attitude towards him.

This all happens in summer. Then the screen notes that it is winter – and we see that Christmas is coming. However, Colin has a deep secret and is at pains to keep it quiet, even putting rotting prawns in his garbage bin to disguise the smell of sheep, and lots of spray around the house.

Ultimately, as always, the truth comes out. And, a bit more humanity with the brothers, some disappointment on the part of Kat and her experience with Colin.

Then come the bushfires, quite vividly presented, part of Australian consciousness. A trip to the mountains to the sea with the sheep – and the possibilities for Ray, comparatively, happy future.

An Australian yarn, an acknowledgement of farmers and their problems, and quite a lot of photos of sheep and flocks back in the pioneering days during the final credits.

THE RHYTHM SECTION UK/US, 2020, 109 minutes, Colour. Blake Lively, Jude Law, Sterling K.Brown, Richard Brake, Raza Jaffrey, Geoff Bell. Directed by Reed Marano.

The Rhythm Section is a contemporary espionage story, a film about an agent with a license to kill. Of particular interest is the fact that the film was produced by the 007 team, Michael Wilson and Barbara broccoli. Was a series intended?

Blake Lively plays a young woman, Stephanie, from an affectionate family, who changed her plans for travel, her parents and brother and sister all being killed in a plane crash – and the information that a bomb was aboard. (Parallels with the plane of Malaysian airlines shot down over the Ukrainian in 2014.)

Stephanie is seen at the opening, a gun, threatening a victim in Tangier – and the action going back eight months, seeing her drug-adult, in prostitution in London. She is approached by an agent for recruiting, his having investigated her link to the crash at her parents. He is killed and she travels to Scotland to encounter retired agent, tough and merciless, played by Jude Law. He challenges her, trains her, then send her out on mission.

It is somewhat surprising to find that she is ready for 007-style mission after eight months of training. She has various disguises, weeks, and eventually takes on the persona of a dead agent. She

has various commissions, is partially successful, find she cannot go through with ultimate kills. She goes to Spain, there are car chases, she goes to Marseille to confront one of the chief suspects, she takes on a mission in New York but again is unable to go through with it.

She is connected with an ambiguous agent in Spain, played by Sterling K Brown, who gives her various commissions – but she discovers the truth about him for a final challenge.

Was directed by cinematographer/director, Reed Marano, who won awards for her work on The Handmaid’s Tale.

Perhaps the producible hoping for a series. However, The Rhythm Section was not so popular at the box office and the question could be raised as to whether Blake Lively could sustain a franchise along the lines of 007.

TENET

US, 2020, 150 minutes, Colour. John David Washington, Robert Pattinson, Elizabeth Debicki, Kenneth Branagh, Dimple Kapadia, Michael Caine, Aaron Taylor Johnson, Martin Donovan, Fiona Dourif, Clemence Poesy, Himesh Patel. Directed by Christopher Nolan.

Tenet was to be the spectacular film for 2020. However, it also fell victim to the coronavirus, release date put off, tentatively released in the United States, suffering at the box office because of the closure of cinemas, then released, step-by-step, in other countries.

Audiences were expecting it because of the reputation of its director, Christopher Nolan. For almost 20 years, he has made his mark on cinema, with his Batman trilogy, with his psychological imagination in Inception, with his exploration of space and time in Interstellar, re-creation of Dunkirk. He has a talent for the spectacular, extraordinary special effects, filming on 65 mm and IMAX film.

And, of course, that’s what he brings to Tenet. While Inception and Interstellar were mysterious binding, Tenet is even more so. The title is a palindrome, the TE at the beginning is in a different order at the end, indicating forwards and backwards…

Tenet requires full concentration to keep pace with the plot and its twists and turns (and returns). What on earth (in fact, for the earth) is happening at various points of the narrative? And, who is who? (At this stage, for those who might have been baffled and bewildered as they watched the 2 ½ hours of Tenet, a recommendation to check with Wikipedia and its plot outline to check whether you were correct or not.)

At the centre of the film is a character simply called The Protagonist (John David Washington) who is seen initially involved in a daring raid in the Ukraine Opera house, lone survivor, tortured, taking his cyanide pill to avoid talking – only to recover and be told by his superior that it was a test. We are wondering why the raid, who is the masked agent, what of the bullet holes and the way they have been created…?

Tenet has been filmed in quite a number of countries and locations, especially in Norway and Estonia, emphasising the Nordic and Eastern European atmosphere. By contrast, there is a visit to India. And further contrast to the beauty of a yacht on the Amalfi coast.

