Displaying items by tag: Peter Malone's Movie Reviews

WOMAN OF THE HOUR

US, 2024, 93 minutes, Colour.

Anna Kendrick, Daniel Zovatti, Tony Hale, Nicolette Robinson, Pete Holmes, Autumn Best, Matt Visser, Jedediah Goodacre.

Directed by Anna Kendrick.

Anna Kendrick as established herself as a significant star of many American films. She stars in this one but has been acknowledged strongly because it is her first film as director. She has been generally praised for her work – and encouragement for her to continue as a director.

Audiences will feel disturbed at many moments of this film, sometimes a bit disoriented.

It is based on actual characters and events. And, it is a film about a serial killer. The film introduces him, 1977, charming, a photographer, taking photos in a remote spot of a woman who has just been through some trauma. Then he brutally kills her. In fact, the screenplay is something of a jigsaw puzzle, moving around in time the audience having to do the piecing together. Especially with the time shifts. There is a murder scene from 1971. There is an attempted murder scene from 1979.

But, at the centre, is an event which rather defies belief. It is an episode of the television popular show, The Dating Game. This is the program where three men are concealed from the woman who interrogates them and who has to choose one of them for a date. (There have been favourable comments about the recreation of this event except to say that the murderer was contestant number one rather than in the film, contestant number three!).

Anna Kendrick herself plays a young woman who has come to Los Angeles, experiences a put down at an audition, exploited by her neighbour at the apartment block, given the opportunity for some exposure by being the young woman on The Dating Game. The screenplay is highly satirical of the show, the efforts of the compere, the dimwitted answers of the first contestant, the innuendo and explicit comments of the second contestant, and, the audience knowing who and what the third contestant is, fascinated by his skill in answering the questions and being charming. There is a tense episode after the filming where the young actress is in fear of the contestant.

There is also an episode where a member of the audience recognises contestant number three in connection with the death of a friend, going to the television authorities and being fobbed off, going to the police without their following up. At the end of the film, there is adverse comment on the investigations and how long it took to arrest the killer.

Ultimately, the killer makes a mistaken decision and is arrested.

And the title? A focus on women, in the 1970s, discovering their power and value, put upon by men embodied by the compere and the contestants and their approaches and the violence embodied in the vicious killer.

1. Based on actual characters and a true story? The US, the 1970s? The serial killer? The television episode?
2. The atmosphere of the 70s, the variety of locations, the desert, small towns, Los Angeles, television studio? Police precincts? The musical score?
3. The title? The focus on women? Victims of the serial killer? Women taking a stance? Sheryl symbolic of this? Laura and her interventions?
4. The structure, the opening with the murder of the young woman, Rodney, charm, photography, vicious? The moving about in time, the focus on 1978 and the television show, the return to 1971 in the murder of the flight attendant and his interactions with her, the shift to 1979, the encounter with Amy, travelling with her, the attack, her calling the police? The overall effect of the structure, jigsaw pieces, together?
5. The story of Rodney, little background, his appearance, charm, photography, the initial murder? 1971, helping with the furniture, charming, turning the tables, vicious? With Amy, seeing her in the streets, flattery, photography, the driving, out into the country, the brutality and tying her up, his not killing her, travelling with her, his going to the toilet, her escape, watching him, phoning the police, his waiting their arrival? The arrest, his denials?
6. The portrait of the women, their stories, difficulties, charmed, their fate?
7. The introduction to Sheryl, her story, coming to Los Angeles, the sexism of the audition, the producers and the low bar for the auditions, her apartment, her neighbour, his attentions, the outing, his approach, expectations, going home with him, the night, her discussed with herself, the later encounter with the neighbour, his walking past? The phone call, the possibility for The Dating game? The decision to go? Some exposure?
8. Audience responded to The Dating Game, the contestants, the audience and their expectations, the woman for the dating? And, of the compere, in charge, sweeping around, criticisms, the manner of the show, his disagreeing with Cheryl and her approach, the aftermath? The members of the staff, the producer picking her on, make-up and hair, support? Joel, being urged to charge, writing alternate questions after the platitudinous questions, the reactions?
9. The three contestants, the first and his background, but playing dumb? The second a furniture designer, playing the sexy games and innuendo? Rodney is the third, self-confidence, his answers? Sheryl changing the question is, more intellectual and philosophical, the reactions of the of the two, Rodney and his charm about women and their expectations? Sheryl and her choice of Rodney, the whispering warning from the second contestant?
10. The aftermath, walking with Sheryl, the coffee, Sheryl apprehensive, I signal to the waitress, Rodney and his talk, her being uncomfortable, running away from him, in the car, his pursuit?
11. Laura and her friend, and the audience, seeing Rodney, the flashbacks to her friend, for friends death? Leaving, knocking over the equipment, the guard and his popping her off? Going to the police, their not listening, her desperation? Her snapping her boyfriend, his return with the flowers, the attempt was the police?
12. The tone of the film and its title, the importance for women, women and dignity and rights, men and their attitudes, sexism, violence and brutality?

NEITHER DAY NOR NIGHT

Israel, 2023, 90 minutes, Colour.

Eli Manashe.

