Displaying items by tag: Peter Malone's Movie Reviews

BUMP IN THE NIGHT

US, 1991, 93 minutes, Colour.

Meredith Baxter-Birney, Christopher Reeve, Wings Hauser, Corey Carrier, Richard Bradford, Geraldine Fitzgerald, Shirley Knight, Terrence Mann, Richard Joseph Paul, and to me.

Directed by Karen Arthur.

A strange, unexplained title.

However, this is a 1991 American television movie that is still worth noting.

Basically, it is the story of an abduction of a child, the anxiety of the parents, their participation, with the police, to find the child. The family story is complicated because of the careers of the parents, she, played by Meredith Baxter-Bernie, a successful investigative journalist and Colin writer who has taken to drinking, unreliable, especially with her son, and the father, a successful novelist, played by Wings Hauser.

There is a sympathetic presentation of the police and the investigators, led by Richard Bradford, professional, having to react to the anger of the mother, learns to understand the pressures on the father.

However, the theme that makes this television movie significant, especially in the early 1990s, is that the abductor of the little boy is a paedophile. There had not been many films about paedophiles to this point, Short Eyes with Bruce Davison, a prison film, an example.

What is very telling for this film is that the paedophile is played by Christopher Reeve, a very nuanced performance, taking away from his iconic Superman performances. He plays a literature Prof, colour of the community, discovered to be a paedophile, imprisoned, model prisoner, early release, but in no way cured or rehabilitated. He is in league with the woman associated with the pornographer, she sending him a photo, he paying her $1000, setting up a meeting with the boy on the pretence that the boy was meeting his father.

What is significant for those who want to understand something of a paedophile is the way in which, often subtly, Christopher Reeve plays his role, words spoken, sharing stories, the mentality of the child, touching, moods, the techniques of grooming.

There is an excellent supporting cast, veteran Geraldine Fitzgerald in her last role, Shirley Knight is an alcoholic friend, Terrence Mann as the pornographer.

At the same time the Dutch film, For a Lost, a nonjudgemental portrait of a relationship between an American soldier and a 12-year-old boy, was released, the film that with current understanding of age of consent, legislation about underage sexual relationships, could not be made in the same way today.

1. A telemovie of the 1990s? Issues?
2. The New York setting, filmed in Pittsburgh, American cities, apartments, police precincts, the streets, atmosphere? The musical score?
3. The meaning of the title?
4. The initial focus on Jonathan and Martha, ready for school, another drunk, sleep, contact with his father, going to the old lady who was minding his cat, going to the restaurant to wait? School principal, friend of Martha, concern, phone calls, the teacher referring to Martha is drunk, interrogating the little girl? Visiting the old lady with the cats, her information, the later visit and information?
5. The tension between husband and wife, her past career as an investigative journalist, success, column? His successes and novelist? The separation? Her drinking? The refusal to admit it? Her irrational behaviour throughout the search, outburst, anger, drinking, the need for a drink? The treatment of people, relegating them? Her attitudes towards Patrick, arguments, anger?
6. The introduction to Lawrence Buller, Cheryl the phone call, the photo, the rendezvous, the restaurant, Laurence introducing himself, talking about his father? The film showing something of the psychology and behaviour of the paedophile, the link, the contacts, with child pornography, charm, the mentality of a child and an adult, conversation, trust, sharing stories, the poem, the child trusting? Friendship? The experience of the zoo? Christopher Reeve and his performance, indicating the paedophile, touch, words, persuasive, trust? Techniques of grooming? Knowing how to respond? The rendezvous at the apartment? Pretending about his father to Jonathan? At the apartment, waiting for his father, the photography equipment, Laurence having an answer to everything? Time progressing, Laurence and his moods, angry, aggressive torts Jonathan? Locking the doors? Jonathan, the escape, his ingenuity, going to the attic, hiding, spending the night? Laurence and his frustrations? No food, going out, Jonathan breaking the glass in the window, Laurence noting it? The arguments, cajoling, the ultimate threat of the fire, setting it, getting out of hand?
7. Cheryl, the dance company, Nicola 90s and the pornography, getting the photo from the photographer, contacting Lawrence, $1000, the apartment and rendezvous? Nickel ideas, confronting Cheryl, the police, killing Cheryl, searching for the information, going to the apartment, confronting Lawrence, bashing him, Laurence killing him? The police arriving, Laurence killing himself?
8. The search for Jonathan, the clues, Martha and her not drinking, moods, aggression, friendship with Katie, sharing the drinking, Katie denying her alcoholism, the sketch of the face, made available, a couple recognising Laurence and telling the police?
9. Patrick, his arrival, the tension with Katie, tension with the police, the search?
10. Sgt Mooney and his assistant, taking the case seriously, the school, the outbursts, confronting each parent, moving sympathies, memories of Martha and her column? The assistant, actively involved, suggestions? The identification with Laurence Miller, Mooney and his telling of the story of Laurence, University lecturer, pillar of the society, accusations, jail, model prisoner, release? Yet his preying again?
11. Martha, the photos, the numberplates, contacting the police, identifying the building? The fire, urging Jonathan down and catching him?
12. The resolution, together, going into rehab, possibilities for the future?
13. The raising of the issue of paedophilia and dramatising it in 1991? Impact at the time? Later?

SYMPATHY FOR THE DEVIL

US, 2023, 90 minutes, Colour.

Nicolas Cage, Joel Kinnaman, Alexis Zellicoffer, Burns Burns.

Directed by Yuval Adler.

Not a variation on the Rolling Stones.

This is a Nicolas Cage film, one of those maniacal performances, maniacal in look, maniacal in sound, sometimes controlled, sometimes beyond control.

The film opens like a thriller, Joel Kinnaman taking his wife to the hospital to give birth, Cage intruding and demanding that he drive him to a destination, holding a gun to the driver. What emerges is a story of changed identity, crime in the past, desire for revenge.

