Displaying items by tag: Peter Malone's Movie Reviews

MOTHER TERESA & ME

India/Switzerland, 2022, 125 minutes, Colour.

Banita Sanduh, Jacqueline Fritzie-Cornaz, Shobu Kapopor, Deepti Naval, Bryan Lawrence.

Directed by Kamal Musale.

Mother Teresa of Kolkota, now a canonised saint, was a significant figure in India in the 20^th century and, indeed, throughout the world. There have been many documentaries about her, three feature films where she has been played by Geraldine Chaplin, Olivia Hussey and Juliet Stevenson. Now another film? But one with some significant differences.

It can be noted immediately that the film was fully funded by donation and by grants from foundations, especially the Zariya foundation, established by the actress Jacqueline Fritschi-Cornaz and her husband. She was impressed on a visit to Kolkota many years earlier and they set up the foundation to help the Missionaries of Charity, and with the proceeds from the exhibition of this film. She asked the Indian director, Kamale Musale, Switzerland-based, to both write and direct the film about Mother Teresa.

In fact, there are two films in one, so to speak, here. And they are intercut with strong dramatic effect, and the two stories finally coming together.

The first story, of course, is that of Mother Teresa herself, seeing her as a Loretto sister, migrant from Albania, teaching, but impacted by the poor, especially in the streets of Kolkota in the immediate aftermath of World War II. She asks permission to work outside the convent school, permission eventually granted by the Archbishop of Kolkota, her work with one of the local priests to achieve the fulfilment of her request.

One interesting feature to note about this film is that it shows Mother Teresa’s work in Kolkota, nothing of her fame, connections with Pope John Paul II, world leaders, the Nobel Prize. The focus is solely on her meeting the poor, the response, the questions, some hostility, being joined by a school pupil, more sisters joining, some government assistance, the building up of the centre – and the realisation that whatever people think of Mother Teresa, for and against, she was actually there, with the poor, in the streets, for almost 50 years.

  Jacqueline Fritschi-Cornaz plays Mother Teresa, not in a film star way at all, sometimes severe, certainly always determined, memories of her anguish of soul and struggles with faith, and the reality of the Kolkota streets with these sequences filmed in black and white, gradually some colour tinting until 1991 when her story is in full colour.

And, initially, audiences wondering about the second story. It is set in London, the 2020s, a young woman, Kavita, Indian background, a violinist. Very much a London woman of the 2020s, definite, outspoken, critical, reacting against her parents wanting to arrange a marriage for her, discovering that she is pregnant, her partner fearful and not helping, a lot of discussion about abortion and keeping children. So, contemporary audiences can resonate with the character and the issues. And all this is filmed in bright colour by contrast to the Kolkota black-and-white.

Kavita goes to India to stay with her aunt, discovering the work of the missionaries of Charity, talking with a young volunteer at an aspiring doctor, gradually becoming involved, sceptical, interested, discussions with her aunt, and some discoveries, learning more about Mother Teresa until the end where there is the revelation of a connection.

So, this is not just another film about Mother Teresa, worthy though that enterprise could be. It is an invitation to a 21^st-century audience to look back on her work, the commitment of the Missionaries of Charity, a discussion of issues of poverty, interfaith dialogue, pregnancy, birth, abortion…

And, by the end, we have a good focus on Mother Teresa and her main work, and with the performance by Jacqueline Fritschi-Cornaz, images of her face, sometimes anguished, sometimes happy.

1. Audience knowledge of Mother Teresa? Her reputation in the 20^th century? In India? Nobel Prize? Worldwide? (In various documentaries, feature films about her?)
2. This film for a 21^st-century audience, a quarter of a century after her death? Her becoming part of memories? The decision to show her work in India, on the streets, none of the international connections or reputation? And Missionaries of Charity focus? The decision to make a 21^st-century story, contemporary characters, issues, the work of the sisters in the 2020s, the meeting of the past with the present?
3. The opening, Mother Teresa and her struggles with the sense of the presence of God? The background, Albania, the Loreto sisters, the convent, community life, teaching the wealthy girls, the classroom scenes? Her discoveries on the street, 1946, a sense of the presence of God, the voice of God asking her to move out, the discussions with the priest throughout the film, his reactions, his intervening with the Archbishop, the long time, the eventual permission for her to move? Her response?
4. The decision to film these sequences in black-and-white, the gradual tinting of colour, full colour by 1991? And comparisons with the 21^st-century colour?
5. Moving out of the convent, choosing the sari, her habit, walking the streets, encountering the poor, good responses, suspicions, getting the children, teaching them, people donating goods for her teaching? The care for the ill, the dying? The impact on audiences of this work among the poor and the dying?
6. The doctor, the cases, his showing the building, the hostility from the religious group, the leader? Her defying him? His coming inside, the religious issues, interfaith and God? (And the later scene in where he is dying and being cared for by sisters?)
7. The development over the decades the young girl joining her from school, more nuns joining, the Missionaries of Charity?
8. Mother Teresa and her spirituality, of service to the poor, but her own struggles, feeling the absence of God and God’s voice?
9. The introduction of the modern story, its narrative, inserted into the stages of the work of Mother Teresa?

