ONCE UPON A TIME IN ANATOLIA

Turkey, 2011, 150 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Nuri Bilge Ceylan.

Ceylan is probably Turkey’s best-known director today. He has featured with most of his films at the Cannes Festival and has won the director’s prize there for Three Monkeys. He also won the Grand Jury Prize for Distant and in 2011 for the present film. However, he is known in the art film world rather than at the multiplexes and his films and their style are an acquired taste.

His films often have quite a long running time – and are quite unhurried, often with a lingering gaze at characters in close-up or at landscapes. The audience has plenty of time to contemplate, reflect and be immersed in the world that Ceylan invites them into.

This film runs for two and a half hours. The action takes place over one night and a morning – so plenty of time to offer detail. And the film does. It is detail about the search for the body of a murdered man – the police, soldiers, a doctor and the local prosecutor accompany the alleged killer to different sites in the rather barren mountains of Anatolia. There is a prologue with three men drinking and talking, then the credits, then a long shot of three cars, lights on, travelling the mountain road, then arriving at the first site. When we see the accused, we realise that it is a seemingly jovial friend that he has killed.

After some futile visits to possible burial places, the group spend the night in a village. Again, we have a long time to contemplate the mayor, his daughter, and what life, hospitality and cooking, are like in this remote town. There is an interesting discussion about the need for funding for a morgue – many emigrants to Europe have left their families behind and want to return at their deaths, often in a very hot summer. He makes a point.

When the body is recovered, there is quite a lot more detail, not just the forensic detail, but the problems in transferring the body since the group has neglected to bring a body bag. Later, there are sequences in the autopsy room.

There are enigmatic interludes, especially with the prosecutor asking the doctor’s opinion about the death of the wife of a friend (obviously telling his own story) as well as the relationship of the accused with the son of the dead man who is identified by his wife.

Films like this can alienate an impatient audience. They can fascinate those who surrender themselves.

1. Audience interest in the film: plot, characters, complications? Life in Turkey?

2. The director and his reputation, international? Many awards? His art style?

3. Anatolia/Turkey: audience knowledge, audience ignorance? The remoteness of eastern Turkey? Villages, poverty? Cities? Changes in the 21st century? The look of Anatolia, by night, by day? Hills, fields, barren landscapes? The small fountains? The village? Houses and interiors? The lack of electricity? The contrast with the city, exteriors, overview, offices, the hospital, the morgue? The finale – an ordinary town, the children playing at school? The musical score?

4. The basic plot: simplicity, murder, search and failure, night, morning, finding the body, the forensic details, the morgue and autopsy?

5. The complexities: the introduction, the camera looking through the window, the three men talking, laughing? The gap of the credits? The night view, the cars in the distance, coming to search, Kenan and his saying he was drunk, not remembering where the body was buried? The chief of police and his harshness, Kenan and the touches of tenderness, his weeping, the issue of the boy, whose father? The victim, hogtied? The range of people, the condemnation of Kenan, the boy throwing the stone at him?

6. The plot concerning the chief: twenty years, getting tired, relationship with his wife, the boy at home, his mental disability, yet his high IQ? His questions? The chief needing to get away from home? Getting the pills for his son? His fatalism – that this was meant to be?

7. The story of the prosecutor, well-to-do, his work and expertise, his telling the story to the doctor of the woman who died, her pregnancy, the moment of her death? The issue of the husband having an affair and his wife seeing him? The pregnancy, giving birth, cuddling the child, death? The issue of pills? The doctor’s explanation – and the father-in-law having such pills? The ruthlessness and the punishment of the husband – and the prosecutor telling his own story?

8. The story of the doctor, from the city, his work in the country, at the service of people, alone at home, shower, going to work? His explaining the death of the woman to the prosecutor? The morgue, the details of the autopsy – and his dictating that there was nothing wrong with the lungs even though the doctor had found dirt and the prospect that the victim was buried alive?

9. The range of police, Arab and his story, Izzet in charge of the prisoners, the group of soldiers, the secretary and his laptop? The people in the village, the search, the type? The issue of the body bag and its absence, getting the body into the boot?

10. Life in the village, the head, the mayor, his being re-elected, his story? Votes and his standing again? Hospitality, the lamb, the honey? His wanting a morgue, his explanation of migrants to Europe wanting to come back and see their dead parents, the heat of summer? His daughter, her work? The men looking at her, the comments that she would fade away in this village?

