Displaying items by tag: Peter Malone's Movie Reviews

ANORA

US, 2024, 139 minutes, Colour.

Mikey Madison, Mark Eydelshteyn,  Vache Toymasyan, Karren Karagulian, Yura Borisov.

Directed by Sean Baker.

Winner of the Palme D’Or at Cannes, 2024, enthusiastic reviews, many award nominations, Anora is a very much talked-about film.

However, there are some films in a reviewer’s experience that do not resonate at all and the challenge of how to write a fair review. This is the case for this reviewer and Anora

This reviewer hasseen writer-director, Sean Baker’s other films, small, independent, down-to-earth, several focusing on sex workers, Tangerine, Starlet, Florida Project. And here, Anora is a lap dancer, sex worker/escort in the Russian area of New York City. The plotline is quite basic and straightforward, Anora encountering a rich young son of a Russian oligarch, escort, attraction, proposal, Las Vegas marriage – displeasure of the young man’s minders and his parents, their challenging the marriage, rough arm tactics for Anora, these tactics prevailing  and winning.

The running time is two hours 20 minutes, quite a long time to spend with Anora and Ivan, self-indulgent, irresponsible, let loose in the United States, defying his parents and their thug  minders.

Many of the reviews highlight how funny the film is, especially the clashes between Anora and the tough Russians. That will definitely depend on your sense of humour, appreciation of farce and sense of the ridiculous. Reviews also praise the performance of Mikey Madison as Anora, definitely entering into the dramatics, the farce, the fiery confrontations.

Perhaps the best way to describe what happens and its tone is to highlight that there are three acts, so to speak, in the film. The first act is focusing on Anora, who work at the club, her friends, her clients, the encounter with Ivan, his infatuation, Las Vegas and the marriage – all accompanied by sexual exhilaration, hangers-on friends, self-indulgence as a philosophy of life, couldn’t-care-less irresponsibility (and a huge bill for all their destructive mess of their Las Vegas suite).

The second act is the response of the Russian minders in New York City, dismay at learning what Ivan has been up to, confronting him – and his running away – and the fiery encounter, at great, great, length with Anora. Much of this combat seems to be improvised, the   director really enjoying the set up and filming, and continuing to film. Anora is one of those types who can give as good as she gets (at times better) and this whole confrontation has the atmosphere of farce.

The third act is the confrontation with the oligarch but, more forcefully, with his dominating wife, rounding up the ineffectual and cowardly Ivan, dealing with Anora and her defiance, everybody against her except one of the thugs, whom she treats violently, but who has feelings for her. Anora doesn’t win this encounter with the Russians – but, at the end, she is certainly not down and out.

Later looking at other reviews and blogging, there are many opposite opinions about Anora, some highly enthusiastic, others not so favourable, some rather critical, with which this reviewer identifies.

1. Popular acclaim? Critical acclaim and awards?
2. New York, the world clubs, neighbourhoods, mansions, the glitter and extravagance of Las Vegas, the Wedding Chapel, the world of the Russian oligarchs, the courts?
3. The writer-director, his career, independent filmmaking, the focus on sex workers and sexuality? Issue of class? International comparisons, US/Russia?
4. The structure of the film, the first focus on sexuality, the next on the extravagance, the next on the conflict, the final on the resolution?
5. Anora, her story, age, background, family acceptance, work in the club, exotic dancing, escorts, the management, the other women, friendships and clashes, the clientele?
6. The Russians, Ivan, his age, background, oligarchs, visiting the US, extravagant, the encounter with Ani, her response, successful, his asking for her again, for the week, the financial deal? His sexual appetite? Immaturity? Watching the computer games? His friends, the drugs, the flight to Las Vegas, their behaviour, the bill for damages? The proposal, Ani and her response, the touch of Cinderella, the Chapel, the marriage, back to New York?
7. The Russians, Toros and his role in keeping an eye on Ivan, not knowing about Las Vegas, the news of the wedding, his presence at the baptism, the religious dimensions, the interaction, his leaving an apology, driving, Garnic and Igor, their role, the confrontation with-and Ani, Ivan, irresponsibility, running away and hiding?
8. The long sequence of Ani confronting the two men, her violent reaction, language, biting, the vase, the destruction? Been tied up? Going and his broken nose, Igor and the bite? The phone calls, trying to control Ani? Torres and his arrival, his stance, wanting her untied, underestimating her violent reaction? The interchanges, her determination, gradually warm down? The phone calls, trying to find Ivan?
9. The search for Ivan, the club, the ensuing fight, the computer games, eventually finding him?
10. The parents, their flying to the US, the dominating mother, the nonchalant father and his observing? The confrontation with Ivan, mother’s boy, his response? Ani and her continued interventions, despised by the mother? Ani standing her ground, the issue of the divorce, Torres and the financial settlement, Ani and her final estimation of Ivan? A totally weak character?
11. The lawyers, the American court, the hearing, Ani and her continued interventions, Toros and she shouldn’t speak, Ivan and his hangover? The realisation that the annulment would have to take place in Las Vegas? The flight, the hearing, Ani and her reaction? The papers? The mother, and in the confrontation and Ivan’s father laughing?
12. Igor, his attention towards Ani, the bite, the fight, her sitting on him, gagging her, tying her up? It sympathy? At the court, giving her the ring, her reaction, the encounter in the car? A future?

A REAL PAIN

US/Poland, 2024, 90 minutes, Colour.

Jesse Eisenberg, Kieran Culkin, Will Sharpe, Jennifer Grey, Daniel Oreskes, Liza Sadovy, Kurt Egyiawan.

Directed by Jesse Eisenberg.

90 minutes well spent.

An acknowledgement of actor/writer/director, Jesse Eisenberg.   for morethan 20 years he has been on screen, his appearance is usually a variation on his vintage performance, more than a touch the edgy. (And he did play Mark Zuckerberg in The Social Contract, 2012.) So, it is surprising to find that he has written and directed A Real Pain, a role for himself which is familiar, but creating a very different character for Kieran Culkin (winning the Golden Globe for his performance).

We are invited to spend the 90 minutes in their company. Ben (Culkin) is already at the airport, lounging around, watching people. His cousin, David (Eisenberg), with a wife and daughter at home , is hurrying to the airport, compulsively phoning his cousin Ben (and later David refers to OCD). And, why are they at the airport? They are cousins, same age, longtime friends, but mostly different in personalities. And their Jewish grandmother, who had experienced the Holocaust, has died but has left them enough money to travel to her native Poland to visit her old home.

