MICKEY ONE

US, 1965, 93 minutes, Black and white.
Warren Beatty, Hurd Hatfield, Alexandra Stewart, Franchot Tone, Teddy Hart, Jeff Corey, Kama tail Fujiwara. Directed by Arthur Penn.

Mickey One is, so far, the only film that Arthur Penn has both produced and directed. Most critics, and the public, didn't like it, and was accused of being the worst type of arty film, self-conscious and pretentious. Penn himself says that he concentrated too much on ideas and themes without sufficient emphasis of these themes on real characters and coherent situations. Thus Mickey One himself is a symbolic representative of humanity as K was, for instance, in Kafka's - The Trial. In fact there are more than passing similarities between Penn's film and The Trial. Mickey One is a man of his environment, yet alienated; he is pursued and guilty, yet one wonders whether he is his own enemy. Mickey's encounters with people who are normal are quite strange; a clash between a symbol and reality. Penn has filmed the whole exercise in striking ways and this has the audience consciously aware of how clever the artist is: symbols, lights, costumes, Japanese artists, night-club patter, gangster-film techniques are all used.

Warren Beatty does his best as Mickey One. Interestingly, Hurd Hatfield of The Picture of Dorian Grey, makes a rare screen appearance. Alexandra Stewart, who turns up unexpectedly in British, French and Canadian films, is a very sympathetic Jenny. In Penn's canon this film comes between The Miracle Worker (1962) and The Chase (1966).

1. Did you enjoy this film? Why? Did you find it easy to follow?

2. What was the main theme of the film?

3. What symbols impressed you most? What did they signify? How did they work?

4. Most critics called the film 'pretentious', attacking its over-obvious end, and, at times, over-clever techniques and symbolism. Do you agree it was a self-conscious piece of 'art cinema'?

5. The world of Kafka comes to mind whilst watching this film - is this so? Living in a nightmare of fear and flight, alienated, anonymous, persecuted man; man of appearances and reality? Are these valid considerations for Mickey One? Was Arthur Penn trying to transfer contemporary existential anxiety and alienation themes to Detroit and Chicago?

6. How effective were the sequences during the credits? What did they suggest about the world, society, the individual? Did Mickey One represent modern man? Of what was Mickey One guilty?

7. What comment on organised religion and charity did the sequence of the meal and Bible reading make?

8. How did the physical environments of Chicago and Detroit contribute to the meaning of the film?

9. Was Mickey One a good comic? Note his talk with Jenny about acting and trying to be an ideal self.

10. What was the effect of the rehearsal without the audience, with the anonymous spotlight on him? Why did he run away?

11. What was the significance of the Japanese artist and his continual invitations? His work of art, "Yes", and its destruction?

12. Why were Castle and Fryer so anxious to have Mickey One at the Xanadu?

13. What had Mickey achieved when he finally opened at the Xanadu?

14. What was the meaning of the piano playing at the end - acceptance, success, failure, compromise?

MUGGERS

Australia, 1999, 95 minutes, Colour.
Jason Barry, Matt Day, Petra Jared, Nicola Charles, Chris Haywood, Caroline Gilmer.
Directed by Dean Murphy.

Muggers is a black comedy set in Melbourne. It focuses on two medical students and their hapless lives. They have some ambitions, but their studies and their lives are in a mess. They decide that they should try to hack into a computer to get answers for their exam - only to find they get information about an organ transplant market.

The film is farcical in tone, especially in its two central characters and their behaviour. Matt Day, veteran of a number of Australian films, is Brad, a promising student. Irish actor Jason Barry is more happy-go-lucky and leads Brad into all kinds of mischief and dangers. Chris Haywood plays Roy Rogers, the wheeler-dealer in organ transplants. Caroline Gilmer is Nurse Armstrong.

The film is amoral in its tone, in its portrait of the characters. However, when confronted by the moral issues of the organ market, they act in a kind of Robin Hood vein. The film was written and directed by Dean Murphy, who had made short films and television pilots and had released another film about two young friends, Lex and Rory.

