Displaying items by tag: Peter Malone's Movie Reviews

THE LESSON

UK, 2023, 104 minutes, Colour.

Richard E.Grant, Julie Delpy, Daryl McCormack, Stephen McMillan, Crispin Letts.

Directed by Alice Troughton.

There are certainly lessons in this drama but they are not the core. Rather, the characters involved are those who have to learn lessons – and do.

This is a British film, but set in the world of literature, creative writing, the screenplay divided into chapters. There is a prologue where a young man, Liam, Daryl McCormack (Good Luck to You, Leo Grande) is being interviewed about his writing – and, this will be reprised in the epilogue, the tentatively having become the self-confidently.

Liam is talented, gets the opportunity to go to a large country estate owned by the celebrated writer, Sinclair (Richard E.Grant), successful, seen being interviewed, ultrasensitive, walking out, certainly a man of moods. At home is his French wife, Helene (Julie Delpy). She is supportive of her husband, and businesslike. But they have hired Liam as a tutor for their teenage son, Bertie (Stephen McMillan), somewhat erratic in his studies but being pressurised by his father for forthcoming exams and qualifications.

For a while, the audience will be with Liam, intrigued by the family situation, memories of a talented dead son who committed suicide in the mansion pool, Sinclair writing into the early hours of the morning, the seeming detachment of Helene, and a butler who is the essence of formality.

But, we become more and more antagonistic towards Sinclair, his whims, self-importance, ambiguous relationship with his wife, as well as mixed responses to Bertie and his studies, his writing, the ups and downs of his interactions with Liam.

Then, there is a surprise when Sinclair seems to be very friendly with Liam, even inviting him to read his latest manuscript. Liam invited to show his own manuscript to Sinclair. The results are rather disastrous and lead to quite some dramatic complications, Liam expressing positive criticism of the final part of the novel, Sinclair, upset, denouncing Liam as having no talent.

What follows is quite intriguing, the revelation of some truths, a liaison between Liam and Helene, and the raising of the issues about the dead son.

Very British in tone, interesting plot developments, and a lot of ironies in the lessons that the characters have to learn.

1. The title? The tutor and his coaching? The novelist and his teaching everyone lessons? And the experience of the tutor and its being a lesson for him?
2. A British film, British atmosphere, affluent family, the country mansion, interiors, subsidiary buildings, the grounds, the pool? The world of literature, author interviews, television interviews? The literary atmosphere? The musical score, the classics?
3. The prologue and the division into chapters, epilogue? The cumulative effect?
4. The interview with Liam, his novel, the interviewer asking the origins, the cut and the flashbacks, the epilogue and the final question and Liam’s response?
5. Sinclair, his being interviewed, his manner, humorous, condescending, superior, the influence of events in his work, upset, walking out? Replay of some of the scenes? And the theme that authors steal from great works?
6. Liam, his background, accent, qualifications, studies, agency, the tutor? Going to the Sinclair family? The encounter with Helene, contracts, nondisclosure and the later use of the contracts? The encounter with Bertie, his age, studies, talent, parents expectations, preparation for interviews and exams? Liam arriving, Ellis, the reception, the perfect butler, Liam and his accommodation outside the main building? Ellis, no familiarity?
7. The sessions with Bertie, outside, initial hostilities, the discussions, literature, the to-ing and fro-ing, Bertie gradually mellowing, the influence of his father, Liam and daring him to go into the pool?
8. Sinclair, returning home, working throughout the night, the windows, Liam observing, observing Sinclair and Liam working through the night, asleep? Observing the sexual encounter between Sinclair and Helene? The meals, formalities, the playing of the classics? Liam being excluded from some meals? Ellis and his preparing the coffee?
9. Liam the quotations, his memory, word associations, remembering further texts? In this important for the drama with Sinclair’s novel?
10. Felix, the dead son, prior to the family, the story of his suicide, drowning? His literary abilities? Silence about him?
11. Sinclair, his computer, Liam and his fixing the computer, Sinclair’s reliance on him, the conversations, the new novel, Sinclair giving Liam the manuscript to read, Liam and his own writings, Bertie taking his text, Liam asking Sinclair to read it? Liam’s return, his comments about the novel, the two thirds excellent, the failings of the final third? Sinclair’s angry response? Ridiculing Liam as having no talent?
12. Sinclair’s absence, Liam talking with Helene, his approach, the sexual encounter, the consequences?
13. Liam, his anger with Sinclair, supporting Bertie, Bertie’s absence in London? His deleting the manuscript from the computer? Taking the text? The discovery that Felix had written the first two parts? His father appropriating them? His anger about his own manuscript, tearing it up, throwing it in the pool?
14. Sinclair’s return, the disappearance of the manuscript, Helene’s reaction, Liam and his searching the computer? Sinclair driving away, the search? Return, Liam and the truth, the confrontation between the men, Liam outspoken, the struggle, falling into the lake, Sinclair turning his head and drowning himself?
15. Helene and the consequences, protecting everyone, Ellis and his retrieving the body, subservient to Helene, the scenario, the deaths, the police, Liam to leave, his packing, at the gate, the police arriving?
16. The epilogue, his having written a novel, the interviewer, looking into the gallery and Bertie present and encouraging him?

THE BEAUTIFUL GAME

UK, 2024, 125 minutes, Colour.

Bil Nighy, Micheal Ward, Valeria Golino,, Kit Young, Callum Scott Howells, Tom Vaughan Lawler, Leo Hamilton, Susan Warlomo, Christina Rodio.

Directed by Thea Sharrock.

Even though this is a soccer (football, a.k.a. in the UK, The Beautiful Game), it is much more than just a sports film – although fans will enjoy the different matches and the play.

But there is much, much more to the film then the soccer, essential though it is.

Did we know that since 2001 there has been the Homeless World Cup, where teams of homeless men and women representing their country train, have a coach, can apply to participate in the annual competition, a small group going to the host country, small sides, limited playing time, but a competition nonetheless?

Here the competition venue is Rome (always an attractive location). The focus is on a UK group, a group of men, though the American side is a team of women, coached by Mal, a thoughtful Bill Nighy, Nighy at his most likeable.. We learn the homeless stories, addiction, gambling, child neglect… But these men are on the moral mend, especially through the team.