They have booked into a tour, led by sympathetic British scholar (Will Sharpe) along with a middle-aged Jewish couple who have prospered in the US, Marcia (Jennifer Grey) a divorcee and, surprisingly, Eloge, a refugee from the Rwandan genocide, welcomed by  a Jewish community in Canada and converting.

Throughout the film great deal of Chopin’s music.

On the one hand, there is quite a lot of comedy, sometimes black comedy, always focused on Ben, enormous mood swings, trying to be friendly but ready to turn on people, speak frankly, practically no filters. And, of course, David is always trying to make excuses for him until, finally, in a long close-up on Jesse Eisenberg’s face, as he explains his cousin to the other members of the group.

And, there are some tense moments for the group as well as for the audience, Ben suddenly erupting as they travel first class through Poland and he vigorously reminds them of the train voyages of their ancestors to the camps. And, at an old grave, he turns on the guide, criticising him for his facts and statistics instead of talking in humane terms about the stories. But, at a monument in Warsaw, he rushes off to pose like an attacking soldier, David to take photos, and urging the rest of the group to come and pose with him – which they do.

And, so, on the other hand, there is the very serious issues of memories of the Holocaust, truly moving scene as they visit the city of Lublin and its memories, a visit to the nearby concentration camp of Majdanek, brief indications, silence, for them to remember as well as for us to contemplate. And, finally, quite a visit to their grandmother’s house, an edgy encounter with the neighbours. But, mission accomplished.

The other serious theme of the film is that of the personality of Ben, the fact that he can be a real pain but also the personal, mental struggles.

A significant film for later generations of Jewish people remembering their ancestors in the Holocaust. A significant invitation to empathy for wider audiences.

1. The ambiguity of the title? Ben as an annoying real pain? The contrast with the pilgrimage to Poland, memories of the Holocaust in the camps, memories of the real pain, reliving the pain? And pain in the present, Ben as a tormented character?
2. Jesse Eisenberg, writing, directing, performing, a variation on his vintage nervy performances, yet his sensitivity to Ben’s character, to the visit to Poland, to the Holocaust memories? His delineation of characters, the situations, torments, serious, humorous?
3. The wide range of Chopin’s music as accompaniment?
4. The New York opening and closing? David and his world, his mentioning OCD, late, incessant phone calls, reaction at the airport, to Ben, to boarding, the flight? His preoccupation, phone calls, his wife, the young son and his ability to give statistics about buildings? The role of the grandmother, David and Ben’s relationship with her, her leaving the money for them to visit Poland, to see her house? David and his organisation?
5. The introduction to Ben, Kieran Culkin’s performance, many hours at the airport, interested in the range of people, his background, the grandmother and his devotion, living in his parent’s basement, the later revelation of the attempted suicide, his mental condition? Erratic, the range of moods, mood swings? The bond with David despite their different worlds, approaches to life?
6. The bond between the two, conversations, humour, David’s exasperation, Ben’s outbursts, David’s apologies, sharing the room, the meals, the episode of David sleeping in the train and their having to return, Ben’s confrontational actions, the effect of the trip, the grandmother, memories of the past?
7. The tour, the hotel accommodation, the group travelling together, James, British background, not Jewish, five years of leading the groups, his commentary, friendliness? Accosted by Ben about Germany facts and figures, wanting empathy, James saying this was a first-time he had been given feedback, his serious considerations? His sensitivity during the visit to the concentration camp? His consideration of the other members of the group?
8. The members of the group, Marcia, age, the divorce, the absent children, ladies who lunch? Friendly, her response to Ben? The middle-aged couple, ordinary Americans, their Jewish heritage, memories, prosperity in America? Eloge and his story, victim of the Rwandan genocide, Canada escape, welcomed by the Jewish community, conversion, valuing the Sabbath and the time for recollection, a gentleman, sincerity? The interactions as a group, attention to James, the various reactions to Ben?
9. The various episodes and their impact, comic touches, serious reflections, memories of the past? The monument in Warsaw, larger than life, the resistance, Ben and his posing, persuading all the others to come and pose, David having to take all the photos? The effect on each member of the group from this activity? The issue of travelling in first-class, Ben and his outburst, the memories of the past, the different reactions from the group, not worrying, justified, David and his upset, Ben walking out, David going to find him? The consequence, David going to sleep, passing the station, Ben’s declaration that David was so peaceful and could not wake him up? Getting out of the train, going the opposite direction, eluding the land and the tickets, reuniting with the group?
10. The city of Lublin and, the views, the memories, the literary tradition? The gate monument, going to the oldest grave in Poland, James and his commentary, Ben’s outbursts, against statistics, wanting the human element, James taken aback, the reaction of the group, David and embarrassment? The solution of putting the stones and tribute on the headstone? And James’s later comments and reactions?
11. The meal, the talk, Ben and his outburst, leaving, David and his monologue, the close-up on his face, his sharing the story of Ben’s attempted suicide, his own emotions, the contrast with their ways of life, yet their bonding and the experience of the trip?
12. Preparation for the travel to the concentration camp, the vast Polish countryside, yet the camps are near to the centre of the Lublin? The treatment of the episode, the silencing of the music, the brief commentary an indication of the buildings, the entry, standing, the blue stains on the gas chamber walls, the opens, the vast collection of shoes… And the audience sharing in the silence and the experience of the group?
13. The parting from the group, the audience feeling that it has been part of the group on the tour? David and Ben going off on their own, coming to the town, finding their grandmother’s house, putting the stones on the doorstep, the old man on the balcony, not speaking English, the young man, their explaining what they were doing, his sympathy, suggesting the stones were dangerous for the elderly woman living there to fall, David and Ben removing them, the glimpse of the final gesture of the old man, a wave or a sign of dismissal?
14. Mission accomplished, going to the airport, the flight back, Ben always able to sleep, David and his phone calls?
15. The farewell at the airport, more conversation, the embrace and all that it meant after the trip and the experiences, the Heritage of the grandmother, the Jewish heritage, and David going home and reuniting with his family, and Ben’s saying at the airport, the range of different people there, the enigmatic final close-up of his face?

TROUBLE

Sweden, 2024, 89 minutes, Colour.

Filip Berg, Amy Deasismont, Eva Melander, Mans Nathanaelson.

Directed by Jon Holmberg.

If you are feeling in a good mood feeling light-hearted, you will probably enjoy this zany film, a remake of a 1988 Swedish film.