1. The ironic aspects of Australian comedy? Larrikins? The black tone, amoral/moral comedy?

2. The use of the city of Melbourne, the streets, the universities, laboratories, classrooms? The world of studies? Flats and housing? The musical score?

3. The title, the muggers, Brad and Gregor and their mugging in a farcical manner as well as hijacking the organ trade? The social surgeons as muggers? The dealing in illegal transplant organs? The Robin Hood tone to the film?

4. The prologue, the introduction to the characters, their situations, the tone? Organs, illness, kidneys and transplants?

5. Brad and Gregor, their age, studies? Their lives in a mess? Hungry? Going to the lectures? Their not doing well in their studies? Nigel's attack on the professor? At home, the apartment, squalor and noise?

6. The film's comment about health, medicine, doctors? Legal situations, illegal?

7. The professor, Belinda, the computer? Hacking in? The professor and the organ deals?

8. The start, the Italian and sirens? Crawford and death?

9. Roy Rogers and his associates? The money? Sophie and the loan? The types, toughs? The hospital and Nurse Armstrong? The death, the taking of the organs, taking of the liver? The corpses?

10. The ambulance and the thugs, Nurse Armstrong, the pursuit and chase? The nurse and her buying?

11. The industry, the money, Brad and Gregor getting in on the act? The flat, the golf and Nigel? The professor and his permission about the exam? Roy Rogers?

12. Sophie, relationships, sexual encounter? The photos, pregnancy?

13. The professor, the promises, the issue of the liver?

14. The final fight, the police?

15. Brad and Gregor as personalities, their characters, their hopes, amoral tone? Moral judgments and behaviour? The irony of the dog eating the liver?

16. The entertainment value of farce and spoof, characters and satire?

A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH (STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN)

UK, 1946, 104 minutes, Black and white/Colour.
David Niven, Kim Hunter, Robert Coote, Kathleen Byron, Richard Attenborough, Bonar Colleano, Marius Goring, Roger Livesey, Abraham Sofaer, Raymond Massey.
Directed by Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger.

A Matter of Life and Death is considered one of the major works by The Archers, the team of writers-directors Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger. Beginning work before World War Two, they came to great fame and attention with several films during the war especially the controversy concerning The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (with Roger Livesey). They also made One of Our Aircraft Is Missing as well as A Canterbury Tale.

This was their post-war film, a memoir of the war with a pilot being shot down after a bombing raid, opening his parachute but, finding that it was his time to die. Since he was not found for twenty hours and had been in contact by radio with an American working in London, his trial is to be argued in the Heavenly Court to see whether he would have another chance at life or not. This is a blend of fantasy and realism.

David Niven is perfectly cast as the British pilot. Kim Hunter at the beginning of her career (an Oscar for A Streetcar Named Desire in 1951) is the American. On the fantasy side Kathleen Byron is an angel and Marius Goring is the conductor for the downed pilot. On the realism side there was Richard Attenborough, Robert Coote and Roger Livesey.

The film is rather rhetorical at times. However, the dialogue offers strong characterisation as well as arguments about life and death, the meaning of life and wider questions of the universe.

The film is considered to be one of the great British films of the 1940s.

1. The emphasis, thematic tone of the title? The American title was Stairway to Heaven. A better title?

2. The film had great impact at the end of World War II. Why? It has had popularity and status since. Comment on the skill of the film, its high points, aspects of bathos in the fantasy? Why was it popular in the 40s? Later?

3. How well did the film contrast realism and fantasy? How well did it blend them? The use of colour for earth, monochrome for heaven? How did this aid the contrast and the blending?

4. The significance of the initial caption commenting on the two worlds? The imagining of the long journey through the universe, the philosophising about the universe and its meaning? The imagination of heaven and its visualising? What kind of heaven was presented?

5. How realistic was the situation? Audience response to Peter, his war mission, the bombed plane, the dead comrades, his expectations of death? How warm were the conversations he had with June? June and her helplessness, Peter and his cheerfulness before death? The significance of this encounter, a basis for love? The interrelationship between love and death? Peter and his expectations about death and these forming a basis for his fantasies?