11. The victim’s wife, son, throwing the stone, the truth about his paternity? The woman identifying her husband, taking the clothes? The end and the boy kicking the football back to the children?

12. The details of the autopsy – and the ambiguity about the dirt found?

13. A film of meticulous detail, taking its time, offering audiences time to reflect? The effect on the audience experiencing this detail?
 

LA DELICATESSE / DELICACY

France, 2011, 105 minutes, Colour.
Audrey Tautou, Francois Damiens, Bruno Todeschini.
Directed by David Foenkinos and Stephane Foenkinos.

If you are fond of French romantic comedies and dramas, especially with that Gallic je-ne-sais-pas-quoi, you should enjoy La Delicatesse. It is the story of a loving romance and marriage which is broken by the tragic death of the husband in an accident, then the story of a lonely and grieving widow, then an unlikely romance where a lot of people become victims of their prejudices, unfavourably judging people by their appearance. Nothing particularly new, but that does not matter, because it is all nicely done.

It is a star vehicle for Audrey Tautou who entered moviegoers’ consciousness with her performance as Amelie of Montmartre in 2001. Since then she has appeared in a number of romantic films but also the World War I drama, A Very Long Engagement. She was also the co-star of The Da Vinci Code. Her role in La Delicatesse as Nathalie shows what she does best. Because she has that gamin, pixie face and slender build, she seems the embodiment of delicacy.

The early scenes of the film are full of the delight of romance and a happy marriage. After the shock of the death, she seems numbed and survives by her constant work. Friends, of course, urge her to make a new life. Her married boss makes advances.

Whether this happens only in French films –perhaps - she impetuously kisses one of her work team, a Swede who has lived in France for 15 years. He is, judging by appearances, quite an unprepossessing man. However, his rhapsody after being kissed, walking up a hill with all the girls looking at him to the tune of T Rex’s Get it On, is cut short when Nathalie declares she cannot remember kissing him and is all apologies. Francois Damiens as Markus is immensely likeable.

What follows is a genial growing in friendship despite the snide comments of her boss and even of her friends.

The ending is sweet, a touch of fantasy as Markus acknowledges Nathalie’s love for her husband and his own love for her. Happy ever after.

1. The title, French romantic comedy, delicate style?

2. The city settings, the contrast with the countryside, the cemetery? Apartments and offices? Bars and restaurants? The theatre? The musical score – the range of songs and their lyrics?

3. Audrey Tautou and her screen appeal? Nathalie at the opening, the cafe, Francois and his betting what she would choose, the joke about their reunion? His proposal? On his knees? Nathalie at the theatre, fooling around with Sophie? Her job? The collage of the wedding photos? The collage of their trips abroad? The meal with the respective parents, getting on well with them? Wanting to get rid of them, hoping for pregnancy? Casual, at home? Francois, his shorts, going jogging, his death? A genial character?

4. The funeral, both parents, Nathalie and her grief, wanting to be alone, bewildered, her mother bringing food, her going out?

5. The background of her job, the interview with Charles, her success in the office, hardworking, Chloe working with her? Her decision to come back to work? Going in to Charles – and his approach, the possibility of harassment? His taking her to dinner, his approach, her not being attracted to him, walking away, her apology and frank speaking to him? Her new job, gathering her team together, their success?

6. Markus as part of the group, from Sweden? His coming into Nathalie’s office, the sudden kiss? The effect on Markus, walking on a cloud, going up the street with all the women looking at him, T-Rex? and ‘Get it On’? The aftermath, the letdown, Nathalie asking him to forget, her apology?

7. The two talking, unlike but at ease with each other, the developing friendship, the outings?

8. Charles and his talk at the bar with Markus? Markus explaining that Nathalie enabled him to be his best self? Going to Sophie, the group, their disapproval?

9. Nathalie, the possibilities of a relationship? In the office, Charles rebuking her and mentioning Francois’ name?

10. Her leaving the office, leaving the planned meeting, driving to the countryside, Markus and his search for her – on the roof where they met and talked? Nathalie in the countryside, the place of her childhood, meeting Markus, the rain, going to her grandmother, changing into the old clothes, the soup, the night together?

11. In the garden, the game of hide and seek, Markus saying that he would hid in the stages of Nathalie’s life, their being visualised? Nathalie and her looking to the audience at the end?