Directed by Phinehas Veuillet

For Israeli and Jewish audiences, there will be great interest in this portrait of Sephardic Jews living in an Ashkenazi community, difficulties, adapting, challenges, crises. The audiences will be familiar with the traditions, the different cultural backgrounds, clashes and compromises.

However, for non-Jewish audiences, some homework is required, the nature of the Ashkenazi traditions, the prevalence of Ashkenazi Jews, the background of the Sephardic Jews, long history, both groups coming to Israel, settling, majority and minority, cultural and religious differences, clashes.

This film focuses on a Sephardic community amongst the Ashkenazi. The father, devout, is a labourer, married with three children, the oldest studying Yeshiva and preparing for his Bar Mitzvah. Is a keen and student, bespectacled, articulate, of his class, expecting to go to the issue of his choice. However, he discovers that only one Sephardic student is acceptable to the Ashkenazi issues and a boy has been chosen because of his wealthy family.

While there is a long sequence of the studies and the young boys at their desks, studying Talmud, the interpretations, there is also the sequence of the Bar Mitzvah, the separation of the men and women, the men in black and traditional garb, the young boys sitting at the table, the central boy giving a long sermon about Wes becoming adults at this time (with reference to pubic hair which shocks his father). The women are separated, the mother having to observe the ceremony through a hole in the wall, a relative coming less modestly dressed causing some kind of panic.

At home, the father is tentative at times with his wife, she very demanding at home, ordering the children and their sometimes refusing to obey her. And there is the upset at the boy not being accepted, the meeting with the head of the school, generally a sympathetic character encouraging of this central boy, but bowing to the acceptance of the rich boy. Violent moments, and finally a confrontation when the father pushes the head of the school who falls down the steps, is injured, and later dies.

This raises moral dilemmas for the father, sitting in his car, pondering, picking up a student and asking his advice, outlining the situation and the student offering a solution from Moses Maimonedes, enabling the person who pushed the other to continue freely because undetected. However, the husband tells his wife. The relatives of the dead school principal come to ask forgiveness of the couple and the young boy is accepted into the college.

But, the audience is left with the moral dilemma and its effect on the father and his sense of responsibility and guilt.

MEMOIR OF A SNAIL

Australia, 2024, 94 minutes, Colour.

Sarah Snook, Kodi Smit-McPhee, Jacki Weaver, Magda Szubanski, Dominique Pinon, Eric Bana, Nick Cave, Adam Elliot, Tony Armstrong, Paul Capsis.

Directed by Adam Elliot.

Quite a striking experience. However, the title might be a bit offputting to some audiences, especially those with a fear of snails, Molluscophobia (seeing ‘snails and slugs as slow, writhing anomalies in a city full of things that flutter, stomp or scuttle’. But, reassuringly, snails here have some heroic status.

Melbourne animator, Adam Elliot, won an Oscar for his short film, Harvey Krumpet. His animation style is stop-motion, and he uses clay models, giving his films a distinctive look, and, combined with his idiosyncratic characters and their stories, something of a unique position in animation. In 2008 he directed Mary and Max (admirably voiced by Toni Collette and Philip Seymour Hoffman), the story of two lonely characters’ correspondence between Melbourne and New York.

Which means that his new film is visually distinctive and admirably voiced. Adam Elliot’s visual world is dark, often misshapen, touches of the sinister, a great deal of sadness, rare moments of joy. And the story is told by Sarah Snook who is able to engage the audience completely.

Actually, the memoir is of Grace Pudel, having experienced some sadness with the death of her good friend Pinky (Jacki Weaver at her best). Grace has a vast number of collectable snails on her shelf and also cultivates actual snails, especially Sylvia to whom she confides her story.

It is a very sad story, Grace’s mother dying in giving birth to herself and to her twin brother, Gilbert (Kodi Smit McPhee). There are some happy moments with their eccentric French father, Dominique Pinon, an animator but who falls on hard times. , t thenhere is the fate of orphans, and foster homes. They might be described as 21^st-century Dickensian, on the one hand a kind of hippy, freethinking couple inherit G between race trying to affirm her now and then  their escapades. But, worse, Gilbert is sent to Perth to a fundamentalist religious family, and a horrendous mother, Ruth (absolutely ruthless), Magda Szubanski bringing her frighteningly alive. And Gilbert suffers. These sequences of their ferocious moments of criticism of this kind of self-righteous religious cruelty.

Some of the dialogue is very witty. And there are some very happy cultural references, the books that the young Grace and Gilbert read, including Lord of the Flies, and, twice, the family watching with delight The Two Ronnies.

But, back to Pinky. She is a wonderful neighbour, caring for Grace, a surrogate mother, but moving into dementia, trying to warn Grace about the charming Ken (Tony Armstrong) who courts her but has his own terrible secret.

By this stage, Grace finishes telling her sad story to Sylvia. But, while Adam Elliot constantly reminds us that so much of life is sadness and suffering, he is not without hope and by the final credits he he provides Grace with a bit more happiness than we might have anticipated.