6. The contrast with earth, the beach, the shepherd boy and his music, June and her bike, Peter and his sense of reality after his experience of almost-death?

7. How satisfactory in realistic terms was the explanation of the dream and the hallucinations? The relationship between the mind and hallucinations, the basis for such creation of images? How credible with David Niven's performance as Peter? his sensible approach to things, even his hallucinations? The contribution of Frank as friend and doctor? His reasonableness and knowledge of medicine? June and the experience finding Peter alive, falling in love with him, her compassion and wanting to help? The nature of the hallucinations? The relationship between brain and spirit? The human spirit facing life? in the act of death? A man feeling the experience of dying and the desire to live?

8. The heaven sequences and the types of people there? Bob and his jovial waiting for Peter to arrive? The various soldiers arriving after their deaths in the war? The atmosphere of heaven as a rather, large hotel and recreation centre? The discussions about justice and the time for dying? The personality of the conductor, his French background and the 20th century? An engaging personality or not? His mission?

9. The importance of the encounters between Peter and the conductor? Their discussion about life and death? The conductor proving his authenticity to Peter, and yet the audience knowing this was Peter's interpretation? The irony of time standing still, June and Frank standing still e.g. at the table tennis? Peter unable to ring the bell? The conflict expressed through this in Peter's brain and imagination?

10. The personality of June and her contribution to Peter's welfare? The American background and Anglo-American? relationships? The personality of Frank, his concern and friendship, his sensible approach? The representing of love and health?

11. The dramatic impact and irony of Frank's death? His death for Peter? His being unable to be the defender?

12. How well did the film build up suspense in Peter's struggle not to die, not to be taken by the conductor, to hang on to life despite the persuasions of the conductor and his experience of the people from heaven? Frank's wisdom in helping him to stay alive?

13. How successful was the visualising of the operation, the subjective approach from the point of view of Peter on the operating table, his imagination coming alive and stepping out of the surgery? The irony of the surgeon being the heavenly judge? The counterbalancing of the operation sequences with the imagined heaven and trial?

14. How significant was the trial? Frank's decision that the night the trial was on was necessary for the operation? The elaborate preparation, the stairway to and from heaven, the American prosecutor and his American background and hostility to the English? The verbalising in his defence? Moralising about philosophy and history? The jury and the changeover, the irony of the nations represented in America? The people at the trial? The importance of calling June to the trial? What did she prove? Her willingness to give her life for Peter and the meaning of love?

15. How important were the moralisings about Anglo-American? relationships? In the past, during the war, the background of the modern world? The irony of Frank and the defender discussing the modern world, listening to the pop songs? Pretentious? How informative?

16. The final moral about life, and the dedication of love?

17. A satisfying parable, satisfactory moralising? The background of optimism and hope?

THE MAN WHO UNDERSTOOD WOMEN

US, 1959, 135 minutes, Colour.
Leslie Caron, Henry Fonda, Marcel Dalio.
Directed by Nunnally Johnson.

The Man Who Understood Women was based on a novel by Romain Gary. Gary wrote a number of screenplays adapting some of his novels like Lady L. He also directed his wife, Jean Seberg, in Birds Come to Die in Peru.

This film has a Hollywood setting, an insight into the lives of a director, an actress – and with the usual exploration of themes of marriage and fidelity and infidelity.

The film was directed by screenwriter Nunnally Johnson who, from 1954 to 1960, directed a number of films including The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit.

1. The meaning of the title in its context? The irony of this title and its tone for the film?

2. How well did the film explore its sharp theme about Hollywood and human relationships and careers? Was there too much lost in the romantic and lush style? The colour, music, widescreen, locations etc?

3. Was the flashback technique successful? Arousing audience interest in Anne and the falling for Willie? Sympathies and values at the beginning of the film and their changes during the film?

4. Was it easy to identify with Anne at the beginning of the film? Her sympathies at the hospital, her being told the truth, the flashbacks to the test, to her drunkenness, the Cinderella overtones of her rise to fame, success and its effect on her, her falling in love with Willie, her disappointment in him, the choice about career and marriage, the marriage itself, her growing hardness towards Willie and its cruelty, the growing success over the years, the romantic love and its appeal to her, its effect on her and hurting her, coming to a knowledge of her real self via all this trouble and the melodrama of Willie's murder attempt? Was Anne a real character and was she well explored?