There is a great deal of plot and some audiences have watched it for the action, missing a lot of the zaniness, a film of a comedy of errors and surprises. So often, the plot is going in one direction and, certainly, it veers in quite a different direction.

The focus is on a simple, good man, Conny, divorced with his wife marrying a pilot, but devoted to his daughter. He is an electronics expert, giving some good help to a police officer in the shop, then going to in house to install a television set. Already, the audience has seen a drug set up, an ambush by masked attackers – and all this filmed on the phone by the husband of the woman who has employed Conny to work on the television.

Then the comic touch begins, the man returning home, Conny diligent at work with his headphones on, the murderer coming, blood and the screwdriver, Conny oblivious. But, of course, he picks up the screwdriver, blood on him, and the plausible arrest for his being in the house for burglary.

He is very quickly in prison, sentenced to 18 years, working in the laundry where, more zaniness, there is a huge tunnel for some top criminals to escape – but, one of them is certainly not the brightest, and the other enjoys his control. Conny uses the tunnel to try to prove his innocence, but the two convicts, seeing the photo of his wife with her new husband, an airline pilot, assume that Conny is a pilot, the plan where they will escape, go to an airport and meet an accomplice with the money, and Conny will fly them to safety!

And, of course, more zany episodes, the drive through the city, the errors of the prisoners and their being arrested on the plane! With the help of the police officer who Conny helped with the computer advice, they continue to try to prove his innocence.

The clue for the murderer according to the victim’s wife is the phone. She has hidden the phone in the roof of her house, and, when they look at the footage, the discovery is that the chief of police is the culprit, organising the drug ambush. In the meantime, Conny had been appointed a lawyer who is all talk and no action, then revealed to be an accomplice, but easily giving up information.

In the confrontation, the police chief shoots and wounds Conny. In hospital, she comes to track him down, but the nice police officer is there, and more zaniness – the chief wounding herself with her own gun, planting it on the young officer, the shooting of a guard adding  to the guilt of the young officer.

The chief has also destroyed the television set where they had played the phone footage – but, Conny with his electronic expertise knows that the basic footage has been retained and it is set up to play it in the elevator, the horror of the police chief watching it.

Happy ending, of course, Conny’s daughter wanting a horse and Conny getting her one, trying to ride it, falling off… But, the nice possibility of Conny and the young police officer and the future…

If you enjoyed watching the film, a recommendation is to Google a review which takes the reader through all the details of the plot to quickly enjoy it again: Sutamba Bannerjee in fugtives.com

MISSING YOU

UK, 2024, 5 X 45 minutes, Colour.

Rosalind Eleazar, Ashley Walters, Richard Armitage, Steve Pemberton, Mary Malone, James Nesbitt, Jessica Plummer, Lenny Henry, Charlie Hamblett, Catherine Ayres, Felix Garcia Guyer, Oscar Kennedy, Marc Warren, Lisa Faulkner, Stephen Kunz.

Directed by Nimer Rashed, Isher Sahota

Missing You is a 2014 novel by crime writer, Harlan Coben. In 2010s and in the 2020s, a number of his novels were adapted for streaming, especially for Netflix.

This limited series is shorter than some of the others, situated in a British town, creating an atmosphere of the town, but focusing on police investigations. At the centre is Rosalind Eleazar (Slow Horses), strong-minded, a detective, working with collaborators but also independently, personally affected by the murder of her police father a decade earlier and the disappearance of her fiance.

As with this kind of series, there is the introduction of quite a number of characters spending time on them to make them vivid, flashbacks to Kat’s father, discussions with her mother and her mother’s friends, the police officers with audiences suspicion of them at times, the flashbacks to the missing fiance, the development of that story, as well as investigations concerning number of missing persons.

There is quite some complexity with a dog trainer and dog lover called Titus, played by Steve Pemberton (in exactly the opposite way from his playing Robbie Williams’ father in Better Man). And a young man approaches Kat to find his mother who has disappeared. All these themes come together, a ruthless scam to get money by creating a false dating app, false names and resumes, getting their targets  together, capturing and holding them, forcing them to make transferral from their bank account.

There is an interesting performances throughout the series, Richard Armitage has appeared in for Harlan Coben adaptations. Lenny Henry appears as Kat’s father. Ashley Walters is the fiance who disappeared – and there are two scenes, expertly performed by James Nesbitt as the smooth-talking gangster. The series is directed by a two directors who have considerable television series experience.

1. Crime detection, murder mystery? Harlan Coben’s novel? Adaptation? John Waite’s song and the lyrics during the final credits?
2. The British setting, the English city, homes, police precincts, public buildings, streets, the farm setting, interiors, barns, the countryside? The musical score?
3. The focus on Kat Donovan, the centre of the film, as a policewoman and detective, her personality, determined, her relationship with her mother and her mother’s friends, work in the office, Stagger as her superior, working with Nia, with Charlie and the growing relationship, her skills in detection? The background, her father as a celebrated police officer, the flashbacks with him, happy, her childhood, her apartment? The impact of his death? The further investigations, the killer in hospital, dying of cancer, her visit to him, his denial of killing her father? Stagger and his resistance, putting her off the case? Her friends in confidence, Aqua, communication with her, Stacy and her investigations?
4. The issue of Josh Buchanan, writer, the flashbacks, with Kat, happy, his disappearance, her hurt? The reappearance on the dating app? Further investigations, his articles and the AI for his identification, Aqua seeing him and their past sharing the flat? Stacy seeing him, warning him off, her confession to Kat, apology, further detection?
5. The mystery of the man and his car, visiting the site, his wandering, imprisoned by Titus, the torture, the money issues, £25,000? His attempt at escape, his death, his body in the furnace? The further “assets” and the money scheme? The tracking down of his financial adviser and the information?
6. The introduction to Titus, working with the dogs, the couple and his photo of the wife’s infidelity, the later reporting him to the police? His obsession with dogs, proud of his record, competitions and winds? The farm, his henchmen, ruthlessness, cruelty, the focus on Dana, the ‘assets’ tied up and standing? The money being cut off, tracking down Brendan, abducting him, targeting Kat, the buildup to the climax, Dana and her escape, killing the henchmen, freeing the assets, Titus setting the farm alight, threatening Brendan, threatening Dana, Kat seeing the fire, the final confrontation and killing him?
7. The scam, the technology at the farm, the footage of Vanessa and the using it on the app, the various people succumbing, Brendan and his coming to Kat because of Josh Buchanan’s name, on the app, the story of his mother, Costa Rica, ransacking Kat’s flat, the confrontation, the episode with Aqua attacking him?
8. Charlie, his expertise, computers, getting the information, very quickly, opening up accounts, surveillance the airport, Dana and removing the money, the story of Titus henchmen with the rental cars and his taking the money, Titus shooting him? The discovery of the false identities?
9. Kat, the various investigations, Stagger putting her off, her visit to the dying man in the hospital, continually confronting Stagger? Discoveries about Josh, finding where his payments went, following the grandfather, discovering the daughter, meeting Josh again, the apologies, his reasons for moving out, the revelation about her father’s corruption?
10. Culigan, the gangster, the influence, reputation, his manufacturing his mythology, summoning Kat, the Gallery, his painting, the truth about the background, using Kat’s father, promising to find Parker? Contacting Kat, the address?
11. Police corruption, widespread, the father’s murder? The cover-ups – and the good intentions of protecting Kat? Tracking down Parker, the revelation of her father’s relationship with him, his personality, the experience? The link in blackmailing the father because of his gay relationship?
12. The final revelation, Josh seeing the father with his lover, the chase, the violence, the threat to Aqua, Josh and the knife, the father’s death?
13. The police, suspicions Stagger, his protection of Kat? Kohl, genial, retiring, investigations, the farewell, his wife and the information about corruption? Kat and her confronting her mother, the truth?
14. The end, Josh’s confession, Kats love for him, able to forgive him?