1. Work of Adam Elliott? His Oscar? Mary and Max? His reputation and awards?
2. His visual style, stop motion, the attention to detail, the clay and the characters, the creatures, the settings? Colour tone, darker? The distortions in the faces, the situations, the settings? Distinctive, the effect for the audience? The tone communicated? And the musical score?
3. The Australian voice talent and styles?
4. The title, the focus on snails, Grace at the opening, a love for the snails, the collectibles, the shelves, the actual snails in the containers and the growth? Her love for Sylvia?
5. The episode with Pinky, her appearance and voice, sad, dementia, dying, Grace attending to her? The decision to tell the story?
6. Grace and her telling the story to Sylvia, Sarah Snook and her voice-over, the audience being continually attentive to her voice, tone, pathos? The family background, the visuals of the home, Grace being born, the effect on the mother, the birth of Gilbert, the mother’s death? The children growing up, playing, the books and the reading, watching television, The Two Ronnies, their father, his injuries, French, the background of animation, his deterioration?
7. The Dickensian touch with the foster homes, the permissive family and their style, free, trendy, sex and partners, but all the awards for Grace and her achievements, the posters? Finally going off to the nudist colony in Sweden? The contrast with the Appleby’s, the religious fundamentalism, Ruth and her domination, husband, the children? The hard work, the religious language, the tyranny? The treatment Gilbert? The letters between Grace and Gilbert? Ultimately too much, Gilbert and the fire, completely destroyed? The severe brothers and the contrast with the friendly little brother, Ben? The critique of fundamentalist Christianity?
8. Grace growing up, neglected by the parents, the friendship with Pinky, the kindly neighbour, the conversations? The friendship with Ken, her eating, becoming heavier, Ken and his devotion, courting, marriage, her discovery of his scrapbook, the fact that he was using her, feeding her, his fetish? His being ousted?
9. Grace, the years passing, the sales, the letters from Gilbert stopping, her sad memories? The continued support of Pinky? Pinky and her decline, her warnings about Ken? Her positive affirmation of Grace? Her dying, the cry about the potatoes?
10. Grace, in the garden, the various vegetables, dawning her about the potatoes, digging, the tin, the letter, the money?
11. Grace, getting a hold of herself, slimming down, starting the work on animation, her film, the screening, very few there, Gilbert revealing himself, the happy reconciliation?
12. Grace and Gilbert, the sadness of their lives, getting a new opportunity to make something of themselves?

THE APPRENTICE

US, 2024, 122 minutes, Colour.

Sebastian Stan, Jeremy Strong, Maria Bakalova, Martin Donovan, Catherine McNally, Charlie Carrick, Ben Sullivan, Mark Rendall.

Directed by Ali Abbasi.

Once upon a time, there was a young American, ambitious, a touch tentative… And this was in 1974-1984. And the young American, from age 28 to 38, was Donald Trump. And, as they say, this is the beginning of his story. But, of course, we know what happened in years to come. And, as The Apprentice is released in mid-October 2024, there is an atmosphere of apprehension of what is to come on election day.

For audiences observing, this is a very interesting film. The first comment should be in praise of Sebastian Stan for his impersonation of Trump, the look, the hair, the swagger, the various tics, the tone of voice, his increasing apprehension about his weight, all looking authentic. The screenplay, by Gabriel Sherman (who wrote the very telling television series on Fox News’ Roger Ailes, played by Russell Crowe, the accusations of sexual harassment and his ousting by Rupert Murdoch, The Loudest Voice) is strong enough, along with Stan’s performance, to show how Trump “developed” in the times of Nixon’s downfall (no mention of Jimmy Carter) to the time of Reagan’s re-election. Trump had moved from huge ambitions through politicking and power contacts and manoeuvres to the achievement of the Trump Tower and casinos in Atlantic City.

But, the key figure in this film is that of notorious lawyer and power manager, Roy Cohn, a most telling performance from Jeremy Strong (Succession). When Trump approached Cohn tentatively for advice, Cohn took a shine to him, becoming something of a patron, advice, fixing, manipulation, and instilling principles that, repeated at the end of this film, Trump incorporated into his managing, attack, attack, attack, say what you like about your opponent, never admit defeat.

Another interesting character in the film is his father, Fred, played by Martin Donovan, ruthlessly relentless, condemning of his older son, Fred, an airline pilot who cannot live up to expectations, his demands on Donald, not believing in him and then shocked by the successful results of Roy Cohn’s interventions.

And, there are memories of Cohn’s interventions in the McCarthy era, the Rosenbergs going to the electric chair (and a moment of dialogue where Cohn rejects the appeal against the death penalty for a mother and  t declareshat that is no excuse for betrayal of country and therefore she should be executed). There is his closeted homosexuality, his denials, a scene of a birthday party hosted by Trump in Florida and Cohn’s disillusionment with his protégé. And his television denial that he had AIDS, was dying of liver cancer.

There are some moments when Trump might have been a touch humane, the attraction to the celebrated model, Ivana (Maria Bakalova), declaring his love for her, the marriage, the birth of Donald Jr – but, he grows tired of her, wanting to discard her, sexually aggressive, finding new partners. With his subsequent career and court cases with women, it is amazing how his followers, even fundamentalist Christians, can be so forgiving and dismissive of his moral misbehaviour.

But, the focus of the film is on building, development, clashes with the city of New York, with Mayor ced Loch, offering financial investment and incentives, manipulating for tax breaks, ignoring of the protests of ordinary people evicted, losing jobs…

Which means that The Apprentice will be viewed in partisan ways by those who believe in Donald Trump and by those who remember his presidency and dread a further presidency.