• Kavita, her age, music, the violin, her co-musician, the relationship? Discovering she was pregnant? Her response, the issue of abortion, her sense of independence? No help from her partner, his withdrawing? The sequence of her parents, the visit for the arranged marriage, the awkwardness, her walking out? The confrontation with her parents?
• Her going to India, the meeting with her aunt, the issues of the pregnancy, the issue of abortion, the arguments for and against? The pro-life issues?
• The aunt, religious background, not Christian, the flashbacks and seeing her as a little girl, invited to study with Mother Teresa, growing up, working with her, admiration for her?
• Kavita, in Kolkota, wandering, the poverty, the attitudes, the London background, reading the book, learning about Mother Teresa, in the hospital, the young volunteer, friendly, the discussions, his commitment, helping with the work? The growing effect on her?
• Mother Teresa, 1991, her age, the wear and tear of work, the birth of the baby, the aunt, the adoption?
• Kavita and her mother, the visit to India, the clashes, the two older women, the revelation of the truth, her adoption? The scenes with her mother and father, explaining the background and the adoption and love?
• The two stories coming together, the influence of Mother Teresa – and Kavita returning to London, committed to a music, the recital, meeting her musician friend again?
• The open end, the pregnancy, having the child, not…?

HEARTS EYES

US, 2025, 97 minutes, Colour.

Olivia Holt, Mason Gooding, Gigi Zumbado, Jordana Brewster, Devon Sawa, Yoson An, Michaela Watkins.

Directed by Josh Ruben.

Valentine’s Day movie. Yes, destined for repeats every February 14^th.

Title. My Bloody Valentine already taken.

Heart Eyes – certainly a killer to rival Jason, Michael Myers, Scream franchise killer is, with a mask and red glowing heart eyes in the dark.

Slasher movie. Definitely

Romantic comedy movie. Definitely.

Combination of both. (Criticisms that the makers could not decide which was more important? The fact that the makers actually did and thought that both are important and combining them?

Blood. Lots.

Gore. Lots – and many more victims along the way rather than the main targets.

How serious? Serious but a lot of the time very much tongue-in-cheek.

The romantic couple? Definitely not at first, mutual dislike, rivalry. But danger bringing them together, a precarious route to falling in love.

Olivia Holt and Mason Gooding as the couple, she still sad about a breakup, potentially sacked because of her campaign strategy for selling jewellery (Love ends tragically with glimpses of Romeo and Juliet, Titanic, Bonnie and Clyde, and the southern-drawling boss threatening to sack her with Mason Gooding coming in as the expert, and their being told to work together…

The police. Their names Hobbs and Shaw, Jordana Brewster’s character saying that she had never seen the films. (In-joking reference.)

A recommendation – fans of romantic comedies might like all of that part, but may find the slashing too gruesome. Slasher fans might like the romantic comedy but, even if they do not, will be glad to put up with it because of the terror and horror.

Trivial Pursuit note: it was all filmed in New Zealand, Auckland.