THE PIANO LESSON

US, 2024, 127 minutes, Colour.

Samuel L.Jackson, John David Washington, Danielle Deadwyler, Ray Fisher, Corey Hawkins, Michael Potts, Stephan James.

Directed by Malcolm Washington.

The film version of one of the several plays by August Wilson tracing the history of African Americans and the exploration of their culture – Fences, Ma Rainey’s Bottom… It has been adapted for the screen with Malcolm Washington directing.

Producer Denzel Washington, father of Malcolm and of the star, John David, with his wife Paulette and daughter Olivia having cameo roles as mother and daughter, when asked what audiences would get out of the film, replied that it depended what audiences brought to the film.

To this extent, it is very much a film for African-Americans, the background of slavery, the domination of the South, emancipation, racism, African-American culture and traditions, moving into the conflicts and freedoms of the 20^th century.

The film opens in 1911, celebration of Independence Day, a white celebration while, at the same time, a group of black men are taking a piano from a landowner’s house and sending it to Pittsburgh. The father of the family is pursued and killed.

The action takes place mainly in Pittsburgh in 1936, one of the sons, Boy Willie, John David Washington, coming with his friend Lyman, Ray Fisher, with a truckload of watermelons to sell to get money to buy a property of the landowner who has died falling down a well. He hopes to sell the piano to raise the rest of the money for the sale. However, he experiences the clash with his sister, Berneice, a widow with a daughter, Danielle Deadwyler. The patriarch of the house is played by Samuel L.J ackson. Also in the cast are one of his brothers who is visiting as well as the local pastor who aims at building a church.

This is very much filmed theatre but with a number of exterior sequences. However, it is very much a film of words and performance. Central to the drama of the family is the sense of ghosts and spirits haunting, the effect on families, the need for some kind of exorcism.

The wider audience will be interested in this exploration of African-American themes but may often feel that they are observing from the outside.

1. The work of August Wilson? Theatre? Cinema? African-American themes in history?
2. 1911, July 4, the south, the White celebration, patriotism, colour and song? The contrast with the African-Americans, the situation, Mississippi, work, owners, the piano, the stealing, pushing and carrying it, the escape, with Boy Willie, Boy Charlie, the fire, the pursuit, his death?
3. 1936, the desert, the city, the neighbourhoods, the black area? Homes, the streets, nightclubs, church? The musical score, the songs and their lyrics, atmosphere?
4. The theatricality of the piece, on stage, most of the action within the house, the external scenes, Mississippi, the pursuit of Boy Charlie, the drive, the sales of the watermelons? The visual equivalence of the words?
5. The focus on Boy Willie, his age, his mother and father, the memories of 1911, the piano? The death of Sutter, falling down the well, huge man, suspicions, the Yellow Ghost, Berneice asserting that Boy Willie pushed him? The visuals? His friendship with Lyman, the truck, driving to Pittsburgh, the watermelons, the sale, hopes for the money for a for the land?
6. Doaker, the uncle, his brothers, his work, settling in the North, his personality, observing, intervening? Berneice, her experience in the south, the death of her husband, mourning for him, her daughter? Her bitter attitudes? Antagonism towards Boy Willie? Her bitter words, the relationship with Avery? Raising the funds? Avery’s proposal, her harsh response? The scenes of antagonism with Boy Willie? Her nerves, the apparition of Sutter, Boy Willie’s sceptical reaction? The conversations about his appearing, Joker, the daughter? The ominous presence?
7. Lyman, more simple, from the South, wanting to stay in the North, accompanying Boy Willie, their shared experiences, his conversation, the watermelons, in the house, Boy Wining and the bargaining with the suit, shirt, shoes? His going out, at the club, the music, the conversation, his return, the encounter with Berneice, the perfume, the kiss, her response?
8. Boy Wining, his past, one of the brothers, the news of his wife’s death, the music, his drinking, in the house, cheerful, contribution to the controversies?
9. The buildup to a climax, Berneice, the anxieties, Avery’s coming to exorcise the ghosts, the quoting of the scripture, Boy Willie and his experience, the struggle with the ghost, his return downstairs? The reconciliation with Berneice?
10. Love and tensions within the family? The future?
11. And the symbolism of the piano, stolen from Sutter, transfer to the North, the mother playing it, the flashbacks of mother and daughter, Berneice playing it, stopping when her mother died, the carvings on the piano, the family heritage, not selling it, Avery wanting to start the Church, Boy Willie wanting to sell it for buying the property?

THE ROOM NEXT DOOR

Spain/US, 2024, 107 minutes, Colour.

Julianne Moore, Tilda Swinton, John Turturro, Alessandro Nivola, Juan Diego Botto, Roel Arevalo, Victoria Wingo, Alex Hogh Andersen.

Directed by Pedro Almodovar.

After directing two films in English, including The Human Voice with Tilda Swinton, Spain’s most celebrated contemporary director, Pedro Almodovar, has now made his first full-length film in English. It is based on an American novel by Sigrid Nunzi. It won the Golden Lion in Venice, 2024, for Best Film.