1. Donald Trump? Audience responses? His loyal followers? His critics? American response? Outside the US?
2. The reality of Donald Trump, his family, money deals, real estate, achievements, television show, The Art of the Deal, Ivana, the marriage, his son? 1974-1984?
3. The facts of his family, his father coming to America, success, business? Fred as the older son, the pilot, disappointment to his father, the family dinner, his death? Donald, following his father’s footsteps, interest in real estate, building the Trump Tower, New York, Atlantic City? Success? Marriage and courtship?
4. The audience knowing the aftermath of 1984, 30 years later and the presidency, the next election and the uprising on January 6? His campaigning in 2024?
5. 1974-1984, the period, Nixon and the interviews, his resignation, Watergate? No mention of Jimmy Carter and his presidency? The acclaim for Ronald Reagan, the Reagan era? New York politics, riots, poverty, building, investment in taxes and tax breaks, it, Mayor Ed Koch?
6. The performance and impersonation by Sebastian Stan? Look, manner, idiosyncrasies, touching the hair, Trump in his 20s, his look, ageing over the 10 years, becoming larger (and the issue and visuals of his surgery), his hair? Beginning more tentatively, the impact of his father, approaching Roy Cohn, the gradual change, success?
7. Audience response to Roy Cohn, knowledge about him, his reputation, the McCarthy era, his comment on the execution of the Rosenbergs and American loyalty? Stating that America was his client? Tough, closet homosexual, his companion, Russell, relationships with men? His social status, legal talent, his skills, advice, deals and manipulation, behind the scenes?
8. Donald Trump approaching Roy Cohn, not immediately accepted, Cohn’s invitation at the meal, accepting Trump, giving him his approval, a kind of surrogate son (and the implicit gay tones)? At the table, the gangsters, relying on Russell? The various meetings, his skills, in court, issues of taxes and investment, his taping people, exercising blackmail, with New York City officials and forcing decisions? The issue of the Commodore, Trump Tower, meetings and protests, the philosophy of investment, Trump becoming more confident?
9. Fred Trump, patriarch, success in business, relationship with his wife, her strong stances? The family dinner, the taunting of Fred? Spurning the pilot? Fred, approaching Donald, giving up the airline, ill, his death? The family morning? The Trump going to the hearings, not confident in Donald, surprise at Cohn’s success? Going older, senility?
10. Ivana, model, her girlfriends, attractive, her work, the encounters with Trump, his falling in love, the issue of the prenuptial arrangement, Cohn’s insistence, her almost giving up? Trump persuading her, the wedding in the celebration? Appearing in public? Trump falling out of love, the rape sequence, her account, the later denial? Appearing in public, but the hostility? Her son and trumps devotion?
11. The parties, the clubs? Trump naive, especially about Cohn? Seeing the gay activities and his shock?
12. Cohn and his asking for Russell and help, Trump agreeing, but avoiding Cohn, ousting Russell, Russell’s death? The issue of AIDS? Inviting Cohn to Florida, the birthday party, the gift of the cufflinks, Ivana explaining they were fake, Cohn and his speech, disillusionment, the cake? Cohn and the TV interviewer, the denial of being gay, liver cancer? His death?
13. The end, Cohn’s principles of attack, denigrate, never admit failure? The subsequent story of Donald Trump?

HIGH & LOW – JOHN GALLIANO

UK, 2023, 116 minutes, Colour.

Directed by Kevin Macdonald.

John Galliano was a successful fashion designer in Britain and across in France at the end of the 20^th century and the 2000s. He was well known in the fashion world but, perhaps, not so well beyond it.

Kevin MacDdonald is an Oscar-winning documentary maker with subjects ranging from the attack on the Israeli athletes in Munich, 1972, to interviews with the Klinko brothers from the Ukraine in 2022. He has also directed a number of successful feature films, most especially, The Last King of Scotland.

The title indicates the approach that Macdonald has taken to his documentary. However, it does begin with the occasion of Galliano’s fall from grace, eliciting hostility, losing his contracts in the fashion world. Drunk, drugs, sitting in a restaurant, gratuitously insulting some patrons, outbursts of vicious and ignorant anti-Semitic insults. This was the crisis point of his life.

Then the documentary goes back to illustrate the high points of his life, his Spanish and British parents, born in Gibraltar, moving to South London, his entry into the world of fashion, his skill with fabrics, elaborate design. Contracts in England, awards, connections and France and Dior.

The advantage of the film is that throughout there is an interview with Galliano himself, 2022, his falling 11 years, able to talk about his past, give insights into his life and career, his sexual orientation. He is also interviewed about the anti-Semitic incident (or several of them), the condemnation, the cutting of contracts, the possibilities for rehabilitation, his asking forgiveness and receiving some, programs for his learning more about Judaism…

After more than a decade of lows, Kate Moss, who supports him, asks into design her wedding dress and there is some rehabilitation, visiting Dior again…

Kevin Macdonald uses a cinema visual metaphor for the rise and fall of Galliano, throughout the film including clips from Abel Gance’s 1927 epic, Napoleon, scenes and subtitled dialogue reflecting something of Galliano’s experiences.