1. Valentine’s Day film? Slasher film? Romcom? Combined?
2. The American city, apartments, board rooms, restaurants, unfair, police precincts and cells, interrogation? Drive-in? The musical score, the songs and the lyrics?
3. The opening, combining romantic comedy with slasher, the couple, filming the proposal, repeats, the deaths, the killer and the mask? The information, Valentine’s Day, in past years, the deaths, the map? Seattle, apprehension and mood?
4. Ally and Monica, their friendship, the past, chatter,Aally and her breakup, brooding, the phone and images, their work, the promotion, selling jewellery, love ending in death, Romeo and Juliet, Titanic, Bonnie and Clyde…? Meeting, Crystal and her southern drawl, condemnation?
5. Ally, the special coffee, the encounter with Jay, bumping heads, his coming into the meeting, his talent and expectations? The command they work together? The discussions, Ally and her reactions, going shopping with Monica, the various dresses, her arrival, waiting for Jay, his being late, the talk, the sparring, rivalries? Her walking out? Meeting her ex and his girlfriend, the decision to kiss Jay, his response? And their being watched by Heart Eyes?
6. Ally locked out, the taxi driver, Jay coming to help, breaking the window, cutting his hand, first-aid, Heart Eyes in the closet, emerging, the fights, fleeing, the killing of the taxi driver, Jay and his being hurt, Ally escaping, the funfair, hiding, turning on the carousel, the fights?
7. The drive-in, watching Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell? Heart Eyes, the attacks, the couple hiding in the van and the sexual activities, the killings? The panic, the further deaths, the police, arresting Jay, the joke about Hobbs and Shaw and Jordana Brewster in the franchise? Hobbs and his fierce interrogation, Shaw taking over more congenial? Ally and her anxiety, waiting for information, the encounter with David, the IT man? Then the death of the officer at the desk?
8. The continued mayhem, Jay and Ally, their talking, the final confrontation, the revelation about Shaw and David, the explanations of their behaviour, the death of their third associate, the buildup to the fights, the fire, the knives, and, ultimately, Ally’s conservation straw and killing Shaw?
9. The romantic ending, sharing stories, telling the truth? And the postscript during the credits of Monica and her intervention, the photographing of the proposal?

SWEETHEARTS

US, 2024, 98 minutes, Colour.

Kiernan Shipka, Nico Hiraga, Caleb Hearon, Ava DMary, Charlie Hall, Tramell Tillman, Christine Taylor.

Directed by Jordan Weiss.

Sweethearts can be described as a young adult comedy. However, it does not proceed in the way that might have been anticipated in the trailer or the advertisements. In one sense, it might be considered somewhat counter-cultural.

The intended audience is young adults who can identify with the characters and the situations but may well be of interest to parents concerned about their young adult children and their relationships and choices.

Kernan Shipka Jamie and Nico Hir poagartrays Ben. They have a special relationship, Besties, a relationship of friendship from school days. Jamie has a boyfriend and Ben has a girlfriend. There are a number of party sequences in which we can understand Jamie and Ben, their friendship, the attraction, but more platonic. The whole lot of entanglements with the behaviour of Claire and Simon, and their suspicions, and Jamie and Ben planning to break their relationship with each of them.

A different turn comes into the film with the introduction of the character, Palmer, Caleb Hearon, was been living overseas in Paris, returns, friendship with Jamie and Ben.

With Palmer, there is the introduction of the gay theme, identity, acceptance, Palmer finding the coach in the town also to be gay and introducing him to a bowling club where the whole team is gay. Happy ending for Palmer.

There is quite a range of supporting characters, young characters roommates to pressurise, past crushes who are imposing, obnoxious people on a bus… Christine Taylor appears as Ben’s mother.

After a range of episodes, travels, Jamie and Ben agree to break up, Jamie being the last to discover that Ben has had plans to go to Copenhagen for studies. But, they remain friends.

When Ben finishes in Copenhagen, he returns home, encounters Jamie…

One might say an interesting friendship and Platonic relationship between two young adults rather than just sexual experiences. There are references to When Harry met Sally.

THE MONKEY

US, 2025, 98 minutes, Colour.

Theo James, Tatiana Muslany, Christian Convery, Colin O'Brien, Elijah Wood, Rohan Campbell, Sarah Levy, Osgood Perkins, Adam Scott.

Directed by Osgood Perkins.

From a short story by Stephen King. Strong credential in itself. And the film has been written and directed by Osgood Perkins who achieved strong response to his 2024 horror-thriller, Longlegs.

The name of Stephen King, of course, is for many a recommendation in itself. He has been writing novels and short stories for just over 50 years, with more than 50 adaptations of novels and short stories for the big screen and for television – the film starting in 1976 with the shocks in Carrie. He is a household name. So, especially for Stephen King completists, The Monkey goes on the list of films to be seen.