12. Comedy and romance with the delicate touch, Gallic style?

VIVA KNIEVEL

Viva Knievel is a fact and fiction story about the motorcycle stuntman, Evel Knievel. There had been a film about him in 1971 where he is played by, of all actors, George Hamilton.

This film has some biographical material with Knievel playing himself. It has a strong supporting cast including Gene Kelly, Lauren Hutton, Leslie Nielsen. However, it also has a drug story, with an invitation to Knievel to perform, be killed, his body used for transporting cocaine across borders. This was 1977, a decade where there were many films about drug deals. This seems one of the most preposterous in terms of credibility

The film was directed by Gordon Douglas, a veteran of many action films from the 1940s to the 1980s.

There were several other films about Evel Knievel, including a telemovie in 2004. Knievel himself, after the period in which Viva Knievel was made, fell on hard times, was charged with assault and battery, became an alcoholic. He had something of a revival, especially with television commercials, and finally died in 2007.


1. The world reputation of EveI Knievel - how much is fact, how much fiction? His status and audience response to him?

2. There had been a previous biography of him. How did this film present him, make use of him? Thrust him upon his fans? Appropriately, enjoyably?

3. Audience response to the atmosphere of daring, the nature of dare-devilry? Bikes, stunts, people coming to watch and their expectations? How well was this communicated.? Sufficient stunt
work? The climax and the final chases?

4. How much could the film be considered biography? Predominantly fiction? Even if Knievel acting as himself?

5. The feelings of the opening with Knievel arriving, his Santa Claus behaviour, relationship with Sister Charity? Indication of a human story, the blend with action? Was this sufficiently weIl sustained throughout the film?

5. Evel and his skill, press releases, significance of the initial clash with Ben and his greed? The portrait of the greedy promoter?

7. The contribution of WilI Atkins to the film? Gene Kelly in this role? the importance of his past, Knievel’s reliance and tribute to him, his help? His doing the work? His alcoholism? The revelation
about Tommy and his blaming him for his wife’s death? The sequences showing his inability to relate to his son? His being used by Jesse and Millard? His relationship with Kate and her telling him the truth? His realization of his being used, his being victimized with the drugs? His participation in the final chase, the build-up to the reconciliation? How conventional a human story? How much value for the making of money? Sentiment, sentimentality?

8. The portrait of Kate as a photographer, her sneering and cynical attitude towards Knievel, their verbal clashes, emotional attraction? Her feminism anrd emphasis on Ms? Her presence, her reaction to his accident, her support, family intervention, her being kidnapped with Tommy? An inevitable happy ending? An attractive heroine suitable for this kind of film?

9 . Jesse and his relationship with Evel , background of friendship, rivals? Drugs and the drug world ? His ambitions and their being exploited? His duping Will Atkins and taking the photos? His involvement in the crooked deals, the changing of the caravan? His reaction to overhearing Millard and Courtland? The attitudle in knocking out Evel and going to his death? A heroic villain?

10. The portrait of Millard and Courtland as big business tycoons, as evil? Their plans personalities, ruthlessness? Their talk? their smoothing things over with Evel, exploiting his accident? Callously preparing his death for their own purposes? The irony of things going awry, the climax and their being chased? The plausibility of Jesse over hearing Courtland speaking so glibly? The contribution of Norman as the gun man, Bart and his mechanics, exploding the device, being present as hospital assistant, the participation in the chase?

11. The drug sequences and the hospital isolation of the will Atkins? The humor and stunt work of Evel’s breaking in, rescuing him?

12. Mexico, the crowds, the governor, the atmosphere of success? The radio and media commentators? What do people want to see?

13. The stunt work in the chase, will and his pursuit of the car, Evel and his skill in riding, over the terrain, the long sequence in the village as a useful display of stunt work and skill, the pursuit of the truck? How well did his feet into the atmosphere of the whole film? The happy ending with all of them out in the countryside?

14. A film of values, popular heroes, conventional attitudes towards good and evil, right and wrong? American sentiment, sentimentality, aspects of American corn?

DESIERTO ADENTRO / THE DESERT WITHIN

Mexico, 2008, 110 minutes, Colour.
Mario Zaragoza, Diego Catano.
Directed by Rodrigo Pla.

Desierto Adentro is set in the 1920s to the 1940s in Mexico. It was a period of fierce anticlericalism and persecution of the Catholic church. (Memories of Graham Greene’s The Power and the Glory).