2. Did the film explore Willie well? Initial sympathy for his injuries, his career and its outline, Academy Awards etc, his interest in Ann, his kindness to her, the irony of his prediction about the telephone calls, masterminding her success, the effect on him, his response to her love, his verbalizing his feelings and yet the contrast of his actions, his deals and his not fulfilling the marriage? the clash of personalities, his continual concern? The jealousy and the murder attempt? How melodramatic was this? The irony that true knowledge had to come through such suffering?

6. The theme of wasted time, whose fault was it, the fact that it came to near-tragedy for love and understanding?

7. The character of Marco? His typical romantic fear? His reason for the affair with Ann? The reason for his leaving her? Its effect on her?

8. Willie and his relationship to his adviser? The irony of his not being able to listen to advice? The ironic way in which it was given?

9. How interesting was the Hollywood background of the film? Hollywood society which proclaims the phoney? The producer on the alert for deals, the signing, of contracts, the life of the pictures themselves compared with real life etc?

10. How much insight into people, love, hurt, and using people, knowledge and suffering did the film give?

MAN WITHOUT A COUNTRY

US, 1973, 78 minutes, Colour.
Cliff Robertson, Beau Bridges, Peter Strauss, Robert Ryan, Walter Abel, Geoffrey Holder, Sheppard Strudwick.
Directed by Delbert Mann.

The Man Without a Country is a very moving telemovie. It offers a good role to Cliff Robertson (who had won an Oscar for Charlie in 1968) as a man who was disgusted with the animosities of the Civil War and wanted to renounce his citizenship. After a court-martial, the compromise was that he was to be put on board a ship and to sail the world, never setting foot on any country.

Cliff Robertson leads a strong cast which includes such veterans as Robert Ryan and Walter Abel. It is a different perspective on the American Civil War – and is interesting insofar as it was made during the Vietnam War.

The film was directed by Delbert Mann, who had won an Oscar for Marty in 1955, directed a number of significant films including Separate Tables and The Dark at the Top of the Stairs and who, in the 1970s, concentrated a long career on significant telemovies.

1. The standard of this television movie? Its impact on an American audience, nonAmericans audience?

2. The contribution of colour, 19th century atmosphere, the naval settings and the background of the sea?

3. What was the purpose of the film? Fiction about the American past, a modern application, especially in terms of 20th century American deserters and soldiers and patriotism? How convincing?

4. The emphasis of the title, the overtones of patriotism and disloyalty? How did the film present the nature of true patriotism and false patriotism? The significance of Aaron Burr and his conflict with Jefferson? Nolan and his loyalty to Burr, the talk about nationalism in America in the 19th Century? The patriotism that motivated Nolan's judges and persecutors? The patriotism in the officers who had sworn oaths of loyalty and could not talk about America with Nolan?

5. The importance of the sequence of the slaves and their liberation, Nolan being an instrument of liberation and getting them returned home? The scene of longing for home and country? The historical setting and the fanaticism of Aaron Burr? The close-ups of his long patriotic speeches, his greed for Texas, hostility to Jefferson, the question of the one vote? The background of Texas and its annexation? How credible was Burr, the fierce loyalty that he aroused in men like Nolan, the stances that they took?

6. The contrast of the two trials ? Burr and the justice of his being freed? The hostility of the patriots towards him and their harsh application of justice towards Nolan? The consequences for Nolan and the sense of proportion? What comment on the presuppositions of judges did the film make, their impartiality and their prejudice?

7. How successful was the commentary technique of the film: by Vaughan, Ingham and Danforth? Nolan looked at from the point of view of these three men? The audience attitude in sharing the views of these three men? Proving that the three men had the right view of Nolan?

8. The atmosphere of exile, the visual presentation of the seas, the long passing of time, the effect of this long exile and lack of home for Nolan, his cabins in the ships, the fact that he was not allowed to talk? His longing for home and mention of it? The device of taking various states out of the map and his knowledge of what was happening? The impact of the long history given to him at the end?