One of the difficulties for Almodovar aficionados in watching the film is adapting to hearing English rather than Spanish. There were some complaints that the English dialogue sounded somewhat stilted. Whatever the complaints, the important focus is on the actresses who deliver the lines and the intensity of their performances.

The film opens with Ingrid, Julianne Moore, signing copies of her new book, learning that her friend from the past, Martha, Tilda Swinton, is in hospital for treatment for terminal cancer. At first the film works as two friends meeting again, reminiscing about the past, especially for flashbacks to Martha’s teenage years, her encounter with Fred and his experience of the Vietnam war, the birth of their daughter, Michelle.

So far, so expected in a portrait of strong female friendship.

However, the narrative then veers into medical, ethical, moral and legal questions about assisted suicide.

Audiences will have a range of views on this topic. One might note that if all there is in this life on earth, then why cannot individuals take their lives at the time they decide. For those who believe in the afterlife, there are many moral questions. And, there is the status of assisted suicide and euthanasia in different parts of the world in terms of legislation and criminality.

All these issues come to the fore but always in the context of the friendship. Martha is a strong-minded woman, mistakes in the past, but finding her fulfilment in life as a war correspondent, celebrated, but completely alienated from her daughter, her daughter always wanting to know more about her father, Martha unable to fulfil her daughter’s wishes. With some failure in the experimental treatment she is undergoing, she decides that she will end her life, her own decision, her own time, buying a euthanasia pill on the dark web, a woman who wants to end her life with control and dignity.

And, the room next door? Martha rents spectacular mention in upper New York state, asking Ingrid to be with her, not participating in the suicide itself, but assisting in making the last days of Martha’s life days of content. Ingrid is quite emotional, hesitant at first, fearful of death itself, going along with Martha’s plans, but needing some kind of outlet, a sympathetic trainer at the gym, the reappearance of an old flame who has strong views on everything, John Turturro.

And, there is the plan for dealing with the police, denying knowledge, set answers, legal support. There is an unsympathetic police investigation by Alessandro Nivola.

Almodovar wants the audience to appreciate the issue, the emotions, the moral issues, personal responsibility and independence.

However, for the average audience, while this important issue is dramatised on screen, the setting is affluent, very affluent, American society, healthcare and drugs available, the comforts of wealth and a mansion to die in, not the ordinary experience of most moviegoers, an important issue but in another world of which they will never be part.

And, as expected, the final scenes will leave the audience confirmed in beliefs about assisted suicide or challenged ethically, legally, morally.

1. The films of Pedro Almodovar, his Spanish sensibility, his films over the decades, continuing his themes, the focus on women, the focus on sexuality, homosexuality, the Catholic church, religion? Now in English language, in the US context? And the theme of death?
2. The New York settings, the book signing, apartments, hospitals, restaurants? The New York State countryside, Woodstock, the mansion, interiors, the gym, restaurants? The musical score?
3. The first part of the film and the friendship between the two women? The strong presence of Tilda Swinton and Julianne Moore? Working together? Establishing Ingrid as an author, the art world, writing for magazines, the success, apprehensions about death? Encountering stellar, the news of Martha’s illness? Visiting Martha, the past friendship, working together, Martha and her work correspondence (and the flashbacks, the dangers, with the photographer, encountering the two Carmelites), her relationship with her daughter, the flashbacks to the scenes with Fred, the Vietnam war, PSD, the night together, his leaving, marrying, the fire and his death? Martha and the alienation from a daughter, her daughters questioning about her father?
4. Martha and the flashbacks to the war, the discussions with the photographer,
5. Martha, Almodovar’s themes of sexuality, homosexuality, the two Carmelites, the relationship, the discussion about war, vows, sexuality in the context of war and destruction?
6. Her illness, the diagnosis, the medical staff, the experiments, partial success, ultimately not successful, to continue with the procedures or not? The issue of death, planning her death, the pill from the dark web, her plan?
7. Ingrid, her own story, memories of Damien, Damien and his relationship with Martha, the renewed friendship with Martha, talking, listening, sharing? The proposal about assisting at the suicide? Martha saying she had asked others, appreciating Ingrid’s apprehensions about death?
8. Ingrid, her dilemma, emotional response, values response, moral and ethical response, legal issues? Are pondering, the decision?
9. Martha, the renting of the mansion, comfortable, the plan for the room next door, Ingrid choosing the downstairs room? And packing, settling in, the time together, further reminiscences? Martha and her strong determination cop the time of her own choice, not wanting to compromise Ingrid legally, the plan for the police? Her leaving the letter for Ingrid, the letter for the police?
10. Martha, the emotional effect, coping and not, going to the gym, the sympathetic trainer, unable to hug, but her feeling hardened? The encounter with Damien, the conversations, his offer of legal help?
11. The signal for the door to be open or shut, Ingrid seeing the door shut, her grief, and discovering the wind had blown the door shut? Her going out, the time with Damien, Martha deciding that this was the time, setting everything up, going out to sit peacefully, her death?
12. Ingrid discovering her, grief, the letter, contacting Damien, the interrogation by the police, the officer and his faith and strip perspective, not believing Ingrid? The lawyer coming, planning to file a complaint against the officer?
13. Damien, the past, relationships, sexuality, with Martha, with Ingrid, his talk, no questions, his philosophy, doom, the end of the world? The legal support for Ingrid?
14. Leaving Ingrid with the emotional experience, the legal experience, her own values? And the audience response, depending on their attitude towards an afterlife or no afterlife, the right to end life, emotional, legal, ethical and moral perspectives for decisions?

PARTHENOPE

Italy, 2024. 136 minutes, Colour.

Celeste Della Porta, Stefania Sandereli, Gary Oldman, Silvio Orlando, Luisa Ranieri.

Directed by Paolo Sorrentino. 

A Paolo Sorrentino film. By this stage in his career, Paolo Sorrentino is so well known, especially for The Great Beauty tand he television series, The Young Pope, The New Pope, that audiences will want to watch each of his new films eagerly. There is always something in his explorations of Italy, the Italian people, Italian culture, his native Naples and his critique of Naples…

But, in the early part of Parthenope, some audiences, including this reviewer, begin to wonder whether they should continue watching. It opens in 1960, moves to the1970s in various dates over the next 10 years or so. There are central characters, but there is also a succession of episodes, somebody remarking that they are random, and one wonders what Sorrentino is really offering, what he wants us to look at, reflect on, what conclusions to be drawn, if they are to be drawn.