The film opens in the 1920s with the suppression of the Catholic church, soldiers coming into villages, decapitating statues, forbidding people to wear religious emblems, sending the priests into the city – and executing many of those who did not obey orders.

Elias is the father of a family, quite devout in his way, whose wife is pregnant and in pain. He goes to the city to persuade the parish priest who had been exiled to come back and baptise the child. When he comes back, he blesses the mother, has to hide, but is arrested – and taken out and put before a firing squad to be shot.

Several of his family are also executed at the time and Elias starts to blame himself. The film is divided into several sections: guilt, repentance, the sign, the sign that did not come. This traces Elias’s religious experience as he takes his family into exile, builds a church over many years as a sign of repentance. He also keeps the child born from his dead wife inside, virtually a prisoner.

As the years pass, the boy grows older, has been in the care of his sister Micaela. When he gets out, they have a passionate relationship – which the father discovers and continues to blame himself and his children.

However, the boy questions this image of God. Elias’s God is a vindictive God – he punishes himself, even whipping himself, continually doing penance. However, disillusioned, he breaks down the church that he has built. His son is finally able to give voice to an alternate image of God, one who is merciful and forgiving, speaking of his father’s wrong beliefs.

The film has a dramatic location, in the village, in the desert. The film also uses animation many times throughout the film, summarising Elias’s story, the paintings of his son, as well as having Jesus talk from a crucifix. This gives a sense of surrealism to the plot and the characterisation.

Rodrigo Pla has made few films, but many of them significant including La Zona, La Demora. La Demora and Desierto Adentro have received awards from Signis, the World Catholic Association for Communication.

MOUCHETTE

France, 1967, 78 minutes, Black and white.
Nadine Nortier, Jean- Claude Guilbert, Marie Cardinal, Paul Hebert, Jean Vimenet.
Directed by Robert Bresson.

Mouchette comes rather later in Robert Bresson’s career. He is hailed by many film critics and commentators on culture as one of the great directors of the 20th century. Paul Schrader uses him as an example of transcendental film-making, austere, direct, luminous.

Bresson made his mark in the early 1950s with his Diary of a Country Priest, based on the novel by Georges Bernanos. He followed up in the 50s with such films as A Man Escaped and Pickpocket. He made four films in the 1960s, the first three considered classics: The Trial of Joan of Arc, Au Hasard Balthasar and Mouchette. He made five other films before he died, his last being L'Argent.

This film was also based on a novel by Bernanos, transferred from the 1930s to the 1950s. It gives something of a glimpse of what village life was like at that period, the town, the school, the bars, homes, the woods.

The film focuses on Nadine Nortier as Mouchette, a young teenager, in the need of affection, not receiving it from her father, caring for her sick mother and the other children. She is persecuted at school and gets revenge by throwing dirt at the schoolgirls. She works part-time in the bar, has a moment of joy in a dodgem car at the village fair – a rather prolonged sequence for what it was worth. However, she becomes entangled with a trapper in the woods, putting him on a pedestal, even after his abuse of her, defending him. However, she is someone who is very needy – and finishes by rolling down the hill – and into the river where she drowns.

1. A Bresson classic? French cinema? Transcendent cinema? The austerity of the film and its style of film-making? Minimal music?

2. The work of Georges Bernanos, transferring his story from the 1930s to the 1950s?

3. Black and white photography, the woods, the village, bar, home, school? The village fair – and the editing of the dodgem car sequence?

4. The title, the focus on the girl, a portrait, her hard life, experiencing physical disabilities, abuse? Her death?

5. The opening with the trap, Mathieu, the local policeman, watching Arsene? The snare, the bird going into the trap, the details of its struggle, finally getting free? Flying away? An image of Mouchette, the traps, her struggle, her getting away – but only by escaping from the village?

6. Mathieu, the policeman, in the bar, his relationship with Louisa? His wife? Warning Arsene? The clash with Arsene?

7. Arsene, the hunter, his attention to Louisa? In the woods, his hut, the clash with Mathieu, the wrestling, thinking he had killed Mathieu? Trying to get an alibi? Using Mouchette? Taking her home?

8. Mouchette at home, the opening with her ill mother, her father and his indifference, touches of brutality, the other children, Mouchette’s care, cooking, working? The work in the bar, the money, the drink?