9. Cliff Robertson's performance as Nolan, how humane, genuine? What feelings did he elicit for the man, his youthful brashness, his punishment, his patriotism? As a fierce young man on the side of Burr suffering injustice, the rash remarks that he made in the court and the consequences of these for half a century? The presentation of him at work, the ship, helping in war and his military skill? the military decoration, his helping in the work of healing? The reasons for Vaughan's admiration? Ingham and the detailed scene of what he learnt from Nolan and the gaps of the years? Danforth and his admiration and his final decision to tell the history?

10. Audience admiration for Nolan as a scholar and a gentleman, the humiliation of the woman at the dance at Naples? discussions about patriotism and America at the table? Nolan and his learning and his use of languages? his encounter with the slavers and his helping them to go home, a man of healing,. a wanderer moving from ship to ship and aging?

11. Audience response to the sequence where Ingham sought the pardon, the double talk of the secretary for the Navy, the fear of a prosecution by Nolan if he were pardoned? Legal justice and the talk of sympathy with no action? Audience hostility towards these attitudes? Was the film impartial here or did it present its point of view with justice?

12. Why was Nolan's death sequence moving? His burial at sea and the memorial?

13. A valuable fictional piece of American history, the human element, the interplay of politics and patriotism, fears? A parable about a hero?

THE MUSIC LOVERS

UK, 1970, 122 minutes, Colour.
Richard Chamberlain, Glenda Jackson, Christopher Gable.
Directed by Ken Russell.

The Music Lovers is an extraordinary attempt to tell something of Tchaikovsky’s life in terms of his music. Many of the sequences of this film are not straight biography but imaginative reconstruction of what was, or might have been, visualised on screen to the rhythm and flow of the music. This is a constant delight although some devices may be considered quite inappropriate and out of harmony with the meaning of the music. The rendition of the 1812 is ingenious - the rout and flight of all the characters most closely associated with the composer and his triumph in liberated Moscow as he begins a new, free life in conducting. Most people know enough about the 1812 to understand whether this is good and legitimate or not. There are many other examples and one leaves the film with the sense of having shared the intense experiences of a musician.

On the narrative level the film is mature. Tchaikovsky’s homosexuality, being patronised by Madame Von Mech, his attempt at marriage to Nina - a nymphomaniac who disintegrates into insanity, are strong meat psychologically and director. Ken Russell, pulls few punches, especially with Glenda Jackson (after her Oscar for Russell's - Women in Love) acting the part of Nina with an enormous range of intensity and emotion.. Some have found her railway carriage scenes where, drunk and mystified by her husband, she desperately tries to arouse him, too much. However, it is consistent with the exuberant and spirited nature of the whole film. Richard Chamberlain portrays the composer well. Russell has tried to understand Tchaikovsky and his genius to help us appreciate the suffering of a creator who does not feel at one with the world except in his music.

1. How was Tchaikovsky's music used in the film? It almost becomes one of the characters, continually present, commenting on the ideas, imagination and actions of the characters. How was this done? Were the various devices effective? Did it continually set the mood of the film?

2. What were the initial impressions of Tchaikovsky as a person - drinking, revelling, musician, public image?

3. The Piano Concerto was given at some length. Comment on what was shown on the screen concerning happy aspects of the composer's life and the fantasies of Nina's imagination. Did this correspond to the mood of the music?

4. What control did Tchaikovsky’s brother and sister have over him? Was their influence, love and devotion helpful or not? What was the meaning of Tchaikovsky's memories of his mother's death? How had her love and death affected him?

5. How infatuated was Tchaikovsky with the Count? How strong was his desire to be 'normal'?

6. Madam Von Mech was Tchaikovsky’s benefactress in real life. Comment on her actions, infatuation, romantic and seemingly overdone nineteenth century posturing - especially towards the end.

7. What kind of woman was Nina? What did her imagination reveal about her?

8. How convincing was the interplay of Nina's letter-writing and the composition of the letter-writing score of Eugene Onegin?