The film has opened with children playing football, a young man watching them, joining in the kicking, but the audience suspecting that he has a chip on his shoulder. He is a bitter former professional, Vinnie (Micheal Ward), with emotional consequences. Mel watches him, invites him to join the group which he reluctantly does. He shows he has great skills, especially with his feet on the ball. However, his relationship with the rest of the men has very strong ups and downs.

Then, the team is ready, and off to Rome. Audiences who enjoy Rome will find plenty to their liking. (The screenplay has been written by Frank Cottrell Boyce (Dog Millionaire), a Catholic, often including Catholic themes in his films, like Millions about being a saint. He introduces some God talk, especially through one of the most exuberant characters in the film, a South African nun, the coach and sponsor of their team, delayed at passport control in South Africa because of visa problems for one of their members from Zimbabwe, but her persuading the official to let them arrive, arriving late, arranging a match with the English team, wearing her habit and veil, and gleefully calling on God for help!

The main teams we see are Japan, US, Italy and, as noted, South Africa. The matches have their excitement, the audience taking sides, especially when we realise that one of the English team is Syrian, a refugee barber, and the Italians have a hostile Syrian on their side. There is drama with the American team, a young woman determined to become a professional, the matches, some defeat, but a final reward for her.

In the meantime, Vinnie goes off by himself at times, refuses to share a room with one of his team who admires him, a former addict who lapses.

This is a very likeable film, and Mal is a very good man. There are some complications for Vinnie, his coping with his past, having to step up to some self-sacrifice – and finally, happily, learning why Mal has supported him so much.

A film of compassion blended with sports enthusiasm, an invitation to feel with others, hope for opportunities and second chances.

1. The title, football, soccer, UK name, beautiful?
2. The football audience, soccer audience, the other football codes? A sports Mfilm? More?
3. The Homeless World Cup? Since 2001? Its scope? The teams, limits, the times for the matches? International? The players coming only one time in their lives? International perspective?
4. The film and its outreach to the homeless, the reasons, addiction, neglecting children, gambling, thief? And the refugee barber from Syria?
5. The International preparations, the focus on the UK, the team from Japan and the girl in charge, her age? The men, vagrants, the look? South Africa, the nun, boisterous leadership, the team? The US, Rosita and her ambitions?
6. Gabriella, coordinator, knowing everyone, observations, comments, encouragement?
7. Vinny, the introduction, with the children, playing, intervening, the criticisms? Mal Bradley observing him, intervening, praising him? Vinny, the loner, in his car, the courier jobs, not available, visit, child, wife, clashes? Is History of playing professionally? His bitterness? The challenge?
8. Mal Bradley, his character, his years as a scout, his years with the Homeless team, bonding with each of them, encouraging, training them? The personal interactions with each?
9. Vinny bitter, scoring goals, special technique, Cal and his skills, reactions, training together?
10. The team, Nathan, simple and kind, revelation of his addiction, not able to be at home, the concern of his mother, the phone calls? Friendly with Vinny? Vinny not wanting to share the room with him, condemnation of Nathan as an addict, a loser? The effect on Nathan, the methadone treatment, neglecting it, having to go home, his apology to Vinny?
11. Kevin, the background of his gambling? Jason, naivete, the attraction towards Rosita and their encounters? Cal, skills, the story of neglecting his son in the car? Aldar, the war in Syria, Kurds, refugee, barber? And his giving the haircuts to the team?
12. The troubles, the spirit, the variety of teams? The South African team, held up with passport control, the introduction of sister, personality, the habit, boisterous, leading the team, prayer, God language? Insisting at the passport desk? The achievement, arriving in Rome, late for the match? Approaching Vinny, the agreement to the game? South Africa winning? The previous points for the UK because of their absence? The American team and their play?
13. The visualising of the matches, the techniques, tactics, the scores?
14. The spirit of the games, teamwork, opportunities, Rosita, her scholarship? The Italian team, the Syrian refugee, the final kicks, handshaking with Aldar? The Japanese loss, but the tour of Rome and their seeing beautiful things? Wanting one goal, getting more? The UK team and the visit to the Trevi fountain and tossing the coin, Mal and the memories of his wife and honeymoon?
15. Vinny and the clashes, not sharing the room, by himself, the request to play for South Africa, his achievement, the medals? Alienation from the team?
16. The ending, his arriving late, the reconciliation?
17. Mal telling them to the truth about scouting him, and his reaction, happy to have been scouted by Mal?
18. And the range of happy endings – touching the heart?

RIPLEY

US, 2023, 8X 56 minutes, black-and-white.

Andrew Scott, Dakota Fanning, Johnny Flynn, Margharita Buy, Kenneth Lonergan, Elliot Sumner, Maurizio Lombardi, Bokeem Woodbine, John Malkovich, Fisher Stevens.

Directed by Stephen Zaillian.

Tom Ripley is the literary creation by crime novel writer, Patricia Highsmith. Over the decades, he has had many incarnations, Alain Delon in the 1960s, Purple Noon, Dennis Hopper in the 1970s, The American Friend, strikingly in 2000, Matt Damon in The Talented Mr Ripley, John Malkovich in Ripley’s game, 2002. (Wikipedia indicates quite a number of other films, especially from the 1950s to the 1970s.)

This time he is played by Irish actor, Andrew Scott, completely convincing. And this time Dicky Greenleaf is played by Johnny Flynn and Marge by Dakota Fanning. There is a strong supporting cast of British, American and, especially, Italian actors.

It is a television series of eight episodes. This gives the screenplay enough time to offer sequences plenty of time to develop, sometimes giving the impression of events happening in real time.

But, one of the key assets for the film is its black-and-white photography, often described by reviewers and bloggers as “pristine” (clean and fresh as if new; spotless). Comments cannot do justice to the clarity of the black-and-white, some of the cities of Italy enhanced by the quality of the photography.

Tom Ripley is a conman. Tom Ripley is also a psychopath, not just a sociopath who can smile and charm but is self-absorbed, but is also criminally insane, and unscrupulous murderer. Every actor who plays Ripley has to be persuasive with charm but yet able to show the in the madness, the unscrupulous narcissism.

Ripley has offered the opportunity to go to Italy by wealthy American businessman, played by playwright Kenneth Lonergan, to persuade his son Dicky to come back to the US. Ripley takes the money, visits Dicky, sees the lifestyle, enviously and vicariously starts to live it, overcoming any suspicions by Dicky, but not by Marge. Which leads them to Ripley is murdering Dicky, covering the murder shrewdly, Tom becoming Dicky in the comfortable life in Rome, then in Venice. And, he is always one step ahead though there are many close calls.