While the Stephen King’s stories have an underlying base of realism, especially in his treatment of family relationships, there is also the move to an atmosphere beyond realism, in the world of the physical, in the world of the psychic, in the realms of: what if…?

This is definitely the case with The Monkey. On one hand, it is the story of twin brothers, one dominating the other, an absent father, a mother trying to raise her children, the decision to search through the absent father’s possessions and the finding of a toy, a monkey with huge eyes which stare, in extreme close-up and threatening, from the screen at the audience, the touch of mesmerising, then the turning of the key and the monkey beginning to twirl the drumsticks and then beat on the drum – with dire, in fact, a lot beyond dire, murderous consequences.

It means then that this is very much Stephen King material, ordinary audiences can appreciate the story of the two brothers and their eventual antagonism and confrontation. But, this is also Stephen King horror territory, and there are quite a number of deaths, targets of the murderous monkey. And, visually and thematically, they are grisly and gory, some audiences might find them too much.

It should be noted that the writer-director, Osgood Perkins (son of Anthony Perkins and memories of Psycho), has noted that the deaths are macabre, black-humour, and the reminder that nobody in reality could die in the style of the deaths portrayed here, that nobody could complain that in watching the film it reminded them in any way of their relatives’ or friends’ death. (And, there is an extraordinary last 10 seconds of the film, surprise and some shocking deaths.)

British actor, Theo James, takes on the role of the adult twins and quite effectively makes them very different. In fact, a lot of the drama and confrontation depends on this effectiveness. And for those who note names in casts, Adam Scott appears only in the prologue to the film, which sets the tone as he tries to sell the monkey to a dealer with shock results. And, Elijah Wood, has only a few, quite telling minutes, as a self-important family and marriage guru.

It seems that Stephen King has approved of this version of his story and so it will take his place in all the analyses of his films. In the meantime, his fans will want to see it.

1. The title? Stephen King story? The reputation Osgood Perkins and horror films?
2. The plausibility of the plot? Realism? Imagination? Beyond the natural? Psychology drama, family relationships? Terror/horror/gore?
3. The opening, Petey at the shop, the toy monkey, the shopkeeper, the discussions, the death of the shopkeeper? Setting the tone?
4. The story of the twins, Bill and Hal, the difficulties of birth, Bill dominant, growing up together, Bill strong, teasing, bullying, Hal, glasses, taking it? The absent father? Their mother, coping? Domestic scenes, school, meals? The boys in their rooms? Rivalries? The effectiveness of Theo James in differentiating the twins in adult of life?
5. Searching their father’s goods, finding the monkey? The visuals of the monkey, small, but large on-screen, the penetrating eyes, the arms, the drums, the movement, the drumsticks? The key?
6. The sinister aspects of the monkey, depending on who has the power, the key? The babysitter, agreeable, going to the meal, the decapitation? Funeral service, the inept priest? Mother dancing with the children? Hal, his reaction against Bill? With the monkey, the mockery at school, Hal covered in slime, wanting the key, the death of his mother? The funeral? The aftermath, going to their aunt and uncle? The behaviour, the monkey, its presence, the deaths?
7. Bill, on his own, bad behaviour, his appearance, his set up, the Thrasher, searching for the monkey, finding it, in Bill’s possession? The Thrasher, his character, searching for the monkey, finding it, wanting it? The phone call to Hal?
8. Hal, the years passing, the marriage, the unexpected birth of Petey, the meeting with Ted, his books, his lording it over Hal, the prospect of the divorce? His wanting time with Petey?
9. The plan, the news of the deaths, the garden sale of the monkey? Petey questioning Hal about the family tree, Hal’s lies? The contact with Bill, the contact with the Thrasher, their going to the house?
10. Bill, his intentions, the monkey, vengeance against Hal for killing their mother?
11. The madness of the monkey, the range of deaths, deaths in the neighbourhoods? The wide range of people dying, heads on fire, diving into a flaming pool, running with the pram…?
12. Hal, Thrasher and Petey in the car, the beehive, the shot, Thrasher consuming the bees?
13. Petey in the house, the confrontation with Bill, the challenge to turn the key, his turning it, Hal coming into the house, confrontation between the two? Bill’s death?
14. The final seconds of the film, the previous glimpse of the cheering group, the bus passing, the truck, the deaths, the final impact of the film?
15. Hal, Petey, the monkey, travelling together – into the future and the indications the future from the prologue?