But, accepting the characters, new characters and episodes all suddenly brought to the fore, and then moved away from, the audience may begin to ruminate as they respond to the always attractive visuals and become somewhat used to the tantalising unexpected episodes.

The film, the title character, Parthenope, a striking and beautiful presence by Celeste Della Porta, who has to age from 18 to 32, shows her to be an ambitious student and her subject of enquiry, anthropology. And this theme pervades the film, especially in her interactions with the role of the detached Professor, played by veteran Silvio Orlando. In fact, she will specialise for her early studies and then her degree in anthropology. And the question she often raises with the retort by the Professor, what is the definition of anthropology.

His contribution to the answer by Sorrentino is the drama of this film. The final statement is that anthropology is: “Seeing”. So, what are we seeing, what have we seen, what does it mean in terms of being human, independence, relationships, love?

For audiences contemplating seeing the film, there are a wonderful views of Naples, the mountains, the Mediterranean, Capri. There are intriguing guest performances in those random episodes, discussions with American novelist, John Cheever (Gary Oldman), an interview with an eccentric screen agent, the social occasion where a Naples-born celebrity actress makes a speech with a savage attack on her city, the annual miracle of the link with location of the blood of the patron San Gennaro and the bizarre behaviour of the local Archbishop, the public witness to the consummation of a marriage, the final interview with the son of the professor.

Which is not to underestimate the ordinary themes of human life, growing up, family and relationships, self-image, suicide, family grief…

And, finally, and Parthenope  in her 60s played by veteran actress Stefania Sandrelli, bringing the human themes to a conclusion, and the anthropological exploration.

1. Audience response to the films of Paolo Sorrentino? His perspectives on Italy, Italian history, politics, culture? Moral issues? Religious issues? The Catholic Church?
2. The title, the focus on Parthenope, the mythology, the siren, the myth, Naples, her being named after the town?
3. The structure of the film, 1960, the episodes in the 1970s, 1982, and moved to the present? The stages in Parthenope’s life, the continuous narrative, the importance of the various flashbacks, information and light from the flashbacks?
4. The visual style, the beauty of nature, Naples, Car pre-, sea, the mountains, the vistas of the city? Mansions, entertainment styles? Funerals? The Cathedral and the blood of San Gennaro? The walks around the town, the beaches, restaurants? Theatre? The University, the lecture rooms, professorial offices? The range of characters and their worlds?
5. The opening, 1960, the coach, the, Dante, parents, the birth of the water, Parthenope, her naming?
6. In appear and the 70s, aged 18, the actress, her presence, her beauty (and the ability of indicating her ageing from 18 to 32)? The world, her age, Sandri and his love for her, her response, disappointing him, her brother, his moods? The water and the swimming? The affection? The range of friends, partying, the lifestyle of the 70s? Leading up to the scene of her brother, standing, looking at the camera, the sea, his death? The impact on the family? The parents?
7. The episode with John Cheever, Parthenope reading his novels and liking them, meeting him, his drinking, the issue of sexuality, homosexuality, drinking, the impact of her scenes with him?
8. Her studies, the professor, the exams and questioning, the panel, his listening to her, the intervention, the result? The later dealings with the professor, discussions, subjects the theses, the effect of the suicide and her wanting to investigate, his suggestion about the miraculous? And her going to the Cathedral, the encounter with the Bishop, the professor warning her against him, his criticisms of the professor? The thesis, the ceremony of announcing the marks, her high distinction?
9. The issue of anthropology, as a means of interpreting this film, Sorrentino is anthropology of Italy, of Naples, asking the definition, the inability to give a different definition, the ultimate statement that anthropology is Seen? Sorrentino and his seeing, Parthenope and her seeing?
10. The random episodes and their being introduced, the relationship to Parthenope? The development of the screenplay, stops and starts? John Cheever? The actress and her coaching, urging Parthenope to acting, the card, the visit, her face being covered, the encounter, the kiss, the effect on Parthenope? The discussions about the actress, the actress is visiting Naples, high society and the gathering, Parthenope present, the actress, vein, her speech, the denunciation of Naples, so vigourously, Parthenope and the discussions with her?
11. The episode of the public witness to the consummation of the marriage, Parthenope and her encounter with their 20, the sexual encounter, the effect on her, his taking her to this event, the range of people, the young couple, her embarrassment, his embarrassment, their being urged on, Sorrentino making the audience complicit with all the observers? The motivation for the witnessing of the consummation and the consequent air, the family, business?
12. The episode at the Cathedral, the strange personality of the Archbishop, the discussions with Parthenope, her questioning him, the annual event of the liquefaction of the blood of San Gennaro, the Archbishop feeling responsible, the response of the crowds, the ceremony, no liquid, the woman in the crowd and the period blood, his denunciation of her? Sexuality issues, celibate clergy? The effect of the experience on Parthenope?
13. The cumulative effect of her experiences, from wealthy young girl, to society, yet her detachment, her literary interests, anthropology, her achievements, the effect of the various episodes on her as she grew older? Her work in anthropology – giving the high mark to the pregnant young the discussions with the professor?
14. The professor and is retiring, his urging her to take positions, is talk about his son, the separation from his wife, eventually introducing her to his son, audience response to the sun, as a child of the enormous size, the nappy, his face and smiles, watching the television, his cheery words, and his father having given his life in devotion to his son?
15. The transition to the 2020s, Parthenope and her age, her achievement, students, anthropology, the 40 years between the audience seeing her at 32 and then seeing her in her 60s, the audience filling in the details of her life, alone, academic, with students?
16. The visit home, memories, the focus on her eyes, her seeing, her personal anthropology is a woman, 20^th and 21^st-century, Italian, origin in Naples?

BLINDSPOTTING

US, 2018, 95 minutes, Colour.

Daveed Diggs, Rafael Casal, Janina Gavankar, Ethan Embry, Tisha Campbell, Wayne Knight.

Directed by Carlos Lopez Estrada.

Blindspotting was created by the two stars, Daveed Diggs and Rafael Casal. They worked together in a number of projects, especially short films, music videos. Diggs himself had significant roles in Hamilton. The director is Carlos Lopez Estrada, also noted for music videos.

This film is a variation of the Boyz in the Hood kind of neighbourhood film, focusing on African-Americans, poor situations and lack of opportunities, relationship with white people, racism, the police, crime and arrests. However, the setting is Oakland in the 2010s, comparisons with New York stories, contrasts.