The screenplay for this series has been written by veteran writer-director, Steven Zaillian, celebrated writer of many significant films from Schindler’s List, Gangs of New York, the Irishman.

1. The work of Patricia Highsmith? The different versions of her Ripley stories?
2. Ripley, a conman, psychopath, his success, an amoral character?
3. The previous versions and comparisons? The value of the television series, eight episodes?
4. The decision to film in black and white, the striking photography, “pristine”? Of the locations, towns, the beach, Naples, Rome, San Remo, Palermo, Venice? The musical score?
5. The pacing with eight episodes, some action in real time, the strong attention to detail for developing the plot?
6. The casting, Andrew Scott embodying Ripley?
7. The introduction, New York City, the petty conman, his character, seeing him in action, the summons by Herbert Greenleaf, his wife, business interests, the proposal about his son? Ripley being tracked down by the private detective, the conversation? Explanations of Richard Greenleaf, Dickie and his leaving, settling in Italy? Ripley accepting the mission, the money, the travel to Italy?
8. The town, Atrani, life there, the coast, Dickie, his age, lifestyle, wealth, relationship with his parents, alienation, dabbling in art? His relationship with Marge? Her writing a book? Her devotion to him? He to her? Is reading the manuscript and giving suggestions, her response? Ambiguous attitudes towards Tom?
9. Tom, his arrival, ingratiating himself, his schemes, revelation of the truth about his mission, bonding with Dickie, not with Marge? Freddie and his visit, Tom’s dislike? The invitation to Cortina and its consequences? The lifestyle in the town, Tom, emulating Dickie, caught wearing his clothes and Dickie’s off-hand response?
10. Tom writing to Herbert Greenleaf, money issues? The father and his letters, dismissing Tom, urging Dickie to be suspicious? The decision to go to San Remo, hiring the boat, Tom, calm, waiting for the moment, malevolent, killing Dickie, taking his ring, all the effort to come to shore, the body overboard, the rocks on the boat? The later recovery, the police investigations, the reports in the media?
11. The details of Tom’s life, in the town, the various characters, learning Italian, the banks? The train rides? The hotels and reception? The feel of Italy in 1961?
12. Tom, his skills at evading detection, going back to the town, Dickie’s clothes, typewriter? The smuggler and the previous proposition to smuggle, selling the boat? American Express in Rome? Tom becoming Dickie, his clothes, manner? Settling in Rome, expensive hotels?
13. The various letters, the importance of the typewriter and its flawed letter e, Freddy’s visit, Tom and his coping, levels, the plan to kill him, the alcohol, the blood on the floor, taking the body, the elevator and its not working, dragging him down the steps, in the street, the car and his working out which one, holding him up, the witness walking his dog and the later visit to the police? The details of the drive, repeated several times, the via Appia, the taxi drivers, going back to retrieve the passport, his settling back at the apartment? Cleaning the blood? The importance of the landlady, her kindness to him, showing him the apartment, her receiving the police?
14. Inspector Ravini, the visits, Tom and his calm during the interviews, the blood on the path? Marge, the visit, his meeting her in the cafe, her telling Ravini and his not believing her?
15. The character of Ravini, the interviews, Tom on the edge, Max and his relationship with Freddie, wanting to meet Dickie? The media reports, suspicions on Tom? On the newspaper, the visualising of the articles, the pressure? Then on Dickie? The finding of the boat, the bank fraud and Tom fixing the signatures? The various phone calls from the bankers? Tom cashing the money? Getting the permission to go to Palermo
16. The twist, Tom and the media and photos in Palermo, moving hotel? The decision to leave, the false clue about Tunis?
17. Tom, in Venice, alive, revealing the visiting, Marge and her visit? The art world and the dealer? Marge intruding? Herbert Greenleaf arriving, the dangers, exposure, the private detective and his arrival, accusing Tom? The further discussions, speculation, the forged letters, the money to the landlady, the ring, the assumption that Dickie had killed himself?
18. Tom, the art dealer, the Picasso, getting a new name and passport?
19. Marge, publishing the book, the irony of Ravini seeing the photo of the actual Dickie?

AFTER DEATH

US, 2023, 106 minutes, Colour.

Directed by Stephen Gray, Chris Radtke.

We have all heard or read about near death experiences. But, do we know what they really are, what they really mean? After Death begins with a definition – so, a review starting with some definitions.

Near-death experiences (NDEs) have been a source of controversy within academia and the public. NDEs occur in 10% to 20% of patients who have come close to death and consist of vivid, subjective experiences that occur during life-threatening emergencies.  (Google definition)

A near-death experience (NDE) is a profound personal experience associated with death or impending death, which researchers describe as having similar characteristics. When positive, which the great majority are, such experiences may encompass a variety of sensations including detachment from the body, feelings of levitation, total serenity, security, warmth, joy, the experience of absolute dissolution, review of major life events, the presence of a light, and seeing dead relatives. When negative, such experiences may include sensations of anguish, distress, a void, devastation, and seeing hellish imagery. (Wikipedia definition)

Here is a documentary from Angel Studios, Distributors of Sound of Freedom, Cabrini, His Only Son, and for the television series, The Chosen. It is a documentary with many interviews. However, some of the interviewees have died and so an actor presents their opinions, audiences assuming that they are seeing the real person, especially Dr Michael Sabom. And, at the beginning, some of the death and neo-death experiences are dramatised, a plane crash, surgery, and, as the survivors of the experience tell their stories, these again are dramatised.

Very striking are the imaginative representations of the experience, cosmic, transcendent, colour, light and darkness, dramatic movement – a tribute to the special effects.

The film opens with the incidents and some interviews but raises issues of scientific verification, attempts at analysis, statistics, registration of near-death experiences.

There can be three main responses to all this material: favourable and accepting, an open-minded attempt at objective consideration, finally scepticism and hostility. After Death has been extraordinarily successful with audiences who are favourable and accepting, the responses on the Internet movie database, almost 200 blogs, are highly enthusiastic, some audiences seeing the film more than once, many overwhelmed by their experience.