DAHOMEY

France/Benin/Senegal, 2024, 68 minutes, Colour.

Lucrece Hougbelo.

Directed by Mati Diop.

The kingdom of Dahomey was part of present-day Benin. This is a documentary focusing on Benin trying to recover its cultural heritage.

In the 18^th and 19^th centuries, the colonial powers took/ stole art and artefacts from nations under their control and transferred them to the galleries of Europe. In this case, it was France who took the artefacts to Paris. Now, in the 21^st-century, several, not all, of these artefacts have been returned to Benin. This is that story, 26 items taken from galleries, packed and stored, transported to the home country and welcomed by joyful citizens.

To that extent, this film is a plea for the restoration of culture, a recognition of the claims of former colonial countries, a challenge to those past colonial powers. And, there are so many such claims even to the present.

What makes this film different, even its winning the top prize, the Golden Bear, at the Berlinale, 2024, is the style that its writer-director, French Matty Diop, brings to her film. And the style varies throughout the film.

One aspect that might disturb viewers is the fact that the director seems to have a delight in long, very long takes, giving plenty of time to a contemptible audience, making more active audience somewhat agitated, wanting the film to move on. And, some of the objects of the long takes seem particularly abstract rather than realistic, white walls, spaces in the walls, time to ponder.

Another creative device that she uses is to focus on the last of the objects to be brought home, identified as number 26. And, in the film, number 26 has a voice, talking about the experience of capture, exhibition, the possibilities of returning, as if the artwork was a person, reflecting, confiding. This does bring different perspective to the return of the artworks and what they mean in themselves as well as what they mean to the local people.

When the objects return home, there are various discussions, especially much younger people, forums to talk about the artworks themselves, the cultural background, the religious background, the transition in perspectives about them from the 19^th century to the 21^st-century – and the film ending with a focus on life in Benin, 21^st-century style, international, modern, a contrast to the world in which the artefacts were made.

The film has won over 60 award nominations and wins.

EVERY LITTLE THING

Australia, 2024, 93 minutes, Colour.

Directed by Sally Aitken.

Documentaries about birds are always popular. This film has had many award nominations.

And the little things of the title are hummingbirds. One of the delights of the documentary is the close focus on the hummingbirds themselves, close-ups, extreme close-ups, focusing on their size, their feathers, their colours, their beauty, their wings, flying and birds in motion.

The directors of this film is Australian, Sally Aitken, from several documentaries about sharks, to a documentary on the Wiggles, and a series on Australian cinema featuring David Stratton an Australian. This time, however, she has gone to California to meet with Terry Masear who is not only an expert on hummingbirds but has played a large part in studying them, caring for them, introducing them to many bird lovers.

Terry Masear has her own story and she is quite a strong and pleasant personality on screen, being interviewed, telling the story of her life, her upbringing, her partner and his collaboration, the sadness of his death. But, interviews with her are intercut with so many of the sequences of the birds themselves and their beautiful variety.

And, some of the locals come to visit, finding hummingbirds and bringing them to Terry Masear for her care, returning to check, helping the audience to identify quite a number of the birds, their names, the difficulties they encounter, care for them, their recovery, and returning to flight and freedom.

While there is a pleasing human story and audiences will be glad to have met Terry Masear, Every Little Thing is a reminder that the little things of creation, especially small birds, have a life of their own, their talent, their contribution to the ecology, and delight in their own right.

NE ZHA 2/ Nezha: Mo tong nao hai

China, 2025, 144 minutes, Colour.

Directed by Yu Yang.

A film very much for the Chinese audience, in China or around the world. Audiences not familiar with the culture, the Taoist tradition on which the film is based, will find it very difficult to follow. However, it can be described as “visually fascinating”.

A brief overview of the plot: After the catastrophe, although the souls of Nezha and Aobing were saved, their bodies would soon be shattered. Taiyi Zhenren planned to use the seven-colored lotus to rebuild their bodies.

The film received extensive worldwide release at the beginning of 2025, especially after its success in China itself. In fact, very quickly, it became the top grossing animated film in animation history. It also quickly became one of the highest grossing films in China, making it a film that many audiences thought that they should see.