Along the way, which is mainly filmed inside the car, there is a stopover when the driver speeds and a policeman pulls him up, a Nicolas Cage tantalising conversation with the policeman and then shooting him. There are car crashes, and dramatic scene and threats in a diner, more menace.

The film seems something like a short story. It has been directed by Yuval Adler, Israeli director of the spy film, The Operative.

1. The title? It use? And which character here is devilish?
2. Nick Cage fans, his presence, the red hair, menacing, psychotic, over the top, maniacal in sound and look?
3. The opening situation, the driver, his family, the child, his pregnant wife, driving to the hospital, sense of urgency, the phone calls with the hospital?
4. Trying to park, the shock of the passenger, getting in, menacing, the gun, the driver and his urgency for his wife, no explanations, insistence, menace?
5. The drama of the drive, the alleged destination for the mother in hospital, the driver’s uneasiness, nervous, tension? The confidence of the passenger, sneering, mockery? The bulk of the film with the audience identifying, distancing from the characters?
6. The conversation, the threats, the gun, speeding, the police, the passenger and his mock interrogation about questions and rights, shooting the policeman?
7. The issue of identity, the passenger insinuating the driver’s previous identity, Boston, giving the details about the company, the accountant, the violence, the death of the passenger’s wife?
8. The attempted crash, confrontation, shooting, the fights?
9. The diner, the waitress, the details of the menu, no substitution, the passenger and his tantrum about cheese? The truck driver, observing, the passenger pulling the gun, the trucker fleeing, shot, the foot on his neck? The mother and child fleeing? The cook, attempting to run, shot, getting out of the diner, the later encounter with the passenger, left to die? The waitress, the discussions about the menu, her hiding and fears, let go?
10. The buildup to the truth, admission, psychological warfare, menace? The crashing of the car, the passenger and his injuries, the driver escaping, his foot on the passenger’s neck, death, going to the hospital? His future?

ANATOMY OF A FALL

France, 2023, 151 minutes, Colour.

Sandra Huller, Swann Artaud, Milo Machado Graner, Antoine Reinartz, Samuel Theis, Jehnny Beth, Camille Rutherford, Anne Rotger.

Directed by Justine Triet.

An intriguing film which holds audience attention for 2 ½ hours. It won the Ground Prix at Cannes, 2023 and received five Oscar nominations, including Best Film, Screenplay, Actress.

In 1959, there was a fine American film, Anatomy of a Murder, with James Stewart and George C.Scott. At the core was a murder. But, the film was significant in the anatomy of the murder taking place in police investigations but, especially in the courtroom proceedings.

And, it is the same here, effectively so.

We are tantalised immediately. A journalist comes to interview a noted writer, living with her husband and son in a chalet in the Alps outside Grenoble. They strain to hear each other, as we strain to hear them, because above them, the husband is playing 50 Cent’s music on a loop, loudly, gratingly so, and on and on. Their son takes the dog for a walk. The visitor leaves. And, when the boy arrives back from his walk, he discovers his father dead in the snow outside the chalet.

The possibilities for the husband’s death are threefold. His wife killed him; an intruder killed him; he killed himself. The audience will begin to formulate their own theories, listening to extensive interviews and discussions between the wife and her lawyer, interviews with the boy, elaborate reconstructions of the scene, especially to test whether conversations could be heard over the loud music by the boy outside the chalet. The screenplay offers no easy solutions.

Then a year passes, the court case begins, the wife accused.

The court sequences, many and some quite long, are very well written, the wife present all the time, able to intervene. She is Originally from Germany, meeting her husband in England, using English for communication, passable French, but her being required to give her testimony in French. Her legal team, especially a friend from the past, intervene on her behalf. However, it is the young prosecutor, brimming with self-confidence, those who would not like him dismissing him as smug who commands court and our attention. He is more than incisive, cross-examining the witnesses, minutely probing every word they use, finding incriminating implications, creating them. The witnesses include the initial journalist, an expert with technological demonstration about the nature of the fall blood spattering, the doctor who prescribed medication for the dead man, a technician for recordings that the husband had made in the weeks before his death.

And, throughout the court case, there is the very detailed anatomy of a marriage, the exposure of great detail, intimate detail, conflict, support, resentments, and complications about the son’s accident when he was small.

Ultimately, there is a significant focus on the son, aged 11, and his testimony in the case.

The wife is played by German actress, Sandra Huller, best known for her presence in the very popular German film, Toni Erdmann. She gives an impressive performance here and was also the star of another winner at Cannes, 2023, The Zone of interest.

One of the best of courtroom dramas.