9. Why was the marriage a failure? What was the point of shoving the first day of the honeymoon at length and then the railway carriage sequence? Was this sequence overdone, in good taste?

10. Was Tchaikovsky cruel to Nina? Was his holiday the best course of action?

11. What happened to Nina and her mother? Did Nina show any signs of madness before her marriage? Did she still love Tchaikovsky?

12. Why did Madame Von Mech abandon the composer? Comment on the way this vas communicated cinematically.

13. The 1812 - did you think this fantasy in the composer's mind was well done or eccentric? This sequence, however, served to summarise his rejection of those who had preyed on his life and gave him a new beginning.

14. Nina in the asylum - did you pity her, struggling for slops to eat and seeing her face looking out from the final credits?

15. What influence did his brother, Maxime, have on Tchaikovsky in the last years of his life? Why did Tchaikovsky drink the infected water? How humiliated did he feel when his symphony was labelled 'pathetic'?

16. Much of the film was flamboyant, postured, romantic, melodramatic. Was this out of place? How did the film's style convey the mood and attitudes of late nineteenth century aristocratic Russia?

THE MIRACLE WORKER.

US, 1962,106 minutes, Black and white.
Anne Bancroft, Patty Duke, Victor Jory, Inga Swenson, Andrew Prine.
Directed by Arthur Penn.

The Miracle Worker is the striking film about Annie Sullivan and her pupil, Helen Keller. It is powerful with a great deal of emotional impact. The story itself, in some of its details and in the inhuman and hopeless treatment of severely handicapped children, seems rather unbelievable nowadays. It certainly highlights the heroism of Annie Sullivan and pays tribute to the extraordinary success of her work.

Anne Bancroft, an extraordinary actress in her later films like - The Pumpkin Eater; The Graduate; Young Winston - gives her Oscar-winning performance here. So does the young Patty Duke. Victor Jory's performance, however, is rather strident. The director is Arthur Penn, who also directed - The Chase, Bonnie and Clyde, Little Big Man.

1. Did you agree with the title? What values did this film present and uphold?

2. What was the dramatic impact of the film? How positive in outlook was it, especially regarding the value of living, affirmation of the challenge of life?

3. What did the film show of strength, psychological and physical courage? How important is this theme?

4. Helen Keller - the sorrow of her early illness, the fact that she seemed like a human animal for so many years, the way she was spoilt, loved, feared? Her violence, response to her parents, to Annie Sullivan? The importance of the meal sequence, her fears, energies, yearnings? The sequences where she learnt the use of hands and faces for communication? The joy of understanding and the possibility of becoming human. How impressive was Patty Duke's performance?

5. Annie Sullivan - what kind of woman was she - admirable? Her background -flashbacks, her brother, their suffering, disabilities, life in the institution and her reaction? Her brother's death? The problem with her eyes, her glasses and determination to see? Her courage, love, sensitivity? Her immediate response to Helen, loving, yet firm? Why was she so determined to make Helen sit down and eat with cutlery? The details of her technique in teaching Helen, first by rote, then hoping for understanding, learning the alphabet, joy where Helen understands what water is? The final embrace sequence and reward for Annie? How impressive was Anne Bancroft's performance?

6. The Kellers - was their reaction to Helen understandable? Were they just impatient or merely ignorant of how to treat her? What sacrifices did they make for the treatment of Helen and what was expected of Annie Sullivan? The impact of the reward of their love when Helen realised they were her parents?

7. Was the atmosphere of the film well communicated: black and white photography, music, the southern states? Some critics said the film was melodramatic. Do you agree?

8. Despite its faults, the film had many successful sequences and two excellent performances. What impressed you most about the film?

THE MEPHISTO WALTZ

US, 1971, 108 minutes, Colour.
Alan Alda, Jacqueline Bissett, Barbara Parkins, Curt Jurgens, Kathleen Widdoes, Bradford Dillman, William Windom.
Directed by Paul Wendkos.