For those not familiar with the story line (and the film is, in fact, a sequel to 2019 original film) even serious concentration may not be enough to be able to follow the plot, the different characters, their interactions, the meaning. Which means that the important thing, remembering that the film runs for almost 2 ½ hours, is to sit back and appreciate the visuals, the colour, the digital creations, characters and action, interactions as well as listen to the sound, the musical background.

What can be recommended is a surrender to the experience, the sensory experience rather than the exploration of meanings or analysis of themes.

BOGOTA; CITY OF OF THE LOST

Korea, 2024, 108 minutes, Colour.

Song Joong-ki, Lee Hee-joon, Kwon Hae-hyo.

Directed by Seong-je Kim.

Many audiences will be initially surprised to find that this is a Korean film rather than a Colombian production. 40% of the film was completed in Colombia before the Covid outbreak and the rest of the filming was finished in Korea. To that extent, exotic – and the information that the director’s mother-in-law is from Columbia. Which means there is a curiosity value before the film starts.

The film opens in the late 1990s, some turmoil in Korea, financial difficulties, the young man at the centre of the film leaving Korea with his family for Columbia, trying to set up a living there, his father a gambler and drinker and going into decline, support of his mother. The film shows the difficulty in getting jobs but the young man, shrewd, making connections with the Korean community in Bogota, ingratiating himself, succeeding in some jobs.

However, the section of the Korean community in Colombia that he connects with is the gangster connection, deals with locals, supervised by a veteran who has been in Colombia from Korea for a long time and has the connections. There is illicit trade, imports coming in by boat, distribution. The film shows a range of thugs, a range of clever business criminals.

In many ways, The Godfather is a useful reference. The young man goes on a kind of Michael Corleone a journey, some innocence at the beginning, greater involvement, loyalties to heads, some betrayals, his use of violence, within a short time becoming the capo, wealthy, well-dressed, connections, getting rid of opponents.

Clearly, of particular interest to a Korean audience, especially Koreans with relatives and connections abroad. Interesting for non-Koreans to look at this story of migration and the criminal connections, the rise of a young man is becoming gangster head.

TOLL /PEDAGIO

Brazil, 2023, 102 minutes, Colour.

Maeve Jinkings, Kauan Alvarenga, Thomas Aquino.

Directed by Carolna Markowitz.

There is an ambiguity in the title, Toll. At an obvious level, it refers to the gates at the beginning of the bridge, and the women who collect the toll from the drivers. But, there is also the toll on the various characters.

The film is a Brazilian slice of life, an industrial town, poor neighbourhood, the focus on a middle-aged woman, Suellen, working at the toll with her friend Telma, in a relationship with the organiser of a gang of car thieves, very concerned about her son and his sexual orientation. This takes its toll on her, the management of home life, the information from Telma about a conversion therapy program, risking criminal advice to the thieves for targets to get money for the programme.

And the focus on the son, aged 17, his room, his making videos and lip syncing to American songs, as well as his dressing up, especially at a children’s party. The scenes of the conversion therapy course, conducted by religious Minister, are not persuasive, often graphic, derided by most audiences.

This is a portrait of a Brazilian woman, difficult circumstances, on the one hand trying her best, but on the other hand, her best leading to criminal activity and imprisonment. And it is a brief portrait of an adolescent manifesting the camp side of his sexual orientation and trying to find a place in society.

1. The slice of Brazilian life, poverty, work, youth, gangs of thieves, sexual orientation?
2. The setting, the neighbourhood, poverty, homes, streets, shops, ordinary life? The industrial atmosphere, factories, smokestacks? The bridge, the city, the toll? The musical score?
3. The story of Suellen, her background, in the town, her son, concern, adolescent? Her relationship with Arauto? Her son antagonistic? The details of ordinary life?
4. Suellen, her work, going to the toll, her dealings with customers, the details, antagonistic, money issues, pleasant? Her friendship with Telma, at the toll, Telma and her age, the large woman, the drivers, the connections, the sexual encounters, her commentary, her religiosity and renewing her marriage vows annually? Supporting Suellen?
5. Aruauto, the gang, robberies, the set-ups, pursuing the cars, forcing them over, the robberies? Stashing the watches with Suellen?
6. Suellen and her concern about her son, his sexual orientation, behaviour, indications, friends? The religious background, the pastor, conversion program, the visitor and his techniques?
7. Antonio, his age, his room, costumes, lip-syncing to the American songs, his performances, the videos, at the party, his dress?
8. Suellen and the need for money to pay for the conversion therapy? The agreement with Arauto, her targeting various drivers, the scenes of the robberies, watches, her payment, and to the pastor, the plan for her son?
9. Antonio unwilling to go, his mother commanding him, the sessions, the techniques, the slides, physical, provocative, the advice, the effect on the boy? (And the effect on the audience, the response to the lecture, the slides, the approach, the morality or not?) Discussion of the red ibis and the city?
10. Meeting Ricky, his background, at the sessions, the friendship, the later meetings?
11. Suellen and her targeting the car, the gang pursuing, the robbery, the fact that it was the presenter of the conversion therapy course? His death?
12. The aftermath, the police, Suellen, arrest, imprisonment? Antonio and Ricky? An unfinished slice of life ending?