Most of the experts, who have written books on the subject, some lecturing widely, describe the experiences in great detail, moving very much towards God language, some focusing on Jesus, and most speculating on what heaven is like or could be like. And, by the end, many of them are quite evangelistic and their enthusiasms.

On the other hand, some of the professional critics have been quite scathing and dismissive. They question the science. They are not impressed by the religious fervour. They consider all this a show.

Which means then that the film offers an opportunity for open audiences to listen to testimonies, to evaluate their credibility, to respond to their enthusiasm (or not). But, by the end, audiences will know that there are many experiences as people approach death, have experiences of being declared dead. But, as the film stresses, those who experience a near-death do not come back from the dead, as some seem to think, but they experience a resuscitation.

A film to challenge belief, scientific method, the reality of experiences which are beyond the normal.

MACBETH

UK, 2024, 150 minutes (including 15 minutes intermission), Colour.

Ralph Fiennes, Indira Varma, Ben Allen, Ewan Black, Jonathan Case, Stefan Rhodri, Ben Turner.

Directed by Simon Godwin.

Macbeth is one of Shakespeare’s most popular plays. And, there have been many film versions, from Orson Welles, from Polanski, and, more recently, from Justin Kurzel with Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard, and from Joel Coen with Denzel Washington and Frances McDormand. All striking in their own way.

This production is a stage version, captured for film, a way of immersing the audience in the action, stylised as it is, but the camera able to bring us closer, even through extreme close-ups, of the characters, a focus and view of them sometimes more intimate than for the theatre audience.

The setting is contemporary, Macbeth and soldiers in more familiar military uniform, the weird sisters (rather than witches) looking bizarre but less sinister, and Lady Macbeth usually in simple white dress. The impact for the audience means that they are not looking at a cinematic spectacle, with a play opened out in realistic fashion. Rather, the emphasis is on the characters and the language.

In many ways, this version is worth seeing because Ralph Fiennes’ interpretation of Macbeth is often very different from what we have seen in the past. At first sight, weary from battle, Macbeth seems very ordinary despite his rank. He is stirred by the words of the weird sisters, moved by ambition, yet firm companion with Banquo, and returning home to his wife.

But, this version of the play could also be called Lady Macbeth. As played by Indira Varma, she is a steely personality, sometimes softer in appearance, but soon moving into grim determination, masterminding the plot, the action moving quickly, the murder of Duncan and its consequences, her trying to hold things together with Macbeth’s bizarre behaviour at the banquet, and her final mad decline.

One of the great advantages of this performance is that the cast speak their lines, making the iambic pentameter seem like conversation – although, there are always the moments of declamation, contrasting with the quiet meditative delivery of so many of the famous lines – tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow… All the actors speak their lines with commendable clarity.

Malcolm is a more memorable character here. Banquo is strong. Seton is more significant. So are the murderers sent by Macbeth to destroy Macduff’s family. And, of course, the final confrontation with Macduff.

Response will depend on audience familiarity with the play, the scenes that they value, their expectations on how they will be presented, any dramatic and unexpected twists.

And back again to Ralph Fiennes’ presentation of Macbeth, seemingly already maddened by the intrigue against the King, mental morality challenged, sanity beginning to go awry. And Fiennes presents Macbeth with all kinds of unexpected erratic behaviour, actually moving through most of the play stooped, bent from the waist, sometimes walking, sometimes running, even sometimes jigging. And his face goes through all kinds of expressions, giggles, mad laughs, even poking out his tongue and pulling faces. Not quite the solemn Macbeth we are used to.

Which then builds up to the climax, an ingenious presentation of troops holding branches so that Burnham Wood can advance on Dunsinane.

So, an unusual vision of Macbeth himself – and, a performance by Indira Varma of Lady Macbeth that will stay in the memory.

THE FALL GUY

US, 2024, 126 minutes, Colour.

Ryan Gosling, Emily Blunt, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Hannah Waddingham, Teresa Palmer, Stephanie Hsu, Winston Duke.

Directed by David Leitch.

A big-budget, Northern Hemisphere summer blockbuster, action and romance – and plenty of stunts – for a happy popcorn audience. And based on an 8os television series with Lee Majors.

The fall guy is usually the one who has to take the blame but the emphasis here is on stunt men who have to do all kinds of literal falls for the action sequences of the movie. Actually, later it is revealed that Colt Stevens, longtime reliable stuntman, is actually the fall guy for a murder.

And it was filmed in Sydney! Action on the Harbour Bridge. Elaborate futuristic science-fiction stunts in front of the Opera House, action chases on the harbour.

And the star is Ryan Gosling. For 20 years he has been a very serious actor, able to do comedy, and hitting the headlines as Ken, I’m just Ken, in last year’s very popular Barbie. The Fall Guy won’t dent his popularity at all. All kinds of stunts, some deadpan lines, some pining for Jody, the camera director who is now making her first feature film, Metalstorm, an action show which looks like a minor variation on Dune. And she is played with charm and energy by Emily Blunt.

One of the main attractions for The Fall Guy is the range and extent of so many of the stunts, many going on for quite a while. The director of the film, David Leitch, was a stuntman and body doubled in the past, even in Sydney for The Matrix films. One can tell that he is very enthusiastic about all the stunts. And, he was one of the powers behind the original John Wick, so is not afraid of violent confrontations. And, there are quite a lot of those, always serious but is a lot of tongue-in-cheek humorous touches..

Television audiences will have seen Hannah Waddingham in the popular series, Ted Lasso. Here she is the big, upfront, producer, spurring people on, sometimes sweet-talking them, other times manipulating them, ruthless. And, as the action goes on, we discover that she is even more ruthless! And the hero of Metalstorm, is show pony, Tom Ryder, played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson, full of himself, prone to flattery, unscrupulous – and sporting a very broad Matthew McConnaughy kind of Texan accent.

And the romance pervades the whole film, stuntman and director pining for each other, split, gradually coming together (symbolised by the split screen sequence where with all their talk about the plot of the film and happy ending, they gradually walk towards each other!).

There will be many more American summer movies like The Fall Guy – but this is the one that we have this year. And a drawcard for American tourists to Sydney to see the sights where Ryan Gosling went into action!