The film creates the atmosphere of Oakland, the inner city, the streets, clubs, the accommodation for those on probation, homes, but also on Oakland society because of the work of the two central characters as removal of this, a variety of locations for their work.

There is also a love for rap throughout the film, various occasions for rap performances – but, especially for Diggs in a confronting finale with a police officer, a tour de force rap presentation.

The title is explained later in the film, a focus on one of those drawings where the observer sees one image and, with suggestion or otherwise, a different image within the same frame (black vase  with two white profiles). The observer sees one or the other, the other blindspotted. And this is the case with observing the central characters of this film. Looking at the good or the bad and the of the blindspotted

To be Diggs is sympathetic as Coll in, released from prison, involved in a vicious fight with his friend of Miles outside a club. And witnessed by his girlfriend works at reception in the same removalist company as the two men. The film fast forwards to the last three days of his probation, his living in the halfway house and the demands made of coming in at 11 PM, of doing cleaning chores, the hostile attitude of the manager.

By day, he and his friend, Miles, are well occupied with their jobs – as well as conversations at reception.

Collin and Miles have been friends since childhood, one black, one white. Myles has married an African-American wife and they have a daughter. Miles’s erratic in his attitudes and behaviour, always taking tough attitudes, bursting out, teasing Collin. There are domestic scenes with his ever-patient wife, the little daughter trying to be tough, enjoying games with Collin.

In the latter part of the film, the fight that got Collin into trouble is visualised, a strongly vicious fight, Collin out of control, Miles more than vicious. Last night of his probation, Collin goes to Miles’ house, finds the little girl playing with the gun Miles has bought, desperate feelings to recover the gun. They go to a party, Miles picking a fight, again a vicious outburst.

But the final confrontation sequences are with the policeman. Early in the film, Collin was stopped in his removalist truck at a red light, suddenly sees a young African-American man who runs, a police officer emerging, shooting the man four times – and the news on television of this episode recurring through the film. At a removalist job, Collin finds that his wife has walked out on the policeman who is still in the house, their eyeing each other off, Collin and every rage coming to the surface, in a dramatic rap, the policeman terrified – but Collin, threatening with Miles gun, says he is not a killer and leaves.

The film was so successful that the makers decided to develop the story into a television series which ran to 16 episodes.

VOICES IN DEEP

Australia, 2023, 94 minutes, Colour.

Hannah Sims, Christos Karavevas, Angeliki Papoulia, Kostas Nikouli.

Directed by Jason Raftopoulos.

Voices Australia  in Deep has been written and directed by Jason Raftopoulos, maker of short films, his second feature. He is an Australian filmmaker of Greek background.

Refugees entering Europe from the Middle East and from Africa in the 2010s was a major immigration shift, already strong at this time but even stronger in 2015, the challenge to European countries and the European Union, their borders, allowing in refugees. The number entering had serious repercussions in subsequent years, hardening of attitudes, political moving to the right and the condemnation of refugees, closing borders, racism within the countries.

However, this is a story set in Athens, location photography, the Australian actor, Hannah Sims, but the rest of the cast Greek. And the use of languages, Greek, English, Arabic.

A singular characteristic of the filmmaking is the director’s choice of fixed camera, even when hand-held, all the action taking place within the frame, on the one hand, with its very long takes, somewhat static while, on the other hand, any movement is from the camera fixed on a car, focus on driver and passengers, or views from the back of a moving vehicle.

While inpatient audiences who like action and movement may find this very difficult, the filmmaker wants the audience to stop and look, seriously look, and for quite some time, observing, reflecting, being challenged.

The film opens with an underwater sequence, the bottom of a boat, than a focus on refugee faces staring ahead, then a glimpse of the Navy to the rescue.

As regards the narrative, the focus is on Bobby, one of the Navy personnel, ready to return to Australia. The other focus is on the Syrian, Tarek, with his younger brother, finding accommodation and work difficult to come by.

Bobby later tells her story, the story of an ugly child, herself, a difficult childhood, joining the Navy, going overseas and volunteering, but now ready to come back to Australia, collecting mussels on the rocks and selling them, or attempting to sell them on the black market. She is also emotionally unsettled, exposing herself, encountering a middle-aged woman and an affair with her.

Tarek applies for accommodation but the list is long, can’t find work, encounters a pimp, works in massage and prostitution. There is an episode where his younger brother is invited to a wealthy mansion to work for a social gathering but is actually being groomed by the house manager for the owner.

The attitude of the filmmaker is nonjudgemental, telling the stories, that this is what is happening, hardships for both Bobby and for Tarek and his brother.

A small budget film, a reminder of the worldwide plight of refugees, welcome and unwelcome, and the continuing consequences as hostility towards refugees increased during the 2020s.

1. Australian film and director? Setting? Athens setting? Cast, languages, Greek, English, Arabic?
2. The title, the different characters and their voices? The deep, the sea, the situations, people out of the depths?
3. 2015, refugees on the move, from the Middle East, from Syria, people smugglers, on the Aegean, drownings, landing in Greece? Surviving in Greece? Lack of accommodation, lack of work, prostitution? The contrast with Bobby, Australian, volunteer, surviving, troubles?
4. The opening, underwater, the bottom of the boat, the long focus on the refugees on their faces, eyes straight ahead, the Navy and the boat, coming to the rescue?
5. The visual style of the film, the fixed camera and action within the frame, movement coming with the camera on the vehicle, the focus on drivers and passengers, views from the back of vehicles? The long takes, the demands on the audiences to stay fixed and focused, seriously looking at the characters and situations?
6. Bobby’s story, Australian background, countryside, her telling the tale of the ugly girl, her moving away from home, the Navy, volunteering, work in the Aegean, finishing and preparing to go home, on the rocks, the mussels, packing them, the ice, trying to sell them, the black market, the various contacts, setting up meetings, restaurants, the police? The accommodation, the hotel, exposing herself, the psychological attitude, prostitution? In the park, exposing herself, Gloria passing, returning? At home with Gloria, Gloria caring for her mother, the friendship, the sexual approach, the bond between the two women? The travels together, on the boat and the sea, the story of the dead child, the return, leaving Gloria, Bobby to return home?
7. Tarek’s story, with his brother, applying for accommodation, on the waiting list, their taking shelter, their friends? Tarek and Masi, the pimp, prostitution, the scene with the elderly man, massage and sex, on the streets, picked up in the car, the conversation with the man, Tarek beaten up, Masi and his anger, finding the man, the brutal beating?
8. The younger brother, his age, the girl, friendship, moving away from Masi, on the beach, going to the house, the woman, the proposition, offering him money, work, his accepting, his return, having to put on the dress, the man, the setup, sexual exploitation, the boy running away?
9. Tarek again applying for accommodation, care for his brother, what future?
10. A small film, the writer-director and his Greek ancestry, an Australian perspective on Europe and refugees in the 2010s?