Certainly a must for audiences familiar with the fashion world. Interesting and intriguing for the wider audience.

1. John Galliano? Audience knowledge of him? The world of fashion? His racist case and notoriety and consequences?
2. Kevin MacDonald, his career, documentaries and awards?
3. The portrait of Galliano, the title of high and low, success, the crisis, years of low experiences?
4. The use of Abel gangsters film, Napoleon, the parallel of Napoleon and Galliano, the various sequences from the film, their insertion throughout the film, symbolic commentary?
5. The film opening with the case, captured on video, Galliano drunk, the clients at the restaurant, his insults, racist, anti-Semitic? The issue of how many cases there were and Galliano’s memory and the visual evidence? His arrest, trials, fines, rehabilitation? The consequences with his loss of work?
6. The director interviewing Galliano in 2022? His age, speaking to screen, genuine, personality and style, camp? The interview recurring throughout the film, his talk, honesty, issues of his memory, the retracing of his career up to the event? The high of the title?
7. Portrait and biography: Gibraltar, parents, Spanish and British, his consciousness earlier being gay, the move to South London, his interest in fashion, style, the portrait of his working career, Steve Robinson and work with him, the impact of Steve Robinson’s death? The many models? His talent, success, deal, in France, testimony of Kate Moss?
8. O of the title, being disowned, the therapy, alcoholic, drugs? The issue of the rabbis? The comment of the concentration camp survivor not forgiving the Nazis because they did not ask for forgiveness, but Galliano apologising and asking for forgiveness? The different programs, Michael, his education? Drying out, drive for 11 years? The various steps, the range of his reading, forgiveness? The effect?
9. Kate Moss, the invitation to design her wedding dress, her support, the beginning of his rehabilitation?
10. Gradual employment, the passing of the years, Dior and other bosses, Jewish bosses being interviewed, the reactions, some final forgiveness?
11. The scenes with those who are insulted in the restaurant, there are interviews, the court cases, their assessment of the issues, their wanting apologies, Galliano not being able to remember?
12. The portrait of talent and influence, his fashion style and achievement and awards, his influence? But also rehabilitation and the possibility of a new phase of life and success?

THE VANISHING SOLDIER

Israel, 2023, 95 minutes, Colour.

Ido Tako, Mika Reiss, Efrat Ben Tzur.

Directed by Dani Rosenberg.

The Vanishing Soldier had its premiere in Locarno on August 5, 2023, two months before the Hamas attack on Israel and the consequent war in Gaza and the extension to Lebanon during 2024. So, while this is a pre-war story, it certainly has its moments relevant to 2024.

The action takes place over one day. We see a group of occupying Israeli soldiers, their going into action, but one of them, Shlomo (Ido Tako) hesitating, staying behind, literally running away, seeing bodies lying dead on the streets, a Palestinian of woman raising her hand in surrender, his taking an abandoned Palestinian car and driving to the border, running along the barbed wire, crossing back into Israel, running to his home. The audience wonders about his motivations, fear, the battles, his age, 18, his family, a relationship… And, we soon discover, all of the above.

As the film moves on, television news is seen and heard in the background, remarkably like what was heard in 2024. However, there is a significant twist. With Shlomo’s disappearance, the interpretation is that he has been kidnapped by Hamas and needs to be rescued, action escalating, public opinion, condemnation of the enemy.

But, on the whole, Shlomo’s day is very mundane, meeting his girlfriend who is cooking at a restaurant, about to move to Canada which he does not want. He has a swim in the Mediterranean, greeted by a couple who is to his military service – and then he steals their clothes and phone and their later chasing and accosting him. He is a voracious and intense eater, quite a number of times during the day. He visits his grandmother, has a phone call from his mother and his being alerted that the military are searching for him.

Gradually, he realises the military consequences of his desertion. His mother urges him to go back. There is a screenplay trick before the end, one of those what might have been sequences. However, the reality is lament for an 18-year-old, something of a spoilt 18-year-old, facing a serious situation, refusing to face it…

1. Topical? Israel-Gaza 2023? The aftermath of the invasion? World perceptions?
2. The setting, northern Gaza, the border, Tel Aviv? Atmosphere, the ruins in Gaza, the barbed wire, the border, the installations, homes, apartments, restaurants, Tel Aviv streets? Hospital? The musical score?
3. The action taking place over one day? The drama, the personal story, the consequences, the interpretation as a kidnapping, the escalation of war activities?
4. The opening, the isolated soldiers, cooking, snipers, rousing to action, the men going out, Shlomo, his decision, running away, continuing to run, his kit and gun, the dead in the streets, the Palestinian woman raising her hands, the car, the border, the barbed wire, arriving home, his hunger and eating? The arrival of the military?
5. Getting out of the house, the bike, riding through the city, going to the beach, the couple and their admiration, th swimming el, his taking the clothes, phone, money? Going to visit Shari, at the restaurant, the bond, her going to Canada, his wanting her to stay, the meal, voracious eating?
6. Going to his grandmother, her help, having a rest, his mother’s phone call, his father, going to the hospital, the phone call from the military, his telling her the truth, her reactions, wanting to go back, then protective? The arrival of the military, Shlomo observing, his promising to go back?
7. The encounter with the couple, their pursuit of him, the attack in the street, taking the clothes?
8. At home, his father’s uniform, his father’s vehicle, the military pursuit?
9. The background of Israel-Gaza and the Palestinians? Television news, the information, Shlomo watching with the people in the club? The growing information about his being kidnapped, the escalation of activities?
10. Going home, sleep, the screenplay trick, at the window, returning, acclaimed, his mother’s joy?
11. The reality, the car, the distraction, the crash? On the road, standing in front of the van, the crash, the driver bashing him on the street, the medics arriving, his being carried into the hospital?
12. His future, in himself, Shari disappearing, relationship with his parents, desertion, military consequences, only aged 18?