9. Mouchette at school, the singing class, the hostility of the teacher, her false note, being dragged in front of the class? The girls laughing? Her going into the ditch, throwing earth at them? Hiding from them?

10. Sunday, the bar, the gift, her going on the dodgem car? Flirting with the young boy?

11. The woods, at night, the rain, Arsene, taking her home, her shoe in the mud, drying her off, the physical and sexual abuse? The effect on her?

12. The interrogation, Arsene and suspicions? Mathieu not dead? Mouchette and her claims of the relationship with Arsene? Her neediness for affection?

13. Her going to the woods, rolling down the hill, rolling into the water, the close-up of the water?

14. The impact of the film? Portrait of a young girl? Her harsh life, the need for love? Not receiving it?
 

THE HOUSE OF THE SPIRITS

US/Denmark, 1993, 140 minutes, Colour.
Meryl Streep, Glenn Close, Jeremy Irons, Winona Ryder, Antonio Banderas, Vanessa Redgrave, Maria Conchita Alonso, Armin Mueller- Stahl, Teri Polo, Vincent Gallo, Jan Niklas, Sarita Choudhury.
Directed by Bille August.

The House of the Spirits is Isabel Allende’s well-known and respected novel. It is a panoramic tale of Chile for almost half a century, from the old-fashioned class differences of the 1920s to the overthrow of the Allende government and the torture and oppression of 1973.

Danish-born Bille August (Oscar winner for Pele the Conqueror, director of Ingmar Bergman’s memoir, Best Intentions, director of the Liam Neeson-Geoffrey? Rush Les Miserables) seems an unlikely choice for the adapter of this Latin-American? novel. He has made a somewhat stately epic of a vibrant culture, always interesting to watch.

This is complicated by the international cast and European locations (Portugal for Chile, Copenhagen studios for interiors). Jeremy Irons (age and accent, covering the fifty years) takes some getting used to in the central role of the self-made landowner and eventual conservative senator, though by the end of the film he seems to have grown into the role.

Meryl Streep has less to do as his spirit-psychic wife, though, of course, she does it well. Glenn Close, however, is most impressive as the oppressed and repressed sister-housekeeper. Winona Ryder does well as a representative of the modern generation caught up with the reform and revolution, stirred by her lover, played by Antonio Banderas in an early Hollywood role. Vanessa Redgrave brings dignity to the role of the mother, Armin Mueller-Stahl? as the father.

Fans of the novel will have much to comment on and criticise but those who see the film without reading the novel will probably find it a dramatic opportunity to understand a little more of the social and class history of 20th century Chile.

1. The work of Isabel Allende, literary work, adaptation for the screen?

2. Chile in the 20th century, the conservative decades, the movement to the left? The election of Salvador Allende? The CIA and the conservatives moving with the army to overthrow the government? The consequent repression? Audience attitudes towards the political stances?

3. The scope of the film: family saga, the 1920s to 1970s, the range of politics, economics, mores, the different generations? South America and the rest of the world, southern hemisphere issues?

4. The recreation of Chile, the countryside, the hacienda, poverty, the mines, the towns, the cars and changing fashions? Indications of change? Buildings, crops, wealth? Peasant life? Post-war Chile, prosperous, the changes? The political world? The army? The musical score and its moods?

5. The title, the focus on Clara, her gifts, her prophecies, her clients, her life and her indicating dangers to come, the link between one world and the other, the interventions of spirits in the ordinary world?

6. The opening, 1973, Esteban and Blanca travelling through the desert, their relationship and tensions, going to the house, the memoirs of the past?

7. Blanca, her voice-over, the story of herself, Clara, her parents? The story of Esteban and his achievement?

8. Esteban’s story, his age at the beginning of the film, his appearance, young and energetic, courting Rosa, Clara as a little girl in attendance, her love for him, his work, hard work in the mines, discovering the silver, his return, Rosa’s death and Clara’s prophecy? The parents and their receiving Esteban? Esteban, the money, going to his property, building the hacienda, his working with the peasants, over the twenty years, prospering, his hard work – and demands on the peasants?

9. Clara, her life, her gift of prophecy, sense of the spirits, a sense of death, Rosa’s dying, her blaming herself? Keeping silent, not speaking? The portrait of her parents? The sadness of their death? Her love for Esteban, his coming to court her, her speaking, happiness, marriage?