1. The status of the film? Awards nominations?
2. The title, the reference to Samuel and his literal fall to death? The revelation of his character, his personal fall from confidence to suicide?
3. The chalet in the Alps, the beauty of the surroundings, snow, mountains, the interiors of the chalet? The contrast with Grenoble, the court sequences? The countryside, the diners? The musical score?
4. The importance of music throughout the film, the loud music at the beginning,.50 Cents (and accusations of misogyny)? Daniel and his piano pieces, playing with his mother, loud music?
5. The opening, Sandra, the interview with Zoe, the loud music on audience response to it, interrupting the conversation, the interview being taped, discussions about writing, Sandra asking her visitor questions? Breaking off of the interview? Daniel, with the dog, going for the walk? His return, finding the body of his father, Sandra’s reaction, the doctor, the police?
6. Sandra alone with her husband in the house, her version of what happened, talking, the music, translating, the earplugs, sleeping? The plausibility of the suspicions? The possibility of suicide?
7. The writing of the film and its development, the audience participating in the interrogations, observing, identifying, distancing, Jury attitudes?
8. Vincent, his arrival, sympathetic, lawyer, knowing Sandra from the past, the conversations, the audience listening, her explanation of what happened, its plausibility? Vincent and his comments on what she should say, what she should not say, words and phrases that could be interpreted negatively? Incriminating?
9. Daniel, his age, the story of the accident, his father not picking him up, ringing the babysitter, his being hit by the cyclist, destroying his optic nerve, long time in hospital, his father taking the blame, Sandra and her blaming Samuel, the repercussions for Daniel, in the aftermath of the accident, his site, relationship with his parents, the piano, his fondness for the dog?
10. The year passing after the opening interrogations? The court case, Sandra in the dock? The layout of the French court, Sandra’s presence, the judges presiding, the two lawyers on each side, the witnesses at the stand in the centre? The jury? The camera sometimes roving over the jury and the crowd?
11. Audience response to the detail of the court sequences, attitude towards the prosecutor, his self-assurance, quibbling on words, interpreting words all the time, making them incriminating, suggestions, probing? The response of Vincent, counterbalancing, intervening, his assisting counsel and her interventions? The attitude of the presiding judge, seemingly to favour the prosecutor? Her interventions?
12. The revelation of the life of Sandra, Samuel, their marriage, the details, the psychological repercussions, the revelation of such details? Sandra in the court? Listening, her interventions, to speak in French, appealing to speak in English? Her demeanour throughout the trial, giving no indication that she had killed her husband?
13. The range of witnesses, Daniel and his presence observing, the previous record of his memories, his inconsistencies, not seeing well, feeling the bits of material to guide his journey throughout the house and outside, the elaborate testing of whether he could hear an argument between husband and wife with the music blaring? His testimony in the court, treatment by the lawyers? The judge summoning him, his appeal that he had already been hurt and therefore he should stay in the court in order to understand? Her granting this?
14. The journalist, the playing of the interview, the words, the music, the prosecutor and his insinuations, Sandra bisexual, the discussion of seduction and her manner, definitions of seduction, precision, the prosecutor and his conclusions, smug and self-satisfied?
15. The medical experts, for and against Sandra, the fall, the body weight, somebody lifting the body, the fall, the blood spattering, the scientific explanation in diagrams and details? What was possible?
16. The situation of Samuel, psychological states, the prescriptions, of the reasons, his wanting to get off the medication, the psychologist and his interpretation, in favour of Samuel, highly critical of Sandra, his conclusions? Sandra and her indication of Samuel’s vomiting, the remnants of the pills? This evidence dismissed because of its being her word? Her confronting of this man, his partial knowledge of the situation?
17. The introduction of the tape, the playing of the tape, the flashbacks, the audience seeing and hearing whereas the court and jury hearing only? Audience response to Sandra on the evidence of the flashbacks, her generally being calm, rational, her explanations, Samuel, erratic, his decisions, the aftermath of the accident, forcing them all to go to the chalet, his lecturing, his home tutoring Daniel, yet his wanting time, giving up on his writing, allowing Sandra to use a key idea, her reading his work, encouraging him? The exasperation, his accusations about her affair, the anger, the violence? And this only a day before he died? The interpretation that Sandra would kill him? The interpretation that he was at his wits and, would take his life? The money difficulties? Sandra success with her novels, jealousies and resentments?
18. Sandra, exposed to hearing all this detail, her explanations of the relationship with her husband, her interpretation of the recording, credible?
19. Daniel, his decision to testify again, the importance of the young woman assigned to guard him, prevent discussions about the case, her relationship with him? His asking her opinion, her refusing? Urging him to decide? Wanting his mother away for the weekend? The dog, the pills, helping the dog, the hot water, vomiting? His memories of the dog vomiting before, that it it had lapped up his father’s vomit?
20. In the court, his explanation of the situation, the prosecutor saying it was only his testimony and ideas, but Daniel’s speech, becoming the focus of the case, remembering his father driving him, no music, the dog and the vet, his father preparing him that the dog would die – and Daniel realising that he was speaking about himself and his death?
21. The audience learning of the acquittal not in the court, the journalist, speaking to camera, hearing the news, seeing the people coming out of the court, the interviews with Sandra?
22. Daniel, his going home, being with his guard? Sandra, the phone call, asking about whether she could come home that night, her joy when he said yes, the dinner with Vincent and the emotions at the end of the dinner?
23. Her return home, the embrace with Daniel, and the meaning of her going to lie down, and the dog coming, the dog who provided the situation for her acquittal?
24. A satisfying analysis of the situation, in court, out-of-court, the minute detail to be analysed for making a judgement?

ALL OF US STRANGERS

UK, 2023, 105 minutes, Colour.

Andrew Scott, Paul Mescal, Jamie Bell, Claire Foy.

Directed by Andrew Haigh.

With strangers in the title, and referring to everyone, strangers to one another, strangers in our relationships, this is a very melancholy title.

The screenplay, based on a novel by Japanese author, Taichi Yamada, was written by Andrew Haigh who has had a successful career writing and directing screenplays which probe same-sex relationships, Weekend, Looking. He also wrote and directed the insightful film about an aged married couple, 45 Years.

Irish actor, Andrew Scott, has had a substantial career since he was very young, Moriarty to Benedict Cumberbatch as detective in the series, Sherlock, C in the James Bond film, Spectre, and as a comic priest in Phoebe Waller’s comedy series, Fleabag. This is one of his best and most moving performances.

He plays Adam, in his 40s, alone, lonely, a gay man who has had not had an emotional relationship. He is a screenwriter, probing his own history in his writing. Scott makes Adam someone whom we respond to with care, concern about his loneliness, occupying a room in a huge new high-rise apartment block in London, but the other flats still empty. He encounters Harry, Paul Mescal (Normal People, Aftersun, Foe, Gladiator 2) at his door, Harry drinking, suggestive, but Adam closing the door on him.

But we know that Harry will persevere, something will develop between the two.

While watching the film, the key word that emerges in our consciousness is “empathy”. Adam is such a pleasing and sympathetic character who invites our empathetic attitude towards him, for him as a person, for him as a lonely man, for him as a man with a homosexual orientation. And the theme that the film explores is what is “being in love” for Adam.