THE MENENDEZ BROTHERS

US, 2024, 116 minutes, Colour.

Directed by Alejandro Hartmann.

There have been many films about the Menendez brothers, the sensational television treatment of their trial, films, documentaries… In 2024 there was the nine part Netflix series, Ryan Murphy’s Monsters.

Netflix released this documentary in the aftermath of the popularity of the television series.

There are interviews with both Lyle and Erik Menendez, almost 35 years after the events and their decades in prison. They explain themselves, their memories, their defence. There are a great number of talking heads including the prosecutor who has never believed them. On the other hand, the defence lawyers, Jill Skinner and, especially Leslie Abramson, chose not to appear. There are also interviews many years later with several of the doctors and the explanations of their working with the brothers.

The documentary, more sympathetic to the brothers, especially in 2024 some other evidence about their father’s sexual behaviour indicating the possibility of some kind of review of their sentences.

This documentary offers the possibility for audiences to learn more about the case, the life and the family, the possible motivations, see the odd behaviour after the killings, the spending spree and the travel, and the continuing issue of whether the brothers were sociopaths – but definitely spoilt young men.

Concerning the issue of sexual abuse, there is a recommendation that audiences look at the fifth episode of the Netflix series, a single take, over the shoulder of Leslie Abramson, interrogating Erik, the camera imperceptibly moving towards him in one take, into extreme close-up of his face, Cooper Koch’s extraordinary performance and the screenplay’s intense presentation of the experience of being abused. For audiences who have not heard personal explanations that accountings of the experience of sexual abuse, listening is a difficult and significant experience.

The important point is made about the O.J. Simpson case, his getting off, the public getting less interested in the Menendez brothers, the split jury decision of the first trial, declaration of mistrial, the severity and limitations of the judge of the second trial which found them guilty.

1. Audience knowledge of the Menendez brothers, the killing of their parents? 1989, the case over many years? Television films? The Netflix series? Monsters?
2. The suggestion of seeing this documentary first, some factual material, records from the trials, the interviews with both Lila and Erik? Then compare the drama?
3. The stance of the documentary, presenting facts, the confessions, the court cases, the work with the psychologists, the prosecutor and her being interviewed for the film, the defence lawyers (not interviewed for this film)? The crime, abuse, not going to the police, killing, mitigating circumstances or not?
4. The interview with Lyle, his appearance, age, tone, memories, commentary?
5. The interviews with Erik, age, memories of the past, interpretation?
6. The family background, the father and his reputation, migrant from Cuba, making good, his wife? The tennis background? The surface treatment of his children? Behind-the-scenes?
7. The crime, the information, the buying of the guns, the shooting, the brothers of the cinema, tickets and time, suggesting burglary, suggesting the Mafia, the spending spree, the police and their responses, often slow?
8. The confessions, the story, Lyle and his dismay, Erik and his testimony, the discussions, the killing? The arrests, TV interviews, in jail?
9. The court sequences, the prosecutor and her hard stance, never believing them? The defence lawyers? The range of doctors, Dr Oviel and his being chosen for interviews, therapy? His giving information to his lover? The psychologists and their testimonies in retrospect? The response of the public? The drawing therapy?
10. The cross examinations, the fact that the trial was filmed? The material available? Seeing the brothers give their testimony?
11. The issue of abuse, children, Jose Menendez, Kitty Menendez, the expectations of their children, the episode of the father telling Erik to fall backwards but he is not catching him, the tennis issues, while trying to please his father?
12. The cumulative effect, the role of the jury, the sympathetic women, the antipathetic men? The judge, the mistrial?
13. The second case, overshadowed by the O.J. Simpson case, the changing public opinion? The media and the satires on the Menendez brothers? Hate mail?
14. The judge, setting limits for the second trial, the prosecution, harsh?
15. The interviews with the jurors, the friends?
16. The sentence, the separation of the brothers, 20 years? Eventually their being in the same prison?
17. 2024, the appeal and the hopes of the mitigation of the sentence?

GREEDY PEOPLE

US, 2024, 112 minutes, Colour.

Himesh Patel, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Lily James, Uzo Aduba, Tim Blake Nelson, Simon Rex, Jim Gaffigan, Joey Lauren Adams.

Directed by Potsy Ponciroli.

The title is absolutely correct. And, there is only one of the principal characters who is not greedy.

This reviewer had read only the cast list before seeing the film but, about 15 minutes in, the title Fargo came to mind, thoughts about the Coen Brothers and their style of filmmaking. (And, then reading the comments and reviews, practically everybody thought of Fargo and the Coen Brothers!).