The Mephisto Waltz is in the devil-worship, psychological thriller genre like Rosemary's Baby. It does not have religious overtones and so is not controversial. Rather, it concentrates on telling a story and creating an atmosphere. There is a minimum of satanic paraphernalia, but a great deal of menacing detail that builds up suspense and fear. Jacqueline Bissett plays Paula, an ordinary housewife, whose husband, Myles, undergoes a strange personality transformation that turns him into a great pianist. This is the result of contact between himself and a strange father and daughter. The mysterious element of the film is balanced by the matter-of-fact, commonsense attitude of Paula until she begins to dream, then there are deaths and she is drawn into the world of devil-worship. The ending is alarming. There is always a curious fascination about the occult, evil powers and superstition. This film raises questions in a contemporary setting which makes it a little more frightening. Good entertainment but not for the too impressionable.

1. What were the implications of the title? Was this just another horror story or was there any more serious intent behind it?

2. Who was the central character of the film, Myles or Paula? Does it matter?

3. Did this film frighten you with its implications of the influence of Satan?

4. Why was Paula portrayed as normal and sceptical - did it highlight the actions of Myles and Roxanne, and thus make the ending more frightening?

5. Did you like Myles? Was he ambitious? Why was he attracted to Duncan Ely?

6. What did you think of Duncan Ely and Roxanne? What was wrong with them?

7. The witchcraft of Duncan Ely and Roxanne? Is it possible for the soul of one person to take over the personality and soul of another?

8. How did the film build up its atmosphere?

9. Did the music convey atmosphere and inspiration to the film?

10. Were the dreams sequences handled well?

11. How did Myles bring forth the personality of Duncan Ely?

12. Why was Abby part of the bargain with the devil?

13. What was the point of the interlude with Bill Delancey? How did he contrast with Myles?

14. What made Paula neurotic? Was it the preceding events and the fear that she too would be murdered? Comment on her visit to steal the oil and the fight and murder of the dog?

15. What drove Paula into witchcraft - love, jealousy, fear, neurosis? Did she contact Satan?

16. Were you horrified at what Paula did?

17. What was the significance of the ending?

18. Is this type of film 'healthy' entertainment? Does it criticise superstition or foster it?

19. Is this kind of film a parable about the complexity of human emotions and desperation?

METELLO

Italy, 1970, 105 minutes, Colour.
Massimo Ranieri, Ottavia Piccioli, Tina Aumont.
Directed by Mauro Bolognini.

Metello is a fine film from Italian director, Mauro Bolognini. It is based on a novel by noted writer, Vasco Pratolini. Metello succeeds in its vivid and frequently beautiful re-creation of Florence at the turn of the century. In muted colours, the city and the river are continually there, enveloping the audience in their moods and atmosphere. It is not the Florence of the Duomo and the panorama from the surrounding hills. Rather, it is the Florence of the orange buildings, the river flats and the workers.

Metello is a political film, and a successful one. Immersed as we are in the life of the working man's Florence, we share the feelings of the builder's labourers, their hard work, poor conditions and lack of regard by the employers, even those who have come up through the ranks of the labourers. Prison is an ever-present reality for Metello's anarchist father, for himself and his friends who espouse Marxist cause and ideas to win their case. A long, telling strike is the centre of the second half of the film and the victory of the workers, not without bloodshed, riots and more imprisonment.

The third success of Metello is in its presentation of its characters, and here the film comes through as a human experience rather than industrial or political propaganda. Metello himself, excellently played by Massimo Ranieri, is a young man of his times, with goals and ideals as well as weaknesses and lack of character. The other roles are played with restraint, rather than heavy Italian emotions. A moving and enjoyable experience with a social conscience.

1. This film was hailed by many critics as a masterpiece, beautifully presented as a human document about real people. Do you agree?

2. How did the visual presentation of Florence, the city, people, costumes, manners, impress you? How did they contribute to the feeling of the film and your appreciation of its issues? ,

3. Did the film itself preach ideology? Do you think the director followed any ideological beliefs?

4. How moving was the sequence of Metello's father coming out of prison, his immediate social concern and neglect of his wife? Did the cause demand such dedication?

5. How was Italy socially situated in 1900? Comment on the social unrest, anarchist protests, the need for emigration.

6. Did you like Metello? was he a good man? A good worker, naive? Why did he take up with Viola? What comment on Italian society and morals did this sequence make?