1. A popular blockbuster? Action, stunts, intrigue, murder, romance? And a tribute to stunt experts and their performances?
2. Hollywood, the studios, the sets, Sydney, Harbour Bridge, Opera House, harbour, the use of locations?
3. The musical score, songs and lyrics, the theme for the stunts, the theme for Jody? Background to the action?
4. The opening, colt, personality, appearance, manner, getting ready for the stunt, relationship with Jody, her camera work, his voice-over explaining the situation? The harness, his fall, breaking his back? 18 months away, valet parking, the actor who recognised him? The message from Gail inviting him to come back, saying that Jody wanted him as she was directing Metal Storm? The sneer of the actor, Colt in the car swerving? Response to Gail, flying to Sydney?
5. Jody, with the camera, Gael encouraging her, her first feature film, onset, acting like the Dir, discussing the scenes, with the stunt experts, the graph assistant and his abusing people and her rebuke, the action sequences? Setting it up, suddenly seeing Colt, her not expecting him, her reaction?
6. Colt in Sydney, agreeing to the stunt, meeting up with Dan, their discussions, the car and the role, is seeing Jody, her reactions?
7. The romance theme, at the opening, the separation, her reaction, his reasons, the songs and the themes, the conversations about the screenplay echoing their romance, happy endings, the split screen sequence, coming together, the gradual mellowing, the work on the film, his stunts, her reliance on him? The karaoke, his not turning up, her song, upset, in the screenings, ignoring his phone calls? The shock of his being accused of murder?
8. Colt, the stunt work, at the front of the Opera house, the details of the stunt work? Stunts in action, the fights in the hotel room, Alma and the deal, the chase, the stunts, the Harbour Bridge, the streets and crashes? The issue of the phone?
9. Tom Ryder, self-satisfied, star, absent, Colt set to find him, Gail and her intervention, his going to the room, the body in the bath, camera capturing him, seeking the room, the drug connections after his going to the club, the thugs in the truck, his being captured?
10. The revelation of the truth, Tom Ryder, killing his new stunt double, his motivations, the revelation of his setting up Colt is the fall guy? His security henchman, vicious?
11. Colt tied up, dust with petrol, ready to be killed, his blowing the flame to the villain, the petrol in his mouth? The boat, guiding it facing backwards, getting loose, the pursuit about the harbour, the explosion, presumed dead, the media and the reports, the finding of his jacket, a sign for Jody?
12. The final plan against Tom after his return for the film, the setting up of a scene, the close-ups, trapping him, setting him up with the wire, the drive, his confession, the actual stunt and his reaction?
13. Gail, setting up Colt, giving him the plane ticket, her pretences, the meeting with Jody, the fight, unmasked?
14. The film a success, starring Jason Mamoa, the scenes, the reception?
15. The humour of the final credits, the repeat of so many of the sequences – and then the sudden scene of Alma taking stock of the situation and calling for Jason Mamoa’s agent?

THE TEACHERS’ LOUNGE/ DAS LEHRERZIMMER

Germany, 2023, 98 minutes, Colour.

Leonie Benesch, Anne -Katherine Gummich, Rafael Stachowiak, Michael Klammer, Eva Lobau, Leonard Stettnisch.

Directed by Ilka Catak.

Could we see the school as a microcosm of the outside world? The answer is certainly yes, reinforced by this story of an episode in a German school. The Teachers’ Lounge was Germany’s nomination for Foreign Language Oscar.

The day seems to start very well. Carla (Leonie Benesch) is a new teacher at a school, her class consists of 12 year olds. We see her begin the day with happy rituals, the class eagerly joining in, chant, hands clapping, joy. She teaches maths and we see various interactions, concerning homework and tests, getting to know in some detail the children in the class. She is originally from Poland.

But, as the day and days progress, small situations arise, growing more serious, more extensive, and need for mediation for peace, accusations, evidence, hurt feelings, growing intransigence. And, as regards the microcosm, if this can happen with such animosity in the school, what about negotiations in contemporary or situations, civil wars in Sudan and Myanmar, conflict in Russia-Ukraine, Israel-Gaza? Hopes? Hopelessness?

The first inkling of trouble is accusations against one of the boys for stealing. He is innocent but his family are migrants from the Middle East, school management trying to avoid any hints of racism. Then the main trouble, Carla leaving her jacket with her wallet and a significant amount of money in the teachers’ lounge, coming back and finding it missing. But, she has a video camera on her computer and the arm and clothing are partly captured on the computer.

Accusations, denials, hurt, walkouts, condemnation of Carla for having the camera and unlawful filming of the staff, Carla interviewed by the student paper and their twisting her words in a sensational article, her students ganging up against her and refusing to cooperate in class… Microcosm!

The seeming impasses of the confrontation, the school principal and her interventions, the other members of the staff, changing attitudes towards Carla, the behaviour of the students, attempted meetings, animosities, no relenting… Is resolution possible?

Soon the film focuses on one of the boys, Oskar (Leonard Stettnisch in a standout performance) his mother working in the staff office, the reaction of the other children in the class, his behaviour and stances, threats of expulsion, Carla and her trying to be an intermediary to solve the issue.

There is a final moment, surprising, and then up come the final credits. As with so many serious films, it would seem that the resolution is left to audiences to determine, depending on their attitudes towards the situations, sympathies or not towards key characters.

However, for those interested in an interpretation which suggests a resolution, and IMD blog entry is well recommended, well argued, relying on the role of mathematics throughout the film: SPOILER, the ending explained IMO nyccents 27 January 2024