10. The new life, Esteban and his working the peasants harder, Clara and the birth of Blanca? The school, her work with the peasants, Segundo and his support? Esteban his reaction, banning her from teaching? Closing the school? Blanca running to the river, the swim, with Pedro, Esteban exiling Pedro?

11. The portrait of Ferula? With her mother, her mother’s size and illness, Ferula serving her? Esteban and his visit, going away and avoiding his mother? Her mother’s severity? Her mother’s death? Ferula as the poor spinster, the insults from Esteban? Her coming to the house, her attitudes, suspicions of Clara? Meeting her for tea and cakes and changing attitude? The bond between the two women? Her work in the house, the aunt, with Blanca? Her love for Clara, her tenderness? Her observing Clara and Esteban in the bedroom? Her going to confession, talking about herself, the sexual pressures? The reaction of the priest? Her comforting Clara? On the bed, Esteban’s reaction, banishing her? Her going away, the sadness of her life, the loneliness of her death? A portrait of an unhappy woman?

12. Post-war Chile, Blanca and her teenage, going away to the convent? The holidays, coming home, meeting Pedro secretly? Their trysts together? Her pregnancy? Esteban and his banishing Pedro? Pedro’s return, Esteban shooting at him? His reprimanding of Segundo?

13. Pedro as an adult, his life with the peasants, his speeches, the revolution? Esteban and the peasants, the confrontation, Pedro’s escape?

14. Esteban and his being invited to become a senator, his conservative attitudes as he grew older, his attitudes towards the country, patriotism, the rights of the aristocracy, their privileges? His oppressive attitudes? His not understanding the 1960s?

15. The election campaign, the results, the victory of the Left? Joy and celebration? Blanca and her happiness, watching the television?

16. The backlash by the conservatives, US help, the CIA? The generals and their army takeover? The coup? The brutality? The arrests? Their coming to the home, arresting Blanca? The torture? Her half-brother and his torturing her, her not knowing this? Esteban trying to influence the government, the army taking his car, his having to deal with the soldiers? Admitting he was so wrong about what could happen?

17. The subplot about Pancha Garcia, Esteban and his sexual frustration, his assaulting her, her pregnancy? Her son, his coming to the house, tampering with Blanca, her being stopped? Esteban dismissing him? His coming to the house, wanting help to join the army? Esteban’s help? His getting power, his torture of Blanca? Double motivation?

18. Clara, the years passing, separating from Esteban, refusing to speak to him, using a mediator, the meals? Her being alone, supporting Blanca? The birth of the daughter? The love for her husband, his finally coming home, her death?

19. Blanca, her pregnancy, the daughter, relationship with Pedro, his being sent away? Her asking Esteban to help him? Hiding in the basement, Esteban organising his escape? The embrace?

20. The 1970s, disaster for Chile, oppression, poverty, Blanca and Esteban finally returning to the hacienda?

21. Two and a half hours and the scope of the film, at the level of the family, at the level of the nation of Chile?

CAIN AND MABEL

US, 1936, 90 minutes, Black and white.
Marion Davies, Clark Gable, Allen Jenkins, Ruth Chatterton, Roscoe Karns, Walter Catlett.
Directed by Lloyd Bacon.

Cain and Mabel is an amusing 1930s-style battle of the sexes. Marion Davies, who had appeared in a number of frothy MGM comedies, is a waitress who gets the opportunity to become a lead dancer. Clark Gable plays a mechanic who has become a rather unwilling boxing champion. When their careers need a boost, Roscoe Karns as a PR expert, fabricates all kinds of stories about their relationship when they can’t stand each other. However, ultimately, they naturally fall in love. The group surrounding each of them then manoeuvres to break them apart – also for box-office success.

Clark Gable had won an Oscar for It Happened One Night by this stage and was a leading man at MGM. The film was directed by Lloyd Bacon, director of many light comedies and musicals, especially at Warner Bros.

1. The title? Expectation of a battle? The battle of the sexes? Screwball comedy 1930s style?

2. MGM production values, the cast, black and white photography, New York settings? Musicals? Boxing? The musical score, songs?

3. The song-and-dance routines, the boxing bouts? The juxtaposition of the two?

4. Mabel’s story, as a waitress, two years, encountering Riley (**?IMDB: Reilly), giving him the breakfast, getting the sack? Her telling him that he should be a PR man? His going to Sherman’s office, mistaking the actor for Sherman, getting the promise of the audition? His bold attack on Sherman at the theatre? But Mabel getting the job? Or at least the opportunity? The exasperation of the dancing trainer? The humour of her practice in the hotel, banging on Clark Gable’s ceiling? His confrontation? Her telling him off? The bad blood between the two?