7. What did he learn during his national service? Did it give him experience for his work and political involvement?

8. Why did the police attack the funeral? Why did the workers riot?

9. How well did the film convey the love between Metello and Ersilia during the prison years - the women calling out to the prisoners, the letters.

10. Comment on Metello's marriage to Ersilia, the child and settling down. Was this a good picture of the style and quality of the period?

11. How did Idina affect their lives - her chatter, well-to-do status, affair with Metello? Why did he have the affair with her?

12. How did Olindo affect their lives - sharing their house, a moderating influence- at work?

13. Did you sympathise with Metello's political and industrial stands? Did the workers have a just case? Were the employers unjust - even those who had worked their way up from labouring? What role did Del Buono play?

14. Was the strike justified? Did it bring home to you the reality and hardships of a strike, the need of moral courage?

15. How was Metello's infidelity to Ersilia linked with his failure to be present at a crucial meeting to influence the workers?

16. Did you understand the final clash of employers and employees?

17. Why did Ersilia forgive Metello? Did he deserve it?

18. What was the significance of repeating the opening sequence with Metello coming out of prison as his father had done? Should he have continued with his political activity? What future did you see for Metello and Ersilia? Why?

McCABE AND MRS MILLER

US, 1971, 120 minutes, Colour.
Warren Beatty, Julie Christie, Michael Murphy, Rene Auberjonois.
Directed by Robert Altman.

Mc Cabe and Mrs. Miller is an unusual western that would not appeal to everyone. It is a frontier story of an early settlement called Presbyterian Church, but traced mainly through the history of its saloon and brothel. The settings are wintry, snow, primitive conditions and the hard life. In this situation, Robert Altman shows and explores something of the origins of the west, the enterprise of the individual and being taken over by moneyed power. The theme is that of U.S. society as a whole.

Robert Altman rose to fame through his irreverent satire, M*A*S*H, which showed two individual surgeons serving the madness of organised war in clowning and lunacy on the isolated Asian war frontier. His next film was Brewster Mc Cloud where the individual hero tried to develop wings to fly above U.S. society but was continually persecuted by power, tradition, manipulation etc. Unlike the heroes of M*A*S*H, Brewster is destroyed by society. So is McCabe?, the victim individual, who is beaten by Mrs Miller and her sophistication (and finally drugged indifference) and by money and power. Dialogue and sound technique are designed to give an authentic air to the film, but may irritate because of difficulty in hearing. Warren Beatty is a good McCabe?. Julie Christie received an Oscar nomination for her Mrs Miller.

1. What was the style of life in Presbyterian Church? What aspects of American frontier life did it typify?

2. How did Robert Altman portray the style of life - comment on the subdued use of colour, darkness, spontaneous conversations that were hard to understand, the weather, the frank and coarse language and manners?

3. How did Sheahan and his house typify Presbyterian Church before Mc Cabe cams?

4. How did Mc Cabe change Presbyterian Church? He brought a basic brothel there - did he bring anything else?

5. How did Mc Cabe see himself as a businessman? did his reputation as a gun-fighter help?

6. What kind of woman was Mrs Miller? How did she show Mc Cabe up as an amateur? Why did she think men needed trappings of luxury and would pay for them? How did she treat her girls?

7. What was the role of the Church building and its steeple in the town? Were the Negro couple typical citizens?

8. What was the relationship between Mc Cabe and Mrs Miller?

9. Why did the profiteers want to buy out Mc Cabe and why did he stand up to them at first? Was he bluffing or foolhardy?

10. Why did the lawyer persuade Mc Cabe to take a stand? Did Mc Cabe think he could win? How did he symbolise the little man against the overwhelming power of the big man?

11. Why did the minister threaten Mc Cabe?

12. What was the significance of the gunfight in the snow, while the Church burnt and the people were busy?

13. What was the significance of Mc Cabe shooting the gunmen, being shot and unable to reach help?

14. What was the significance of the last shot of Mrs Miller and the drugs?

15. Was this a message film and if so what was the message? Was it effectively communicated?