Once you’re on the wavelength of Greedy People, there is no turning back. Screenplay, by Mike Vukadinovich, is cleverly funny, situations highly contrived but that is part of the enjoyment. And, gradual revelation of links between the various characters and their behaviour, the consequences of greed (and husband organising the murder of his wife also reminiscent of Fargo) becoming more humorously deadly as the film goes on. This is entertaining black humour.

At the opening, we are introduced to a sympathetic young policeman on his first day in a small town in Providence, Will he ia played by British actor, Himesh Patel. His wife, played by British Lily James, is pregnant. And then he meets his partner, one of the brashest to the brash, Terry, played by a very nonchalant Joseph Gordon Levitt, a walking satire of verified self-importance.

Answering a police call, and misinterpreting it, Will becomes involved in a scenario that he could never have imagined. He calls Terry – and thus begins a series of choices that will lead to disaster, greed, violence and general mayhem which makes greedy People both interesting and funny.

There is a good supporting cast, especially Tim Blake Nelson as the fish Baron of the town (and Tim Blake Nelson had played the  title character in the director, Potsy Poncirili’s western, Old Henry). Among the supporting characters is an awkward masseur, Simon Rex, under the domination of his religion mother. There is hit man in the town, philosophical but deadly, played by Jim Gaffigan, The Irishman. And there is his Colombian counterpart who, apparently, has jurisdiction in the town for hits. There is the fish Baron’s ambitious secretary. There is also  Uza Aduba who is the good one, the police chief.

So, with memories of the Coen Brother films, tantalising situations, ironic and satiric dialogue, audiences can sit back and enjoy the mayhem until the final macabre, laugh-out-loud image and a nice postscript, perhaps another tribute to the Coens, with Raising Arizona.

1. The title? Tone? Expectations?
2. The satire, the irony is, linking to the Coen brothers, Fargo?
3. The variety of chapters, the focus on each character?
4. The introduction to Will, bloodshot eye, his relationship with Paige, her pregnancy, his first day? The revelation about his father and the stealing of money? Murphy as the boss, solid and reliable? The introduction to Terry? Terry and his style, forthright, the talk, the copies and meals, going to see the Chinese lady, the rendezvous, the loud music, Will responding to the call, thinking it a burglary, going to the house, the woman and her cutting the carrots, his entry, her fear, the shooting, the fight, her fall, the wound to her head, her death? Calling Terry, is arriving, discovering the bag of money, the plan, roughing up the house, inheriting the money in the locker, noting the missing bike? Getting an alibi, holding up the driver, the fierce argument, the time?
5. The character, Terry, life, bullied at school, becoming a policeman, 16 years, his personal style, bravado, unselfconscious, the relationship with the Chinese woman, her husband? The situation, the money, the locker, owed? His coming to dinner, the encounter with Paige, the threats, killing the dog?
6. The husband, Chetlow his grief, his being interrogated, the revelation of the truth, hiring the Colombian hitman, the payments, at work, the secretary, the affair, the plan? The Colombian, the truth about his not doing the murder? 48 hours for payment? The suspicions of the Mass are?
7. The masseur, suspicious, the meeting, his explanation himself, his work, the dancing, the sex, his mother intervening, having seen the money, escaping on his bike?
8. Paige, pregnant, painting the house, doing the shopping, the information about the Irishman? Will telling her the story but blaming Terry? The invitation to dinner, Terry at the talk, the threats, the death of the dog? The decision, going to the Irishman, the talk, his philosophising and rationale about killing, the local areas for hitmen? Her getting the money, $50,000 to pay him?
9. Will, disturbed in the night, the masseur, observing hetlow, the secretary, mother, the shootings, the secretary shooting? Everybody dead? His phoning Terry? The phone calls to page? The confrontation between Will and Terry, Terry shooting him?
10. The phone calls, Murphy, pursuit, and the shooting, Will dead?
11. Terry, confronting the Irishman, the fight, the Chinese woman defending him, shooting the Irishman?
12. Murphy, the tracking, her arrival, confrontation with Terry? His menacing Paige, her shooting him?
13. The hospital, the birth, page wanting to abscond with the money? The Colombian arriving, taking the money, killing Paige the elevator? The secretary, going to the lift? Murphy waiting, the noise, the lift opening, the two dead, the money scattered?
14. The nice ending, Murphy and her caring then for the baby, the back story of the death of her child?

LONELY PLANET

US, 2024, 94 minutes, Colour.

Laura Dern, Liam Hemsworth, Diana Silvers.

Directed by Susannah Grant.

The title, Lonely Planet, will remind many audiences of the popular travel guides. And, the title is not entirely misleading – the action takes place ( until the end) in Morocco, offering something of a travelogue of Morocco itself, the mountains, lush areas, the deserts, the Mediterranean, Marrakesh… Audiences will feel as if they have been there (or will want to go there).

The occasion is a writer’s retreat, rather an extravagant occasion, world authors being invited by rich hosts to a luxury resort in the desert, there mainly being there to enjoy themselves, some mutual admiration, some harsh criticisms, and, it would seem now and again, some actual talk about writing and literature.