ARAB BLUES/ UN DIVAN A TUNIS

France/Tunisia, 2019, 88 minutes, Colour.

Golshifteh Farahani, Majd Mastoura.

Directed by Manele Labidi.

The English title refers to the population of Tunisia, Arab background, Muslim background, but all the personal and psychological problems. The French title uses divan – but the English title could be divan or sofa, but, more particularly, couch because of the psychoanalysis scenes.

Central character is Selma, born in Tunisia, parents exiled, growing up in France, training to be a psychologist, returning home, wanting to set up a practice. She uses the roof of a building owned by her relatives who do not necessarily approve, although their daughter is very friendly with Selma.

Selma goes to a headdresser and advertises her practice – and, very surprisingly to her and the audience, there are long queues. In fact, rather than long psychoanalysis sessions, there are quite a few clients and episodic moments, revealing characters and problems, some a touch funny, some very serious. The only long conversation occurs with an elderly man in the building who has felt alienated from the authorities at the local mosque.

The other central character is the local policeman, holding up Selma’s rickety truck, abiding by the letter of the law, warning her that she could go to prison without a license, yet attracted to her personally. A lot of to-ing and fro-ing. There are also the frustrating visits to the authorities in order to get a permit.

There are also Selma’s own problems, returning home, the practice, the law, the interactions – and the film does offer a lot of critique of bureaucratic behaviour in Tunisia, eccentricities as well as the perennial problems.

A short film, rather slight, it has its entertaining moments.

1. The title, the divan, the psychology couch, the focus of Tunis? The English title and psychology problems?
2. Tunisia, the city setting, homes and apartments, apartment blocks, the streets, the shops, police precincts, government offices, the trip to the country to see the grandfather, the open spaces, the beach sequences? The musical score?
3. Selma’s story, born in Tunisia, her parents and exile, aged 10, growing up in France, training as a psychoanalyst? The street crowded with psychoanalysts? Her return, her hopes?
4. Her personality, age, living alone, strong-minded, continually smoking? Reuniting with her relatives, their disapproval? The daughter, her problems (education, red hair, wanting to break out, the planned marriage with the gay man, its failure, her travels with Selma)? The background of the relations, the father and his drinking, the later revelations about his frustration, the mother and her frustrations (and her daughter hiding behind the divan)? Some reconciliation?
5. The manager and her style, the advertisement, the long line, the range of clients, the glimpses of sessions, some serious, some farcical, the range of problems? Talking, Selma listening, the strictness on time, on payments? And later revealed her payments in all kinds of food and goods?
6. The buying of the truck, held up by the police, the chief, the breath test, the later encounters, his abiding by the rules of the law, her having to have a license, the threat of prison, yet asking her out? His two assistants and their continually intervening, interrogations, suspicions and false accusations? Selma and her plea for the compassion for the clients with their problems?
7. The visits to the office, the chatty woman, trying to sell goods, enjoying the ? interactions The bureaucracy, the delays? Going to visit her grandfather, his old age, living in the past? The truck, the breakdown, the driver picking them up, listening, her story?
8. Eventually wanting to leave, the harassment from the two police? The rescue by the Chief? Her going to the office, finding the documents?
9. The range of clients, the hairdresser, the cross-dresser, the paranoid about Mossad, the mother with the clinging son…? The old man, the mosque, wounding himself, the long talk?
10. Selma, her work in the truck, her setting up her practice, going to the beach, the police chief, imagining the future?
11. The sympathy for ordinary people, their problems, the need to find someone who will listen to them attentively and sympathetically?