This is a question is posed to him by his mother. And the appearance of Adam’s father and mother takes us into a different realm in the storytelling. They have been dead for 30 years, sadly killed in a car crash when Adam was 12. But, as he looks at the box of photos from the past, he has an overwhelming desire to visit the house again, takes the train, walks the street, encounters his parents, goes into the house, sits down and talks with them. They are played very effectively (and we remember Billy Elliot and The Crown) by Jamie Bell and Claire Foy.

So happy is Adam in his parents and rediscovering them, that he goes back, encountering his mother alone, she innocently asking about his girlfriend, he telling her about his orientation, her being rather bewildered, not knowing how to talk with her son. In his next visit, he encounters his father has been told by his wife about Adam and mentions that she needs to rearrange a few things in her mind. What follows is a powerful discussion about Adam and his experiences as a young boy, bullied at school, his father realising the orientation and the question between them of why his father never spoke to him about the issues and why he never spoke to his father.

These revisits to his parents have a disturbing effect on Adam, waking disturbed, Harry there as support for him. The line between fantasy and reality is disappearing.

These ghostly themes continue with some farewells, and a very sad ending.

In these years of discussion about same-sex relationships, talk about blessings of same-sex unions, this is an empathetic film for a wide audience.

1. The title? Melancholy? Relationships?
2. The London setting, the block of flats, high, empty, the interiors, the corridors, the lifts? The musical score?
3. Adam’s story? The performance by Andrew Scott, empathy? His age, screenwriting, exploring his past, living alone, lack of relationships? Hearing the alarm, going outside, looking up, seeing Harry? Harry and his visit, the talk, Adam shutting the door? Harry’s later return, his story, father, alienated, his mother? Adam inviting him in, the talk, the touch of tension, Harry relaxed, the drink, discussion about the difference between gay and queer, the physical attraction, the sexual encounter, the aftermath?
4. Adam and his writing, seeing the photos of the past, the audience learning that his parents had died in a car crash, black ice, father instantly, mother later, losing an eye? The house, his desire to visit the house?
5. Adam and his physical condition, health? The screenplay showing him to visit the house, the encounter with his parents, the return visits, his waking up? The line between reality and dream? Sometimes overlapping? At home and sleeping and waking, Harry reassuring him? Waking up on the train, but this being part of dreams? Seeing Harry in the underground, following him, alone on the train?
6. And these scenarios as possibility for his screenwriting, exploring and understanding his past?
7. Going home, comfortable, his parents at the age they died, their welcoming him, the characteristics, father being jovial, mother loving her son and being fussy? His happiness in meeting them again? The decision to return, the visit with his mother, her asking about girlfriends, getting him something to eat, his revealing his orientation to her, her not understanding, her being uncomfortable? The visit to his father, his father reassuring him that his mother had told him, that she just had to rearrange some things in her mind, Adam telling his father the things were different, his telling about equality, marriage, less prejudice, but sometimes this rising as it did in the past? His father and his understanding, memories of Adam at school, Adam talking about the bullying, calling him girl, the boys and girls both critical? His father saying he was aware of this? Adam asking why he didn’t come into to talk with him? His father asking why Adam didn’t tell his father?
8. The final visit, the outing with his parents, the restaurant and the waitress, the family meal? But his parents not eating, a more ghostly presence, telling him that had to leave, and wanting them to stay, even to visit them once a year? The question about whether the death was instant, his mother not seeing well, but Adam reassuring them they died quickly? And then disappearing?
9. Adam returning home, going to Harry’s apartment, finding Harry dead? Harry outside, knowing that his body was in the other room? Adam reassuring him, settling him down, urging him to go to see his mother?
10. Reality and fantasy, ghostly presences?
11. And Adam, his illness, live in dying, his memories in coming to terms with his life, in love with Harry (and his mother asking him this explicitly,?
12. An empathetic film for gay audiences? An empathetic and invitational film for wide audiences?

FOR A LOST SOLDIER/ VOR EEN VERLOREN SOLDAAT

Netherlands, 1992, 92 minutes, Colour.

Marteen Smit, Andrew Kelley, Jeroen Krabbe.

Directed by Roeland Kerbosch.

This film is a memoir of World War II, the German occupation of Holland, the transporting of children from Amsterdam to foster care in the countryside. It opens in 1944, establishes the group of children, their being transported, the adoptive families and welcoming them into their households. The action then moves to 1945, the retreat of the Germans, the arrival of the Americans, liberation. It is the story of Rudi van Dantsig, who wrote his story as a novel, contributed to the screenplay. And it incorporates some of the experiences of the director. Rudi van Dantsig was 11 and 12 at this time, the director was four.

The key theme that put this film into the spotlight was the relationship between an occupying American soldier and the 12-year-old boy. The IMDb describes the film as “touching”. Reviews of the time praise the film for its sensitivity. In fact, it is helpful to look at the variety of comments from the bloggers on the IMDb, most of the comments coming eight years and more after the release of the film. There is praise again of its observation of the situation, the emotions of the characters, especially the boy, praise for the lack of explicit moral judgements about the relationship.

Reviews by critics at the time praise the film.

It has been remarked that the film could not be made like this now.

The chief reason for this is the change of public awareness from the early 1990s to the present, more open discussion about paedophilia, the criminal aspects of paedophilia, legislation about age of consent, prosecution of adults who engage in sexual relationships with underage children, the issue of ability for adult consent by underage children, jail sentences. There has been a strong shift in public awareness and public opinion since the 1990s.

Bypassing, for the moment, the central issue, the film is an interesting and strong presentation of occupied Holland, citizens in Amsterdam and the lack of food, the movement (as in Britain and other countries) of children to the countryside, welcoming families, healthy activity and food, school and church. Church is important in this film, the local pastor, the local teacher, church attendance, reading the Bible. There is work to be done, the city children wanting to escape at first, but becoming involved, the central character here, Jeroen helping with the birth of a calf. On the whole, life in occupied Holland seems quite proper – but suggestions of broader issues with one of the refugees, 15-year-old Jan, with some 15-year-old preoccupations with sex.