5. Mabel’s career and success? Nevertheless the fall-off in her box-office? Jack and his winning the bouts? But his lacking a charismatic personality? The need for publicity?

6. Riley going to Mabel’s family, going to Jack’s minders? The agreement about the stories in the press? The reaction of each? Telling the others off, the slap, pouring water over Jack? The meetings, their having to be good sports? His going to the theatre, the flowers? Her resenting him? The socialising?

7. Mabel, the musical, the attentions of the singer? Possible rivalry for the boxer?

8. The humour of the battle of the sexes? Her going home, leaving Jack stranded, his going to the apartment, staying for the meal? Finding out the truth? Falling in love?

9. Success? The difficulty of Jack not wanting to go for the championship? Mabel wanting to give up the musical? Riley and his contriving with all the parties to plant more stories? The resentment of each? Mabel and her being forced to dance – but then getting the plane to Philadelphia after her aunt told her the truth? Jack, the bout, Mabel turning up? His being hit, his trainer exasperatedly throwing in the towel – and his losing? The bets and the money?

10. The future – and an amusing old-fashioned comedy?

LUST IN THE DUST

US, 1985, 84 minutes, Colour.
Tab Hunter, Divine, Geoffrey Lewis, Lainie Kazan, Cesar Romero, Woody Strode, Courtney Gaines.
Directed by Paul Bartel.

Lust in the Dust is a parody of westerns, especially spaghetti westerns, which are parodies in themselves. The film is a star vehicle for Divine, the female impersonator who featured in many of the films of John Waters. The film is also a star vehicle for Lainie Kazan. She goes step by step with Divine in scene stealing. The film was co produced byTab Hunter who appears as the equivalent of Clint Eastwood’s ‘man with no name’.

The story is straightforward: an adventurer has buried gold and outside a New Mexico town, and it has been there for 33 years. The townspeople go nowhere to search for it but there has been a limerick about a man from Scotland and two butes which has been mapped on the buttocks of his two daughters. Hunter’s character is in search of the gold. So is Divine.

The film features a lot of lust and dust, especially with Divine and Lainie Kazan with Hunter. There is also a gross comic sequence where Divine his held up by a gang, led by Geoffrey Lewis, which she reluctantly resists in word but not in action.

Divine also has a song, Those Lips, and Lainie Kazan sings South of the Border, both with innuendo lyrics.

There is some raucous behaviour in an inn. When the characters work at the clues, there is a showdown at the grave of the old man, a kind of the good, the bad and the ugly confrontation, which Divine survives.

However, there is a complication with the Franciscan friar (Cesar Romero). Of all the characters, he seems the most normal. He hears Hunter’s confession, giving absolution and advice. In his few scenes he seems to be doing what a friar should do in the town. However, when he appears at the grave, wanting the gold, his character joins the parody types, and we discover that he had been a rabbi, knew the two girls when they were babies, has being waiting for 33 years for the gold and to spend it. He is quite mad - and is shot by them all.

The film was directed by Paul Bartel who directed such films as Death Race 2000 and Eating Raoul. The film is very much in the vein of John Waters’ campy films.

SINNERS IN PARADISE

US, 1938, 63 minutes, black and white.
Madge Evans, John Boles, Bruce Cabot, Gene Lockhart, Nana Bryant.
Directed by James Whale.

Sinners in Paradise is a brief disaster film of 1938. It tells a story of passengers on a flying boat bound for China. We get to know the characters before a storm breaks out and the plane crashes. The survivors find a small island occupied by a mysterious doctor. They clash among themselves. The doctor does not want to take them to safety – he himself is wanted for murder. Eventually, the group gets to work together, despite the domination of an arrogant senator, played by Gene Lockhart.

The scenes at the airport and in the plane of the best, and the crash sequence is quite effective, especially for 1938. However, once the group lands, the film is less interesting. Two men who want arms’ contracts take the boat with the doctor’s Chinese servant. They’re also fight, wound the servant, and are lost at sea.

1. The career of the director, his horror films, his conventional films?

2. A disaster film of the 1930s? Flying boats in this decade? Lavish interiors? Select passengers? The ability to talk to one another and get to know each other? The crew? Reassurances?