Popular American author, Katherine, has been invited by the host for some privacy for her own writing and some observing of the gathering. She is played by Laura Dern, successful, breaking from her partner, trying to finish a commission. By contrast, one of the guests is a young woman, Lily (Diana Silvers), her first success, swept up by the invitation, the glamour of the occasion, indulging in the enjoyment. Her partner has accompanied her, Owen (Liam Hemsworth), a businessman, more interested in sport than in literature, always on the phone, doing deals, and some shady implications about finance and environment.

The film is billed as something of a love story, older woman, younger man – and there have been a number of these films in recent years, May-December, A Perfect Couple, The Idea of You. But, this is not an immediate attraction and falling in love story. Rather, it is a story of meeting, some conversations, some sharing of stories, visits to Marrakesh. It is a friendship story, moving at a friendship pace, moving towards love.

But, neither is there any easy ending. There is a disaster for Katherine as her laptop is snatched by a passing thief, emotional crisis, taking it out on Owen.

Those who have become involved with the central characters will wonder as time passes. There have been developments in their lives…

1. The title? The books on travel? This film as a travelogue, the beauties of Morocco? But individuals travelling on the lonely planet?
2. The location photography, the variety of landscapes of Morocco, the mountains, the desert, the coast, Marrakesh, the towns? Atmosphere? The musical score?
3. The situation, the retreat for writers, pampered writers, the location, the luxury, the rooms, meals, the excursions? The writers, their selection? Reputations? Discussions?
4. Katherine’s story? Laura Dern’s presence? Age? Reputation as a writer? Her life’s devotion? The breakup of her partnership? Moving out, real estate agents and advertising? The invitation to come to Morocco, to observe the gathering, to do her own writing? Arriving, the welcome, the host, Hamid and his attentions? Keeping her privacy, the writing? The encounter with the writer from the past, his attention to her? Her avoiding it? The plan to go into the city, to write? Owen travelling with her?
5. Owen and Lily, Lily and her first success, flattered to be invited, her response, with all the guests, Owen, supporting her, but feeling on the outside? The charade a game and his failure and humiliation? Going out on his own? His business interests, the continual phone calls, his frustration and going onto the roof, Katherine looking for the door? Situation, the deal, environmental issues, getting to his conscience, the phone calls, the owner, breaking the deal, resigning?
6. The relationship between Katherine and Owen, the screenplay, not an immediate love story, rather a friendship story, discussions, shared interests, experiences in the town? The effect on Katherine, feeling supported, the conversations? The effect on own, the encounters with Lily, her being drunk, the breakup? The times with Katherine and the travels together?
7. The growing intimacy, the effect on each of them, age, experience, literary background, sports background? Sitting on the wall, the sea, the snatching of the computer, no backup, Katherine and her desperation? Taking it out on Owen? Disappearance?
8. Time passing, her new novel, the title from Owen’s description of the pass in football? The acclamation? The chance encounter, the conversation, parting – and returning? The value of the relationship, from friendship, to love and intimacy? The future?

SKATING TO NEW YORK

Canada, 2013, 93 minutes, Colour.

Connor Jessup, Wesley Morgan, Gage Munroe, Matthew Knight, Dylan Everett, Jason Geddrick, Michelle Nolden.

Directed by Charles Kinsky.

A small Canadian drama with overtones of coming-of-age stories.

The setting is a Canadian town across Lake Ontario from New York State. There is also an ice hockey setting, quite a lot of action sequences for fans. At the centre is one player, celebrated, a group of friends, difficulties between his mother and father.

The idea comes to skate across the lake to New York. Much of the film shows the episode, impulsiveness, the lack of preparation, the different personalities of the group, having to leap over a water gap in the ice, an encounter with a strange truckie, getting a sense of direction…

On arrival, there are complications for the central character finding his mother. There follows some attempts at reconciliation and understanding, parental support – and a final match.

1. Title and expectations? The Lake Ontario, winter, the ice, distance, the challenge?
2. The coming-of-age film, Canadian teenagers, the focus on boys, the friendships with the girls? Parents? School? Sport and competitiveness?
3. The background of ice hockey, popular in Canada, the teenagers, the teams, the play, the clashes and competitiveness, the coaches, parents, advice?
4. Casey, the focus, relationship with his father, demanding, advice? Relationship with his mother, supportive, concerned? Her leaving, his father at home? Later finding his mother with the medico from the hockey game? The challenge to her? Meeting up again with his father? Future?
5. The focus on Casey, age, experience, his friends? The range of friends, their ages, supportive, rebellious, the young boy? Their times together? The girls?
6. The idea of skating across Lake Ontario, preparations, lack of preparations, the caution of the young boy and is information, the derring-do of the others, Casey eventually coming? The distance, the compass? Food?
7. The exhilaration of the skating, in formation, the bonding, the gap with the water, the boy leaping over, the others hesitant, searching for an easier crossing, decision to cross, the formation together, the leap? Sense of direction, loss of sense of direction? The effect of the skating?
8. The trucker, stopping, the getting in, his mission, the touch of madness, the driving, going back across the border, the boys in the revolt, the dangers, the crash?
9. Eventually crossing, finding the bar and diner, the girl welcoming them in, the issue of drinking and age, the chat? Casey discovering his mother and the medico? The confrontation?
10. Calling his father, the discussions, the issues?
11. The boys, the dangers, the achievement, the exhilaration? The return home? The hockey matches, parental support?