With the coming of the Americans, and the sense of liberation, the locals respond to the American presence, a concert with a ventriloquist, a singing group, two of the Americans in drag, then the dancing, jitterbugs, and, before long, the roving eye of the Americans and the response of some of the local girls.

But at the centre of the film is Jeroen, played by Marteen Smit in his sole film performance. He has something of a commanding screen presence simply by being there. The film prepares the audience for the sexual issues by a range of sequences, Jan and Jeroen finding a crashed plane in the waters, stripping off to swim out, some sunbaking, gentle references, at home Jeroen having a bath and getting out of the bath… And, there is the suggestion of Jeroen’s curious attraction to Jan and observing him.

The key American is Walt Cook, played by Andrew Kelley in his only film, who takes a shine immediately to Jeroen, spending time with him, giving him sweets, driving around, going to the wreck, letting him drive the Jeep, talking with, increasing intimacy, the audience sensing the emotional and physical attraction, the gay sensibility, and Walt’s story about his growing up, distance from family, and leaving America, the comfortable response by Jeroen and his wanting to be with Walt. This is grooming.

There is a strong scene of intimacy, in Walt’s room, the two naked, on Walt’s bed, and, something that reviewers and bloggers do not mention, the pained look on Jeroen’s face, some tears, during the penetration sequence. However, Jeroen seems to overcome the pain and becomes ever more devoted to Walt.

As said, public sensibilities watching this film in the early 1990s, were not concentrating on issues of underage sexual relationships (or if this was considered, it was considered emotionally favourably). And, as has been said, in recent years, Walt would have been charged with sexual assault of a minor.

Walt disappears, there are happy memories of a photo, and Jeroen’s mother comes to take him away, and a reminder have how welcoming the foster family, parents and children, was.

But there is a framework to the whole film, Jeroen decades later, a choreographer, rehearsing his troupe, dissatisfied with them, talking about themes of freedom and expression. When this is introduced, Jeroen has memories of the past, meetings his younger self momentarily, then the bulk of the film the flashback story. There is a final meeting between the older and younger, then Jeroen the choreographer having some success with his troupe, and, his assistant finding the photo as well is a photo of Walt’s identity tags. Jeroen has no regrets about the past, only the disappearance of Walt.

A comparison might be made with the 1991 American telemovie, Bump in that Night, with Christopher Reeve playing an English professor who befriends a little boy, enjoying his company – the screenplay helping audiences understand paedophile emotions and attractions.

For a Lost Soldier is readily available on YouTube. As is Bump in the Night.

MULLIGANS

Canada, 2008, 92 minutes, Colour.

Dan Payne, Thea Gill, Charlie David, Derek James, Grace Vukovich..

Directed by Chip Hale.

Mulligan sounds like the name of a family. However, it is a golf term, the player getting a second try, a second attempt. This is explained early in the film – which does have a lot of golf throughout.

The film came out in 2008, from Canada, and it is interesting to look at Mulligans in the context of the time, films featuring gay characters, movements around the world, same-sex unions and, especially, political and social implications of same-sex marriages.

It is summer on a lake. The son of the family brings a good friend home from college. The friend is Chase, played by the writer of the film, Charlie David. He tires of his friend trying to set him up with girls, the party life, and finally comes out to his friend as gay.

The core of the film is not so much about Chase as a gay character, this being taken for granted, his behaviour, attitudes, way of communicating. Rather, it is the reaction of the various members of the family. The friend is taken aback and takes a long time to come to terms with the reality. The mother is wary, protective about sexuality, especially with her eight-year-old precocious daughter who seems to get a fixation on one of her teachers.

But the main character is the father. He and his sweetheart married very young, at a time when gay orientation was not acknowledged. He becomes very friendly with Chase and, while his wife and daughter are away, they have a sexual encounter. With the ensuing complexities, both wife and daughter glimpse the couple and their interactions in the woods.

Ultimately, the issues are out in the open, and the father has to make a decision about his life and his marriage.

1. The title, the initial explanation, golf, a second try? The importance of golf throughout the film, for and against, successful and diameter, working on the golf links? Topic of discussion, being forbidden? Metaphor?
2. Canadian production, cast? British Columbia locations, the home, summer atmosphere, golf course, the woods? The musical score?
3. The situation, Tyler at college, his friends, Chase, the artist, travelling to Tyler’s parents? The summer situation, the family, Chase and sharing with Tyler, meals together, conversation, the welcome from Nathan, from Stacy, Birdie and her being outspoken?
4. On the golf course, Nathan and his love for golf, conversation, Tyler and his skills, Chase trying out, awkward? Stacy and her being tired of golf talk? Two men working on the golf course and renewal, the course, fences…?
5. Tyler and his partying, his girlfriend, Chase of the party, uncomfortable, talking, meeting Jarrod?
6. C will hase is gay, coming out to Tyler, Tyler and his disbelief, unable to handle the situation, cautious of intimacy, issues of language?
7. Stacy, with Birdie, the issue of the swimming pool and the little boy’s conversation, taking Birdie away, tennis, the coach, Bertie wanting her ears pierced, holding the coach up as an ideal? Stacy, exasperation, the decision to play golf? On the course, seeing Nathan and Chased together? Birdie later indicating she had seen the kiss?
8. The family going to the grandmothers, cutting short the experience, coming home?
9. Nathan and chased together for the weekend, the attraction, the intimacy, the talk, Nathan and Stacy and the teenage pregnancy, marrying, the 1980s? His not coming out? Suppressing his orientation? The sexual encounter with Chase, the swim? The sudden return home?
10. The effect on Chase, talking with Jarrod, moving out, staying with him?
11. The effect on Nathan, the tension with Stacie, birdie and her observations, the discussions, civilised, Stacy and her disbelief, but thinking about the past, talking things over with Nathan, his decision to move out? The agreements?
12. Tyler, confused, angry, walking out? Jarrod persuading him to go to the bus stop, the farewell?
13. A film of 2008, gay themes in films of the 21^st-century, more open and frank, issues of repression, homophobia, honesty and resolutions?