And, there are mysterious characters. Robert Pattinson, seeming genial, appears as a partner with The Protagonist in a range of enterprises, especially a raid in Oslo where a plane has driven straight into a terminal. There is a mysterious woman, Kat, Elizabeth Debicki, with her young son at a school in London. But we soon learn that she is estranged from her husband, a Russian oligarch, looking for plutonium and an algorithm. (For audiences not quite familiar with algorithms, plutonium, entropy, these aspects of Tenet require a bit of hard work and concentration.)

However, the Russian oligarch, Sator, is played by Kenneth Branagh, an arrogant brute of a man who elicits loathing.

The other aspect of the narrative to note is the fact of movement within time, forwards and backwards, mysterious bullets created in the future, activated in the past, a temporal turnstyle where people can be transferred back and forth, where people can coexist in the various times, where in a pincer movement military attack, troops can walk forward, troops can walk backward, for their tactics.

So, Tenet is rather overwhelming. There is a threat that the earth can be destroyed. There is the mysterious algorithm and its three sections. If all this is intriguing, then Tenet is a must see. If this is not intriguing, an audience needs to psych itself up to enter into this Tenet world.

THE TROUBLE WITH BEING BORN Many, 2020, 93 minutes, Colour. Lena Watson, Dominik Warta, Ingrid Burkhard. Directed by Sandra Wolner.

The question arises: how to avoid the trouble with being born? Robotics? Artificial intelligence? Androids? Programming?

Here is a narrative, in two parts, illustrating some speculations about these questions. It opens mysteriously, echoes and images of pregnancy, but then focuses on a young girl, Elli, and her delight in nature, happy in a swimming pool, affectionate with her papa. However, there is something strange about the texture of her face, her eyes. Elli is an android.

There has been a whole history of films about artificial intelligence and androids, going back to the sinister computer, HAL in 2001, A Space Odyssey. Speculations in science fiction and fantasy developed in films of the 70s and 80s. Then there was Stephen Spielberg’s AI, based on a story by Stanley Kubrick.

This mysterious film is quieter in tone. The relationship between Elli and papa raises some uncomfortable moments, the nature of the relationship between father and daughter, some sexualisation of the relationship, the question as to who programmed Elli and why, where did the memories come from? And does she absorb them, or are they just like a record playing inside her? And, did papa create Elli and insert the memories to suit himself and his needs, his dead wife, his dead daughter?

And there is the mystery of Elli and her disappearing for long periods, a groove in her programming, the needle stuck, so to speak, making her want to seek out papa are after many years.

No easy answers about the relationship between Ellie and papa and suddenly we are in another city, a different Elli, now becoming Emil. The android is androgynous. And relating to a different person, an elderly woman living a drab life, stuck in her memories of the clash between herself and her brother when they were very young, his death. We are still wondering who did this program for the android, the nature of the memories, how the reincarnation (not exactly the correct word) of the brother has an effect on the old lady.

So, while there is narrative, we are really presented with two test cases to illustrate the speculations about the possibility of creating androids, programming them, seeing how they might interact with humans in this version of “real life”.

Often slowly paced, with long takes offering an opportunity for the audience to think, reflect, . wonder. The Trouble with Being Born is not a film for audiences who are in a hurry. Rather, it is a cinematic exercise in intellectual and emotional provocation about what it is to be a human being – and not.

UNHINGED

US, 2020, 90 minutes, Colour. Russell Crowe, Caren Pistorius, Gabriel Bateman, Jimmi Simpson, Austin P.McKenzie. Directed by Derrick Borte.

If you have driven to see Unhinged, be very careful and cautious driving home. This is a film about Road Rage. In fact, it is a very disturbing film whether you are a driver or not.

There is no mistaking the tone of the film. In the first few minutes the audience sees Russell Crowe sitting in the van at night outside the house. He eventually goes in, sounds of his bashing the people inside to death, then setting the house alight. Who is he? And why?

Eventually we do get some indications of answers but not before the driver spends most of the film is running time pursuing and persecuting Rachel (Caren Pistorius) and her son, Kyle (Gabriel Bateman).

It starts as one of those days but finishes as worst day ever. Rachel is running late for work and has to drop Kyle at school. Because she is late, stuck in an enormous traffic jam, bumper-to-bumper forever, she received a phone call firing her for being late. She is rather tense, to say the least. And that big SUV in front of the lights, does not move when the lights change and she gives some blasts on the horn, going in front of it and turning the corner.

Yes, it is Russell Crowe at the wheel. And he begins the persecution in pursuit, getting Kyle to roll down the window, reprimanding Rachel for not giving a polite to type and toot instead of blasting on the horn, bumping into on the Road, all kinds of threats. And, Russell Crowe is a hugely imposing presence (literally huge these days), unrelenting.