3. The black and white photography, the musical score, the cast?

4. The range of characters? The criminal and his money? The platinum blonde type and her criminal connections? The wealthy heiress and her concern about strikers in the factory? The
presumptuous senator? The two men wanting arms’ contracts? The nurse and the unhappy marriage, going to work in China? The old lady going to see her son?

5. The crash, survival? The island?

6. Discovering the doctor, His suave manner, his unwillingness to save them with his boat, his rules about finding food, cooking, cleaning? His Chinese servant, his meals?

7. The group in themselves, squabbling, duties, democratic elections, the dumping of the senator? His continued interventions, being told to keep quiet? The heiress and her wanting to pay for the boat? Her not wanting to do kitchen duties? The criminal, genial personality, befriending the shady woman? Her not wanting to go back home? Two businessmen and the clashing? The taking the boat, the servant, unable to steer the boat, the tropical waters, the shooting, their deaths? The servant returning?

8. The truth about the doctor, the old lady and her son, his not telling her the truth after her being shot? the son being involved in betrayal and criminal activity? The doctor falling in love with the nurse? Their future?

9. Slight in comparison to later films, but effective in its context?

MY BROTHER THE DEVIL

UK, 2012, 111 minutes, Colour.
James Floyd, Fady Elsayed, Said Taghmaoui.
Directed by Sally El Hosaini.

Writer-director, Sally el Hosaini, has an Egyptian father and a Welsh mother. She draws on both heritages in this film. Set in London, it features an Egyptian family, long since in England. Father is with London Transport, mother is a home-maker. There are two sons, Rashid (James Floyd) and Mo (Fady Elsayed). Rash is older and has been involved in local gangs and drug deliveries with relations and peers. However, he is wanting to move out. Mo has just finished school and is ripe for being caught up in the same gang work, despite being robbed and then witnessing a murder in the street.

So far, so familiar, although the director gives a lot more attention than in other similar films to characters and atmosphere. Rash boxes, sees a girlfriend. Mo like literature, meets up with a nice Nigerian girl, idealises Rash.

When Rash takes on a job as an assistant photographer to Sayyid (Said Taghmaghoui), things begin to change – as expected for Mo who sets out on a downhill path, not as expected for Rash who has to come to deeper terms of his identity than he knew about. Mo is even more upset at Rash and his behaviour after he spies on him and then spreads rumours that he is a terrorist.

There is an inevitable violent clash but it is cathartic for Rash and for his relationship with Mo who has to move to greater understanding and tolerance.

1. The director, Egyptian and Welsh background? The two heritages manifest in the film?

2. The generations who had come from Egypt? The generations born in the UK? The differences?

3. The Hackney settings, ordinary East London, homes? The drug world? The streets, robberies, killings? Recreation areas? Socials and photos? Suburban London? Familiar themes, new?

4. The introduction to the brothers, Rash, older, boxing, tough, care for Mo, meeting him at school, Mo’s results, part failure? At home, Rash putting the cash in his mother’s purse? The parents, the father and his work on the buses, the mother at home? Meals? Prospects?

5. The gang culture, drugs, relatives, peers and pressure? Moral issues? Guns? Stealing? Revenge? The murder of the dog, the retaliatory murder in the streets? The bosses and their hold, the younger men wanting to join, the older wanting to get out?

6. Rash, his relationship with the girlfriend, his meeting Sayyid, the job, going to the socials, the photography, the kiss and his being upset? Meeting his girlfriend, forcing himself? His return to Sayyid? Their relationship, Mo following, surprised and disgusted, Rash absent from the film?

7. The gangs, the men, Mo and his being robbed, the young man with the runners, the killing of the dog, the murder in the street?

8. Mo, upset, with Rash’s girlfriend, the kiss, her reaction? The girl from Nigeria and the strong friendship, the white friend? Mo spreading the idea of Rash and terrorism? Not coping? Drug-carrying, the group, his being accepted, the deliveries? Telling the girl about terrorism?

9. Rash’s return, the truth, his anger, wanting to fix the situation, fight Demon, the confrontations?

10. Mo, the group, the leader, the guns, Rash and Sayyid (and Sayyid’s brothers in jail as gangsters)?

11. The shootout, hospital, Mo and his injury, Rashid and Sayyid, the parents, the mother accepting Rash? The father not?

12. The future for the two men – in their work, in relationships? A slice of London life?