LE RAVISSEMENT/ THE RAPTURE

France, 2023, 97 minutes, Colour.

Hafsia Herzi, Alexis Manenti, Nina Meurisse.

Directed by Iris Kaltenback.

The Rapture has many meanings in English, especially with faithful believers being taken up from Perth in The Rapture? However, the French title indicates a fascination, wonder.

The story is set in Paris, strong on atmosphere, the streets, bus routes, hospitals, the work of a midwife. However, while writer and director, Iris Kaltenback, is female and this is very much a female character study and perspective, the voice-over is by a male character.

The focus is on Lydia, played with complex verve by Hafsia Herzi. Enthusiastic, she discovers her boyfriend walking out on her. She goes to a party for her friend who reveals that she is pregnant. They have known each other since school days, bonded, strong friendship, knowing each other well. Lydia then is able to help and encourage Salome during the pregnancy.

Depressed with the breakup, Lydia wanders Paris, eventually going to sleep on a bus, encountering the driver (the company prefers “operator”), Milos from Serbia. He is reserved but they talk, have a one night stand, his not wanting to take it further.

There is a graphic birth sequence, hard for Salome, Lydia insistent, cajoling, encouraging. While Lydia says her care as a midwife is for the mothers rather than for the children, she becomes more and more attached to Salome’s daughter, suggesting the name Esmee, meaning Loved, taking the baby out, more frequent outings, but further complications when she encounters Milos at her hospital visiting his sick father, he thinking the baby is hers and she confirming, then telling him that it is his.

Milos becomes more and more attached, relishing being a father, Lydia arranging a weekly time when she is caring for the baby for them to meet. And invites them to meet his parents – which becomes too much for Lydia.

Ultimately, this is a story of an abduction, a rapture on the part of Lydia, but her eventually having to acknowledge the truth and surrender the baby to her mother. There is a trial, anticipated in the voice-over by Milos, the prison sentence, and her finally getting out – towards what future?

1. The title, wonder, enthusiasm, fascination? Lydia and her preoccupation with Esmee? The consequences?
2. The Paris settings, the initial drive through the streets, ordinary life, Milos and his voice-over, his perspective, narrating Lydia’s story, the puzzle, referring to the trial, the audience anticipating something going wrong?
3. Lydia, age, experience, skill as a midwife, arriving home, the cake, enthusiasm, Julien leaving her? The party, her relationship with Salome? The conversation, the revelation of the pregnancy?
4. The pregnancy, Salome and Jonathan, personalities, Lydia and her continued help, ultrasound, advice, massage…? Her continuing her work?
5. Her moods, disappointment, the apartment, not going home, asleep on the bus, the encounter with Milos, tentative, talk, sharing experiences, the night together, Milos wanting to end the relationship, her persevering, calls?
6. The intensity of the birth sequence, the strain for Salome, Jonathan present, Lydia and her insistence, encouragement, the baby tired, Salome pushing? The eventual birth? Hesitation, the child crying, tending the baby?
7. Lydia, saying she cared for the mothers rather than for the children, preoccupation with Esmee, the name? Loved?
8. The development of the relationship between Lydia and the baby, taking her out, feeding her, the attachment? Her seeing Milos in the hospital for his father? Telling him the baby was hers? Following him, telling him the baby was his? The consequences?
9. The development of the attachment, concealing it from Salome, Salome and her postnatal depression, and the longtime bond from Lydia from school? The strong friendship? Jonathan and his wariness?
10. The effect on Milos, the outings, his voice-over, not expecting to be a father, the attachment, taking Lydia and the baby to meet his family, the meal, the reactions, his mother intervening with questions, his father after his illness, the impact on Lydia, retreating to the bathroom, deciding to leave?
11. Salome upset, Lydia’s explanations? The issue of moving to Brussels, Jonathan and the better money? Salome and her work, Lydia encouraged her to stay?
12. The decision, Lydia listening outside the door, making a decision as regards the baby?
13. Less access to the baby, her going to the centre, taking it, telling Milos that she wanted to go to Normandy, the train ride, the night, the happiness?
14. Her ultimate decisions, the phone call from Salome, coming with the police, her sending Milos to buy the milk and to wait at the station, the interaction with Salome, giving back the baby? The police? The arrest of Milos, the interrogations?
15. Milos and the description of the trial, the psychologists and their opinion about Lydia, manipulative or with a mental problem? Her going to jail?
16. Milos and the meeting with Salome, observed by the audience outside the window?
17. Lydia, in jail, finishing her sentence, leaving, walking along the street, Milos present? A future?

RED ISLAND

Belgium, Madagascar, 2023, 117 minutes, Colour.

Nadia Tereszkiewicz, Quimi Gutierrez, Charlie Vauselle, Alemy Ramotoarimalala, Hugues Delamarliere, Sophie Guillemiin, Romero, Vincent Schmidt.

Directed by Robin Campillo.

The Island of this film is Madagascar.

Audiences outside Africa and outside France may not be familiar with the colonial history of Madagascar. This film throws light on 20^th century history, colonial France, the local people and their rebellions and repression, the moves for independence.

The writer-director, Robin Campillo (Eastern Boys, 24 MBH) draws on his own experiences in Madagascar. The setting is 1971-1972, a period of colonial occupation, uprisings, shift of policy on the part of France, a withdrawal of occupying forces.

For most of the film, there is a summer, holiday spirit, focusing on families where the fathers are stationed in Madagascar, military, pilots… The film creates a happy family atmosphere, meals together, swimming in the summer, dancing, jollity. While the film does focus on the adults, there is an eight-year-old boy, Thomas (Charlie Vauselle), rather withdrawn, prone to be absorbed in comic books, especially Fantomas (and the film frequently bringing these cartoon activities to animated life). Thomas observes, becomes friendly with little girl who loves the comic as well, bonds with her, at school, during the holidays.