Eventually, there is some explanation of why the driver is hellbent on destruction, the man was being fired, humiliated and who will take out his vengeance on anyone who crosses him – even a very alarming sequences where he kills Rachel’s friend at a diner.

On the one hand Rachel’s nerves are on edge after she drops Kyle at school. The driver has her phone, goes through all the messages, knows all about her, wants her to nominate a victim and, when she nominates herself, that is not good enough.

Some bloggers think that she did not act sensibly at all. On the other hand, the screenplay gives the opportunity to call the police, get them into action for protection of those threatened. What else can one do!

There is a climax, Rachel having picked up Kyle from school. There is menace. There is something of a siege. There is reckless driving and pileups on the roads.

In the past there was Steven Spielberg’s Duel. There was also the striking 1990s film with Michael Douglas, Falling Down, the desperation of a working man who finds his world collapsing. This one is more focused. Some brutal sequences in an alarming story.

WORDS ON BATHROOM WALLS US, 2020, 110 minutes, Colour.

Charlie Plummer, Taylor Russell, Molly Parker, Walton Goggins, Andy Garcia, Anna Sophie Robb, Beth Grant, Lobo Sebastian. Directed by Thor Freudenthal.

Recommended is the first word that suggests itself for this review.

It can be recommended for younger audiences, high school age audiences, especially, who can identify with the central characters. They have limited experience of mental illnesses but may well have experienced them in fellow students. This is an opportunity for some understanding and some tolerance.

It can be recommended for older audiences, especially parents and grandparents, for teachers and those involved in youth education. They will have had much more experience of mental illness but this is an opportunity to see it dramatised within the space of two hours.

One of the advantages of the film is that it has a very well-written screenplay, intelligent and articulate, with a great deal of sadness, but also with some humour.

Young actor, Charlie Plummer, brings the central character, Adam, to vivid life. Adam is still at high school. His father has walked out. His mother, Beth (Molly Parker), is absolutely devoted to him, taking him to doctors and psychiatrists, eager to find the right medication and program, perhaps over-eager in her love and care. Many times, Adam finds this smothering. The screenplay alerts audiences to prescriptions, medical programs, side effects, the dangers of not following the regime.

The film uses visual devices to indicate Adam’s schizophrenia and its effect on him. In various episodes, the images are blurred, sometimes a black pervasive smoke, distortions of people around him. For the voices that he hears, they are embodied in three characters, Joaquin, a fellow off-hand teenager, Rebecca, a sympathetic young woman, and a Bodyguard, tough and fierce, with some associates. Adam also hears voices from open doors. And, as for the title, it appears towards the end in a frightening hallucination of so many words of graffiti on the toilet walls.

Adam is very frank about his schizophrenia. He is filmed, direct to camera, explaining himself and his experiences to a psychiatrist. At school he has an episode and burns the arm of a fellow student, and is expelled. Interestingly, for a Catholic audience, while he is not a Catholic, Adam is enrolled in a Catholic school, St Agatha’s, the principal, Sister Catherine (Beth Grant) rather strict but prepared to make allowances for him. There is quite an amount of Catholic imagery around the school, statue of the Sacred Heart, images in the Chapel.

The Catholic theme is emphasised in the introduction of the character of Fr. Patrick played by Andy Garcia. Adam wanders into the Chapel, goes into the confessional, unfamiliar with what happens, but finding a very sympathetic priest who is able to listen, use common sense, is not judgemental, offers a range of Scripture texts (which Adam is not enthusiastic about), explains the nature of the confessional and how acknowledging one’s limitations and faults can be liberating. (If only all the clergy had the genial characteristics of Fr. Patrick!).

The other character that Adam encounters is fellow classmate, Maya (Taylor Russell). She is a very self-assured young woman (for those familiar with the Myers-Briggs Indicator, she is a surprising example of a ENTJ). She has a system going where she writes essays for fellow students. But, Adam is smitten, asks her to be his tutor. The relationship between Adam and Maya is sensitively portrayed, hardships, warmth, to love.

There is a further complication at home when Paul (Walton Goggins) moves in with Beth and she becomes pregnant. Adam is hostile to Paul – although, ultimately, Adam has completely misjudged him. (There is a quietly moving moment at the end when Adam is hearing voices and Paul quietly moves to close the door to stop the voices.)

Words on Bathroom Walls is sensitively directed by Thor Freudenthal (who had previously directed rather slight films and comedies). The performances make quite an impact. The screenplay is able to communicate some of the aspects of schizophrenia, the episodes, the effect on the schizophrenic, misinterpretation and bullying by those who do not understand. And, as has been said at the beginning, recommended.