1. the title, the school, the staff, staff relationships, students, crises and handling of crises?
2. The action taking place within the school, the grounds? The classrooms, the teachers lounge, gymnasium, offices, secretarial? Authentic feel? Musical score?
3. Carla’s story, German, her family from Poland, not wanting to speak Polish with the staff? Age, experience? In the classroom, the rituals to begin, chant, clapping hands? The clapping hands with students joining in throughout the day? Her maths classes, on the board, the homework, corrections? Interactions with the students? Interactions with the staff?
4. The first crisis, the principal and the staff, including Carla, interviewing the class captains, to get information about who was stealing? The list, the silence, the nodding of the head? The identification of the boy? The interrogation? His parents, Middle East and background, issues of racism, language? The condemnation of this kind of getting information, enforcement of the students?
5. The other children in the class, Oskar is clever, son of the secretariat, Lucas and his responsibilities, disturbing? Tom, sullen attitudes? Harley and the theft? The girls? Carla and her relationship to them? In class, in the gym, sport? Personal interactions?
6. Carla leaving the jacket in the teachers lounge, checking the money, coming back, the money gone, the video, the arm and the blouse? Checking the staff, confronting Mrs Kuhn, denials, reaction, hurt, accusations, walk out?
7. The staff and the situation, discussions with Carla, the issue of the computer and the camera?
8. The effect of the situation, Mrs Kuhn and her absence from the office, coming in, the harsh confrontation with Carla, especially at the parents might, fostering suspicions? Oscar as her son, his coming to school, the effect of suspicions on his mother? While taunts from other children? Carla talking with him? His silence, surliness, behaviour in class, success at maths, the opening with his equation on the board and finding the middle number? Outside class?
9. The building up of sympathies, the staff and their attempts, some friendly with Carla, some businesslike in the teachers lounge, the sympathetic teacher, the transfer of the children to his room, Oskar alone? His turning against Carla? The personalities of the staff, the meetings and discussions?
10. The parents night, the questions about interrogating students for information, turning on Carla, accusations? Mrs Kuhn?
11. Carla, her attitude towards Oscar, sympathy for him, trying to reason with him? The issue of suspension, the issue of expulsion, his turning up, not answering the phone to his mother?
12. The students, the interview for the paper, the loaded questions, the interpretation, the accusations? The early publication, Carla not allowed to check, the extra price for the staff? Everybody with the paper? Carla and her dismay? The staff and the decision to stop the paper?
13. The children, their meetings, ganging up against Carla in class, the comments about the chant and clapping, childish, Tom offering to help, the fight with Oscar?
14. No resolution for the film? Leaving into audience interest, sympathies about issues, with the characters on not?

JEANNE DU BARRY

France, 2023, 117 minutes, Colour.

Maiwenn, Johnny Depp, Benjamin Lavernhe, Melville Poupaud, Robin rencci, Pierre Richard, Marianne Basler, Pascal Greggory.

Directed by Maiwenn.

Sets, costumes, the Palace of Versailles, the vast grounds, the magnificent interiors… All suggest the word “Sumptuous”. And, indeed, for any audience eager for looking at the sumptuous, this is a strong contender.

It is the story of a young illegitimate girl, her mother a cook, well educated at a convent, but a more worldly disposition, finding her way in Paris, a prostitute, attracting wealthy clientele, a courtesan. She attracts the attention of the wealthy Count du Barry, politicians and courtiers at the court of Louis XV promote her and, in the film, it is infatuation at first sight. The king has been licentious, many mistresses, and Jeanne takes her place, but a requirement for some acceptance of court is that she should be married and this is arranged with the consent of du Barry.

The screenplay is generally accurate (the Wikipedia entry on Jeanne du Barry is worth consulting for those interested in her). However, it traces the years with the King, her being despised by his haughty and racist daughters, though defended by the eventual Louis XVI, the growing influence on the king and his reliance on her, the enmity of Marie Antoinette, and the king’s eventual illness, death by smallpox, his having advised her to leave the court for her own safety.

Her subsequent life, not without intrigue, is not dramatised here.

This is the middle of the 18^th century, France having achieved extraordinary status and influence under the long reign of Louis XIV. Louis XV was far less interested in political affairs. As the film shows, the aristocratic class was in control, fawning on the king, enjoying a spectacularly wealthy lifestyle, caught up in protocols (even to what looks like a comic withdrawing from the King’s presence, backwards, little jumping steps…), ambitions, spite, intrigues, and a vast retinue off to hunt .

For audiences who are of an anti-Royal disposition, who are amazed at the lives of the arrogant and spoilt, the revolution could not come sooner! (And some of this attitude is voiced in the final comments before the credits.)

For many audiences, the casting is intriguing. Here is Johnny Depp again after many personal troubles, playing Louis XV, Depp now at 60 creates an impression of the king who presumes on his status, is not particularly interested in affairs of state, has a sexual appetite, but growing more self-absorbed and disdaining of his family as time goes on. Often he looks as forlorn as Depp did as Edward Scissorhands decades ago.

But, the attention is on Maiwenn, actress, director, who had a hand in the screenplay here, produces, directs, and takes the leading role. Chronologically she is far too old in fact for the role but, relishing it, she combines a love of luxury with a rather ironic detachment from the protocols of the court. She goes through the marriage with du Barry (a cynical Melville Poupaud), is presented with a black boy slave whom she mothers and promotes, establishes herself as indispensable to the King. And, as the film goes on, the audience can’t help liking her and her humorous disdain of expectations, and appreciating her sorrow at the King’s death.

There is a fine supporting cast of French veterans but the standout is the King’s valet, completely loyal, arranging everything the King wants, presenting a very detached demeanour, gradually very loyal to Jean, grief at the King’s death. He is played most effectively by Benjamin Lavernhe.

An immersion in the French court (rather than with the French populace) of the 18^th century.