While the film does show the perspective of children in the situation, there is also a focus on the adults, happiness and tensions within families, parents and children, husbands and wives. There is also a focus on a young Frenchman who has bought his new wife to Madagascar, she feeling lonely and isolated, returning to France, he becoming involved with a prostitute at the local brothel. There is also a focus on these women, working in laundries and packing, at one stage the group invading the military centre and beating the soldiers.

There are also military episodes, flights, commanders, indications of the uprisings, the military confrontation of the rebels.

So, while the audience may have enjoyed this perspective on Madagascar, the last 20 minutes may put response awry, the preparation of the French to leave, to go back to France, rebels being released, coming back to the town, proclaiming their bids for freedom with great vigour, the film then ending with them singing, the French withdrawing, a freedom for Madagascar. So, dramatically, the film symbolises the situation, the presence of the French, the influence, domination, and their departure and disappearance – leaving the local people, leaving them centre screen for the audience.

1. Title? Madagascar? The red dust?
2. Audience knowledge of Madagascar and its colonial experiences? The presence of the French? The aim of the colonials to make the local people French in consciousness, language and style? 20^th century colonialism? The moves for independence and freedom?
3. The main focus of the narrative on the families, the summer holidays, relaxation and enjoyment, meals, the beach, dancing, joviality? The background of the airbase? Planes and flights? The other officials? The offices dining room and staff? Hierarchy? These attitudes taken for granted?
4. The focus on Thomas, aged eight, reclusive, in the box, peering through the cracks, his reading the comics, love for Fantomas, the visual re-enactments throughout the film, the animation and its style, the stories? Thomas and his place in the family, his older brothers, his father sometimes referring to him as a sissy? The mother and her care for her children? The older boys, mischief? The other families, the exuberant father and his joking and dancing, the happy mother, the daughter and her ballet? Meals, jovial, discussions?
5. Thomas, meeting the little girl, their bonding, through the comic, sharing their experiences? And with her parents?
6. Bernard, newly arrived from France, his wife, pale, uncomfortable, lonely, homesick, her participating in the meals, dancing? The departure? Bernard, going to the brothel, the encounter with the woman, the later meetings, taking her to the officers’ mess, the official permitting them to be there? His having to depart? Her attitude?
7. Details of family life, the central family, father and his strictness, Pilate, his missions, aggravated, coming down? With his children? The mother, loving her children, the international travel, watching her husband flirt? The reconciliations? Thomas and the buying of the pearls, the father designing the ring, the birthday present, the mother relishing it? A realistic picture of family happiness and tensions?
8. The colonial situation, the commanders, attitudes towards the local people, making them French, the rebels, imprisonment, the indication of rebels thrown from the planes to their deaths?
9. The change in situation, the French withdrawing, preparations for the departure, the effect on each of the characters?
10. The departure and the change of tone of the film? The literal departure of the family from the film?
11. The return of the rebels, the vigorous speeches, history, freedoms, the young woman from the brothel, her singing, everybody singing and relish freedom? The end of colonialism?

DUMB MONEY

US, 2023, 105 minutes, Colour.

Paul Dano, Pete Davidson, Vincent D’Onofrio, America Ferrera, Myha'la Herrold, Nick Offerman, Anthony Ramos, Seth Rogen, Talia Ryder, Sebastian Stan, Shailene Woodley, Kate Burton, Clancy Brown, Larry Owens, Dane de Haan, Olivia Thirlby.

Directed by Craig Gillespie.

Unless you are very well versed in the details of the financial world, the business world, stock exchange, familiar with the language of shares and trading, you may find it somewhat difficult to follow this story in detail. There has been quite a long tradition of American films about the financial world, even before the 1980s and Wall Street. We have seen the back rooms in Margin Call, the higher-life exploiters like The Wolf of Wall Street, a number of television films about the financial crisis of 2008, ironic pictures like The Big Short. Dumb Money is in this vein.

Most of us may have missed this true story from 2020-2021, particularly American (and we may have been more preoccupied with pandemic issues and limitations). But, as promotion tells us, this is something of a David and Goliath story. And it is a true story – and, after we have been both alarmed and exhilarated looking at these characters and the financial dealings, there is some satisfaction/alarm in seeing photos, videos, testimony with the actual people during the credits.

For those not in the know, so many of us, the phrase Dumb Money refers to funds invested by smaller individuals and groups, those whom the high flyers would generally despise and, probably, ignore. One of these is Keith Gill, a family man, a job, but in his spare time very interested in finance, stock exchange movement, investments, profits, hedge funds… He becomes interested in a particular company, GameStop, which does not seem to be doing well, invests, but Keith is also an influencer, with his own online program, quite a following, students, employees in shops, who have interest in finance and are looking for opportunities to invest. And, his followers trust him, and as long as he does not sell, they don’t. The value of the company rises, as they say, exponentially (or even more so).

Keith Gill, whose online tag is Roaring Kitty, is from Brockton Massachusetts, working on his computer in a back room, but thorough and meticulous in his research and communication. He is played by the very versatile Paul Dano, his wife by Shailene Woodley. And there are a number of younger character actors playing the range of investors, including Anthony Ramos and America Ferrera. And there are a lot of home scenes to balance the financial world, Keith and his interacting with his offhand brother, Kevin, comically played by Pete Davidson.

But the film also takes us into the high life of the hedge fund entrepreneurs, the powerful men who can draw on billions at beck and call, who are so confident, unspoiled, that they take no notice and then underestimate the financial David’s of this story. And, strong cast here with Seth Rogen, Nick Offerman, Vincent D’Onofrio, Sebastian Stan.

On the one hand, there is the comic atmosphere of Keith Gill’s home life, especially family sequences with his parents (Clancy Brown and Kate Burton), his interchanges with his carefree brother. On the other hand, there is the tension of movements on the stock exchange, holding to one’s convictions, not selling, hugely increasing profits, the danger of their being targeted and falling. And, in the background, government investigations about manipulation of the money market.

Keith Gill testified before Congress committee – as did the high flyers, Keith with a strong prepared statement – well accepted, the high flyers replying on subterfuge – and failing.