FIREBRAND

UK, 2023, 121 minutes, Colour.

Alicia Vikander, Jude Law, Simon Russell Beale, Eddie Marsan, Sam Riley, Erin Doherty, Junia Rees, Patsy Ferran.

Directed by Karim Ainouz.

There is always something interesting and arresting in any story about Henry VIII. And, this is the case here, Henry VIII at the end of his life, returning from battles, throwing his (heavy) weight around, acting on whims, up and down relationship with his wife, Katherine Parr, and caught up in political machinations, especially with the Seymours, the brothers of his late wife, Jane Seymour, uncles of his heir, the boy to be Edward VI. And, there are ecclesiastical intrigues, strong-minded promoters of Protestant theology, ambiguous Catholic prelates like Stephen Gardiner, and, especially the death of Henry VIII.

While this film is supposed to be a history of Katherine Parr, it is a fiction based on a successful series of novels by Elizabeth Fremantle. At this point, it is worth recommending another series of novels, those of the barrister, Matthew Shardlake, long but engrossing books by C.J.Sansom bringing this period vividly to life.

There is a difficulty with the title here, Firebrand. This is not exactly firebrand storytelling. There are some sparks but, rather, this is a somewhat dark and claustrophobic story, mainly confined within the palace. Nevertheless, it reminds us that Katherine Parr was a strong woman even if in the various stories of Henry VIII, she comes at the end of his succession of six wives. And she survived him (though, with a touch of fiction, Henry VIII in this film does not survive her.)

Katherine Parr is played by Alicia Vikander, an intelligent woman, a writer, collector of prayers, committed to the Protestant cause, in contact with a strong female evangelist who experiences the ire of the King. Katherine has served as regent while Henry has been away at the wars. She has been successful, also a strong stepmother young Elizabeth and the young Edward. At this stage, Mary, with her fiery Spanish background from her mother, Katherine of Aragon, is a young adult at the court.

But, while the film shows Katherine as strong, the performance is not quite as attention commanding as intended. Jude Law is pompous, vulgar, festering leg injury, callous in terms of his lustful roving eye, a monarch of whims, Law certainly holding audience attention. As does Simon Russell Beale as Stephen Gardner, reminding audiences of the complexities of the break from Rome, of the role of the Catholics, of the role of the emerging Church of England. Gardiner machinations, intrigues, has the ear of the king, is hostile to Katherine Parr, the scenes of the film concerning him the most active.

While Katherine Parr survived and married Thomas Seymour, the last part of the film highlights the Tudor history to come in drawing attention to the young Elizabeth, her character, her emerging self-assertion.

Firebrand does not stand out amongst the film is about Henry VIII but, the subject matter is always interesting and intriguing.

1. The title? As applied to Katherine Parr, the historical role, author, promoter of the Protestant cause, relationship with the Seymours, the last wife of Henry VIII? Not so much of a firebrand in this version?
2. Elizabeth Fremantle and her Tudor novels? Adapted, historical interpretations, inventions, the film’s screenplay and further interventions and interpretations?
3. The period, the last year of Henry VIII’s life? His return from the wars? His reputation, Katherine of Aragon and the divorce, the clash with Rome, wanting the male heir, execution of Anne Boleyn, Elizabeth, Jane Seymour and her death, Prince Edward? The marriage to Katherine Parr, her being Regent during his absence, stepmother to his children?
4. The portrait of Katherine Parr, her age, her past, marriages and widow, relationship with the Seymours, the political implications? Her concern about her books, her prayers and compositions, publishing? Her skills, as Regent, the relationship with Elizabeth, good stepmother? The marriage to Henry VIII, a loving relationship, tolerating the relationship, personal, sexual, political? His ability to turn against those closest to him? The execution of two of his previous wives?
5. Katherine Parr, the connection with Anne Askew, the scenes with Anne Askew, her preaching, her beliefs, the Bible, strong Protestantism? Katherine Parr’s support? The gift of the heirloom and its later been used against her?
6. Jude Law’s interpretation of Henry VIII, big, ageing, jovial, hedonistic, whims, narcissistic, back from the war, his past, his children, his hold over them, trusting Katherine Parr, his relationship with her, his vigorous and violent sexuality? Food? His health, the infection on his leg, the doctors treating him, in close-up? The sores, the smell?
7. The King’s behaviour, his whims, erratic, the banquet, his eyeing of the young woman and interviewing her, getting her to sing, all in the presence of his wife? The expectations of the time for the king and women? His relationship with the Seymours? His relationship with Stephen Gardiner, Gardiner’s advice, machinations, against Anne Askew, against the Queen?
8. The Seymours, Katherine’s relationship with Thomas, the planning of Edward, the era of the king, the king suspicions about Thomas, the accession of Prince Edward, Edward and advising Thomas to betray Katherine for their political safety?
9. Stephen Gardiner, Catholic background, in the service of Henry VIII, the fluidity of Catholic prelates and Protestant prelates, the absence of Thomas Cranmer from this film, Gardiner, Catholic attitudes, against Anne Askew, interrogating the Queen, his visits, interviews, his political and religious names?
10. The portrait of Mary, speaking Spanish, memories of her mother, her age, attitude towards Elizabeth, in the presence of the king, the banquets, her relationship to Katherine?
11. The portrait of Elizabeth, strong minded, her age, coping in the court, her attitude towards her father, the memories of her mother’s death? Reliance on Katherine Parr?
12. Prince Edward, his age, heir to the throne, the Seymour’s? His role in the court, his father’s attitude?
13. Katherine Parr, the pregnancy, and invention for this story, the experience of the pregnancy, the king’s reaction, the miscarriage, the blood, the consequences?
14. Katherine, the arrest, in prison, the release, her going to visit Henry, invented aspect of her responsibility for his death? Fiction?
15. The enclosed nature of this story, within the walls of the Castle, some views of the building from outside, but the claustrophobic effect? And in the confines of this Tudor world?