1. A sumptuous historical immersion, Versailles in the 18^th century? Visually satisfying? Characters? Intrigues? Interactions? The accuracy of the storytelling?
2. Re-creation of period, costumes and decor, the grounds of Versailles, the exteriors, the interiors, lavish? Costumes? The musical score and atmosphere of the times?
3. Audience knowledge of the Countess du Barry? Of Louis XV and his reign? The impact of Louis XIV, decline in the 18^th century, foreshadowing the Revolution?
4. The voice-over, tone, indicating episodes, time passing, judgements on Jeannene and other characters?
5. The initial outline of her life, information about her parents, her mother, her work as a cook, her patron, is educating Jeanne, attachment, her going to the convent, the years with the nuns, her wide reading, “worldly”? Her being expelled, with her mother, the patron, his attachment, his wife? As a prostitute, her response, survival, increasing clientele, popularity, the brothel, du Barry and his attachment, Marshall Richelieu and the politicians and ambitions for her with the King? du Barry agreeing, her place in his home, the clashes between them?
6. Louis XV, wife, many children, licentious and mistresses, age, the pomp of Versailles, the minute protocols, courtiers and their ambitions, fawning on the king, his lack of interest in affairs of state? Hunting? Personality and manner?
7. Jeanne, in the line-up, the King passing, the long glimpse, the infatuation, calling for her? The initial encounters, her spirited response, mocking the steps backward? The king amused? The beginnings of the relationship? Her place in the court? The King’s daughters, other courtiers, jealousy and resentment? The scenes with them, their mockery, gossip? The daughter who supported Jeanne? Her retiring from the court and becoming a nun?
8. Jeanne as a character, personality, reading men, her experiences, talents, wiles? With the King, the presentation of Zamor and her attachment to him, mothering him, the reaction, racist, of the King’s daughters?
9. The character of Le Borde, his role as valet, arranging everything for the king, protocols, personal attention, procuring? His personality, not revealing emotions? His relationship with Jeanne, the formalities, his mellowing in behaviour, supporting her? The king and his dependence?
10. Jeanne and her care for du Barry’s son, Adolphe, her attachment, mothering, his responses to her, coming to court, possible engagement, the duel, his death? The grief of his father?
11. The years passing, the future Louis XVI and his defence of Jeanne? The arrival of Marie Antoinette, the gossips, poisoning her against Jeanne, the various strategies, arrange meetings, failures? Eventually Marie Antoinette commenting that there were many people at the palace, an indication of victory and acceptance, Jeannes joy?
12. The years passing, the king, other liaisons, the death of his wife, grief? The courtiers, the retinues for hunting? The politicians, their meetings, ruling the country? There intrigues?
13. The king, the smallpox, Jeanne unwelcome, Le Borde and his allowing her in, the scenes with the King, his urging her to leave for her own sake, the return farewell, the humour of her doing the backward steps, the reaction of the courtiers? His death?
14. The courtiers, the candle indicating was alive, blowing out the candle, response to his death? The accession of Louis XVI?
15. Jeanne, the years, her mother at court, the help of Le Borde, leaving Zamor, going on her way?
16. The final information, the intimations of the revolution, execution of the king, Marie Antoinette, and the execution of Jeanne herself and her association with Versailles?

FREUD'S LAST SESSION

Ireland/UK, 2023, 109 minutes, Colour.

Anthony Hopkins, Matthew Goode, Liv Lisa Fries, Jodi Balfour, Jeremy Northam, Orla Brady, George Andrew-Clarke, Rhys Mannion, Stephen Campbell Moore, Peter Warnock, Aiden McArdle.

Directed by Matt Brown.

With Anthony Hopkins in his mid-80s and a 55 year career playing Sigmund Freud, who can resist? It seemed he never met Christian apologist and fantasy author, Oxford CS Lewis, but veteran psychologist Arnold M.Nicholi wrote a book, The Question of God, placing the arguments of each in juxtaposition, compare and contrast. In 2012, playwright Mark St Germain wrote a play, drawing on The Question of God book and some information that before his death Freud met an Oxford don (not identified).

So, with the collaboration of the playwright, here is a film version of the play. For those interested in Freud, a great deal on his perspectives on psychoanalysis and, as expected, his views on sexuality. For those interested in Lewis, a great deal on his conversion experience, his sense of the presence of God. Freud was about to die. Lewis was to have an impactful career in broadcast, writing, Christianity, the Chronicles of Narnia…

It is September 3, 1939. Hitler has invaded Poland. Chamberlain will declare war on Germany. The atmosphere in London is tense, parents and children flocking to railway stations to evacuate the children, and air raid siren and shelter, planes flying overhead. In terms of a World War II film, this is an excellent evocation, filmed with muted colour.

Freud is living in Finchley, having fled Vienna the year earlier with his daughter, Anna, herself a reputable psychoanalyst, especially for children, who lectures in London. Freud has cancer of the mouth and is in pain. His also listening to the radio, wanting to hear the news about the war. And he has agreed for CS Lewis to visit him, even though the two have opposing views.

While most of the action takes place in Freud’s office/den, the play has been opened out with great impact, dramatised flashbacks to the early life of each of the men, Freud’s life and work in Vienna, his reputation, his refuge in England. With Lewis, there is his childhood, parents, but especially the experience of the trenches, death of a friend, wounded, the siren and shelter evoking memories of trench terror. Through these flashbacks and the consequent conversations, we learn a great deal about the two men.

While the two meet, there is quite some hostility between them, Freud and his atheism, his free thinking about sexuality and pleasure, while Lewis is rather more buttoned up, eager to defend belief in God. Which means there are many interesting conversations, Freud and his quips and putdowns, Lewis more aggressive at times. In fact, what we see is an incipient psychoanalysis by Freud of Lewis, not just what he says but what he doesn’t say. And, as the two interact, there are psychoanalyst intimations about Freud himself, especially about his relationship with his daughter, Anna, and Lewis’s attack on their codependence.

For those who side with Freud, the film will confirm their beliefs. They will not be persuaded by Lewis. However, those who side with Lewis, will appreciate his sense of the presence of God, a final dream as he nods off on the train back to Oxford, a forest full of bright light, transcendent light. But Lewis does tell Freud that God is often incognito in the world.

Interesting writing, top performances, a film with substance and intelligent challenge.