(There is a lot of coarse language throughout the film – and this is something of an understatement – as well as some particularly crass lyrics of songs which are playing throughout the action. The Australian classification notes: Strong coarse language.)

1. The title, the tone, the judgement about investments?
2. The 2020 setting, the background of Covid, the financial world dealing with the epidemic? The role of the Internet? Companies, games companies, networks, shrewd observers and investors, their moves?
3. Homes and characters, offices, online activity, official meetings, finance, politics, legal?
4. Keith Gill, life at home, scenes with his parents, his wife and her support, his job? Online, visiting the sights? You Tube and advice, “Roaring captivity”? His relationship with his brother, Kevin and his mocking his brother, the borrowing of the car?
5. 2020, the games company, the investments, difficulties, reading the signs, Keith and his savings, advice for the friends and the online supporters? Success?
6. The portrait of the big finances, Gabe Plotkin and his company, threats, sales, plans? Confidence, manoeuvres, discussions amongst themselves, the contacts and advice?
7. Keith and his followers, Marcos and his work in the store, Rin and Harmony and their life together? Jennifer and her savings? The tension for them, investments and risks, there watching U-tube, they’re trusting Keith? Tested?
8. Selling, waiting, finding the right time, Keith and his wife, the followers, selling, buying again? The complexities?
9. The US House Committee on Financial Services, the interest in the case, a subpoena for all the main people, the heads of the companies, the interrogations?
10. Keith, his being interrogated, his stances, convictions, legalities?
11. The results, Keith and his security, his relationship with his brother and parents, the car for Kevin? The followers online and the success and security?

A POCKETFUL OF RYE

UK, 1985, 103 minutes, Colour.

Joan Hickson, Tom Wilkinson, Timothy West, Peter Davison, Fabia Drake, Stacy Dorning, Martyn Stanbridge, Clive Merrison, Rachel Bell, Frances Low, Selena Cadell, Mira Lena Kendall, Frank Mills, Jon Glover, Anette Badland.

Directed by Guy Slater.

Agatha Christie’s novels were enormously popular in the 20^th century, many film and television series made. And, they continue into the 21^st-century, new Poirot films, continued streaming screening of Miss Marple stories and those of Poirot.

While Angela Lansbury and Margaret Rutherford did portray Miss Marple, the main screen presentations were by Joan Hickson, Geraldine McEwan, Julia Mackenzie. It is interesting that the stories with the latter two Miss Marples was somewhat updated, the films with Joan Hickson had the post-war atmosphere, the late 1940s, the 1950s, life in the village, costumes and decor, vehicles, religious observance, traditional values…

There is a tenuous link with Miss Marple here, her recommending a maid who served in the house where murders occur.

Timothy West opens the film with great bombast, an unlikeable character, and murdered. His name is Rex – and the beginning of the link of the title with the nursery rhyme the king in his counting house, and the murderer choosing various clues from the rhyme for the development of the plot.

This time there is a very sympathetic police inspector, played by Tom Wilkinson more than a decade before his emerging so successfully in The Full Monty. Character actress, Fabia Drake, is also a strong screen presence.

The background to the murder is a mine in Africa and Rex betraying his partner. Rex has two sons, one in the business at home, the severe and humourless man, the other is Lance, in Africa, disliked by his father but returning to make him a proposition.

The plot is rather complex, according to the rhyme, and depends on truth about times.

1. The popularity of Agatha Christie novels and films? The actresses as Miss Marple? Joan Hickson?
2. The post-war settings, costumes and decor, cars? More proper ways of behaviour?
3. The nursery rhyme and the title, the plan to crimes according to the rhyme, the king in his counting house, Queen and tea, the maid and the washing…?
4. The opening, the focus on Rex, at the office, his laughter, the deals, his sudden attack? His death? His presence in the flashbacks, at home, dominating, sneering, his treatment of everybody in the family? Meals, behaviour? Intensely disliked? The fact of his marrying Adele, family criticisms, her age and the difference, issues of money?
5. The family, the financial situation, the two sons, one at home and carrying on the family business, severe, the treatment of his wife, brutality and disdain? Her present the household, cheerful? Put upon? Her friendship with Adele and her support? The absent son, Lance, in Africa, in disfavour with his father?
6. Mary Dove, the management of the household, working with the servants, especially with Gladys and the family’s criticism of her and her accidents? Financial management? Interactions with Rex? Her being formally correct with Adele and the other members of the family?
7. Miss Henderson, age, sister-in-law to Rex, critical observations, haughty, despising Adele, the attitude towards her nephews? Observing what went on in the household?
8. The cook, the attitude towards Gladys, her husband and his laid-back manner? The cook and her being upset?
9. Gladys, the recommendation from Miss Marple, awkward, accidents? Her strange behaviour, phone calls, going out? Found dead? Lance and his commands, her infatuation, the rye…?
10. The arrival of the police, the Inspector, initially wary of Miss Marple, liking her, seeking her advice, following it? His assistant?
11. Suspects for the death of Rex? The mystery of the death of Gladys? Then the murder of Adele? Adele and her relationship with the tennis coach, suspicions, his leaving, his being apprehended and interrogated?
12. Lance returning from Africa, with his wife, their bonding, her past, the arrests, saying she was bad luck?
13. Coming back, the background of the mine in Africa, his father’s behaviour, the partner, the descendants and their being edged out of money? Lance and his rather carefree attitude, with everyone in the house, with Miss Marple?
14. Miss Marple and the Inspector, following the nursery rhyme, unravelling the mystery? The importance of the timing? Lance and his lies, the past connection with Gladys and leading her on? His being unmasked? The truth about the mine, his arguments with his brother, seeming to compromise with the payoff, but his getting the money, leaving the airport, with Patricia, the crash?
15. Mary Dove and the finances?
16. Jennifer and the revelation of her identity?
17. A satisfactory mystery, the suspect and the laying of false clues? And the role of Miss Marple?