1. A blend of actual history and imagination? An Oxford Don visiting Freud just before his death? Identifying CS Lewis’s? Based on a book of speculation, adaptation as a successful play, the text of the play and its being opened out with flashbacks?
2. Audience knowledge of and interest in Freud, psychoanalysis, his career, his theories, his work in Vienna, fleeing the Nazis, settling in London, his final illness, cared for by his daughter, the information about his death, September 23, 1939? The impact of Anthony Hopkins playing him, screen presence, dominating, articulate, delivery, humour, seriousness?
3. Audience knowledge of and interest in CS Lewis? Christian apologist, his radio broadcasts, he is books, apologetics, the war and his linking with children, leading to his fantasies and fiction, especially Narnia?
4. The action taking place in London, September 3, 1939? First of September, Hitler invades Poland? Tensions? Chamberlain’s declaration of war? Atmosphere in London, the muted colour for the film, the trains, parents and children, the children being evacuated? The atmosphere in the streets? The air raid siren and taking shelter? Freud listening to the radio, not wanting to hear the music and his reasons for this, wanting to hear what Chamberlain says?
5. The focus on Freud, his age, cancer of the mouth and the prosthetic his need for medication relief, the routines in the house, his wife away, Anna and her care, the past psychoanalysis with her father, the suggestion of codependence, her going to the lecture, the phone call, hurrying out, knocking on the doors, the doctor, the taxi, coming to his aid? His anticipation of CS Lewis’s visit, complaining about punctuality, his quips and putdowns to Lewis, ironic?
6. The flashbacks, Freud and his Catholic nanny, St Jim from the and her statue, age 6, his making the sign of the cross, his father and the Scriptures, his reaction, ousting the nanny, forbidding his son to talk of heaven? The influence on his atheism? His growing up in Vienna, his clientele, reputation around the world?
7. The focus on Lewis, his age, his critique of John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress, his interest in visiting Freud, confronting him, the existence of God, psychoanalysis, his background in Oxford, his childhood, his parents, he and his brother boarding school in England at a young age, the consequences, his service in World War I, the flashbacks to life in the trenches, his best friend, entrusting care of his mother to Lewis, going over the top, the friend being killed, the shrapnel near Lewis’s heart and inoperable, time in hospital, Mrs Moore, the relationship, friend, her later being housekeeper? The scene at the pub, The Inklings, the presence of Tolkien, the scene with Tolkien – and Freud praising Tolkien’s fantasies?
8. The venue, the action within the house, the main room, Freud then, desks, chairs, the many statues, duties, many cultures, Freud’s explanations?
9. The discussion, the equivalent of a psychoanalysis session, Freud so, analysing Lewis, what Lewis said and what he didn’t say? And some reverse psychoanalysis of Freud himself?
10. The range of the discussion, some antagonism, scoring off each other, Freud self-confident, Lewis confident but British reserve, buttoned up character, difficult to express his inner life? Discussions of God, atheism, Freud’s perspective, Lewis’s conversion and his explanation, a sense of the presence of God, his comment that God goes incognito in our world?
11. The issue of sex and sexuality, Freud expressing his opinions, freedom, pleasure, the issue of homosexuality in British reserve, careful on the issue of lesbianism, his daughter?
12. The focus on Ana Freud, with her father, the psychoanalysis, Lewis mentioning codependence, Freud harsh reaction? Yet Anna and her devotion, but her skills with children psychoanalysis, going to the lecture, the put down by the authorities, the phone call, out of the lecture, searching for the medicine, returning? The character of Dorothy, in psychoanalysis, in Vienna, coming to England, the relationship, Anna and her hesitance, the decision to go with Dorothy, to be with her in the presence of her father? And his final nod and smile of approval? His final image in the film?
13. The contrast with Lewis, the visit of doctor Jones and his wanting to have a relationship with Ana, his being influential in persuading Freud to go to England? Lewis taking the dog for a walk, Freud’s comment about the dog being companion, indicating psychological states of the clients? Lewis then leaving, returning to Oxford, the train, falling asleep, the scenes in the past with the deer, the recurring scene, the transcendent light in the forest? The final image of Lewis?
14. The impact of the film for atheists, agreeing with Freud, dismissing Lewis’s ideas? The impact of the film for those who agreed with Lewis, his expression of his beliefs? And little impact on Freud?
15. The final information about Freud’s death, assisted by his doctor? And the future career of Lewis?

INSIDE

US/Belgium/Greece, 2023, 105 minutes, Colour.

Willem Dafoe, Gene Bervoets, Eliza Stuyck.

Directed by Vasilis Katsoupis.

Edgar Allan Poe had a story about the premature burial, on being buried alive and the threat of death. Ryan Reynolds starred in Buried, a drama with the same theme.

However, this is a story of an art thief, Nemo, yet another excellent performance from Willem Dafoe, who invades a lavish Manhattan apartment to steal paintings by Egon Schiele, fails to find a self-portrait and breaks the security, finding himself trapped, his contact breaking off the phone call.

So, Nemo is buried, a burial inside his deteriorating mind, and external burial and his means for survival in the apartment.

He tries every means for escape, even building a huge scaffolding with tables and furniture to try to reach the skylight and remove its bolts but this takes time and he is unsuccessful, even falling from the scaffolding and breaking his leg, having to construct a splint and limp around the apartment.

Extreme heat and cold, no food and water, water from the sprinkler from for the extensive garden within the apartment, dog food, fish from the aquarium. And his mind deteriorates. He can see on the surveillance screens the maid outside but she does not hear him, wearing earphones. And he has a dream fantasy about meeting the owner at a social.

Weeks pass, he finally lights a fire so that the extinguishers will pour water and alert outsiders – flooding the apartment but no response.

Nemo creates his own art on the walls of the apartment.

At the end, it is left to the audience whether he actually reaches the skylight and is able to escape – or not.

Screenplay was written in collaboration with the director whose only previous film was a documentary about a musician friend. The main author is British Ben Hopkins, Simon Magus, The Nine Lives of Thomas Katz.

1. The title? Literally in the apartment? Nemo trapped in his deteriorating mind?
2. The situation, lavish apartment, the works of art, Nemo as a thief, his contact, not finding the key painting, the search, breaking the security, his being trapped? The consequences for his survival?
3. The visuals of the apartment, lavish, the rooms, staircases, skylight and windows, the artwork, and gallery? The secret passage? The secret room for the self-portrait? The background score?
4. Willem Dafoe, his career, performances, skills in different characters? Age, appearance? Voice? The credibility of his situation, means for survival, consequences?
5. His background story, choices in the disaster, keeping art, art being ageless? For his background as an art thief? Appreciation of art? And his own artwork, drawings, telling his story on the wall? And the note to the owner?
6. The entry, the plan, security, his phone contact, not finding the self portrait, the breaking of the security, his contact breaking off contact? Stranded?
7. The two dramas of his being inside, inside his mind and its deterioration, externally and his attempt at survival?
8. The thermostat broken, the extreme heat and cold, finding clothes and coats? The refrigerator, the continued playing the song on opening the door, no food, no water? The huge garden, the sprinkler and the water? The trapped pigeon and its death? Building the scaffold, to reach the skylight, removing the bolts, making the tools? Eating the dog food, the fish from the aquarium?
9. Time passing, the strain, no contact, the compensation of the television? Focusing, focusing on time, on food, exercise, survival? Deteriorating?
10. The continued building, the bolts, his falling, breaking his leg, the splint, finding the painting, the smoke detector, the deluge of water?
11. The surveillance, his being able to see so much about side, but especially the maid, his name for her, vacuuming, eating lunch, the earphones and her not hearing him bang or call? Fantasies about her?
12. The dream, the social, formal, the discussions with the owner, the conversation?
13. His own art, drawing, sketching, the wall, the final note?
14. The end, the opening of the skylight – and whether Nemo escapes or not?