THE TAMING OF THE SHREW

US/Italy, 1966, 122 minutes, Colour.
Richard Burton, Elizabeth Taylor, Michael Hordern, Cyril Cusack, Michael York, Alfred Lynch, Natasha Pine, Alan Webb, Victor Spinetti.
Directed by Franco Zeffirelli.

The Taming of the Shrew is a very enjoyable version of Shakespeare's play. Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor were in the public eye in the '60s and made many films together. The director of this film was Franco Zeffirelli, a noted Italian stage director - in his native land, England and the United States. The film is sumptuous in its decor, settings, colour photography. Zeffirelli was to use the same method for his adaptation of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet. There is a pruning of the text but the highlights are kept. Many consider that Zeffirelli makes visual equivalents of Shakespeare's poetry. As with Romeo and Juliet, Zeffirelli used the effective music of Nino Rota. This film has an excellent supporting cast and includes Michael York in his first film role. The Taming of the Shrew is not a frequently staged Shakespearian play. It has formed the basis for many enjoyable stories of the battle of the sexes and was updated in the musical Kiss Me Kate, filmed with Kathryn Grayson and Howard Keel. It includes the humorous song in honour of the bard, 'Brush Up Your Shakespeare'. Zeffirelli was later to make such visually impressive films as Brother Sun, Sister Moon about St. Francis of Assisi, The Champ, and the famous teleseries Jesus of Nazareth with Robert Powell.

1. Why was this an enjoyable version of Shakespeare's play? How well presented was it on the screen? And the language?

2. Zeffirelli has been praised for his colour and his style. Is the praise justified in this production? Where was it at its best?

3. How well did Shakespeare survive this version of his play? The makers said they would have been lost without his words. Did they use Shakespeare's words well? Or did the film rely more on a visual presentation of Shakespeare? How?

4. Comment on the presentation of the world of Padua, its visual impact, the people and, their costumes and manners, sequences such as the university inauguration, the family at how, the details of the house and the rooms, the wedding and the Church, Petrucchio's house etc.

5. Though the film focussed on the world of Padua, were its issues more important, belonging to a wider world? How?

6. Lucentio opened the film with his arrival in Padua. The audience arrived as well. Were we want to identify with Lucentio? As we watched the life of Padua and the issues of the film? How sympathetic a character was Lucentio? As a naive student? In love with Bianca? Changing places with his servant? How important were these devices for the film - scholar, lover, teacher, servant?

7. The pretence and presentation of manners, how was hypocrisy a theme of the film? In which characters was it illustrated best?

8. How well did the film explore the nature of true love? In the two women? In the two men? In the father? In the suitor and the widow? How was the theme of marriage explored? The relationship between love and marriage?

9. How attractive a character was Blanca? In her presentation and contrasting with Katharine? Was Katharine attractive? Elizabeth Taylor's performance? Her tantrums? What was she protesting against?

10. How attractive a character was Petrucchio? Richard Burton's performance? His blustering manner contrasting with Padua? The role of his servant, Grumio?

11. How humorous and important for the thew was his encounter with Katharine? The physical vigour of the encounter? The use of words in the tongue-lashing? Why did they clash? Why did Petrucchio want to tame the shrew? How did he make a fool of her at the wedding? Where were your sympathies there? Katharine's willingness to go through the marriage? The people
laughing as they waited? His eventual arrival and the farcical nature of the wedding? Taking her off without eating? How central was this to the whole film and its meaning?

12. What did Katharine learn from her wedding, from being taken away from the feast, from the hardships of the journey, from Petrucchio's rudeness at home, his starving her etc.? Was this a good way for her to learn? Or was she merely tamed?

13. How important was the banquet scene for highlighting Bianca's wedding? were the preliminaries about Petrucchio’s father entertaining? Did it seem just that "all's well that ends well"?

14. The importance of the wager for the film? what did the audience expect? How dramatically was the wager presented? The surprise of the guests when Katharine returned with the other two women?

15. How important was Katharine's speech on women and their subjection to their husbands in the 16th. century? How does it sound today? Why? Was this the central waning of Shakespeare's story?

16. The film was often farcical, comical, Yet it looked lavish, sumptuous and beautiful. What values was it presenting? How successfully?

THE TAMARIND SEED

UK, 1974, 125 minutes, Colour.
Julie Andrews, Omar Sharif, Anthony Quayle, Daniel O'Herlihy, Sylvia Sims.
Directed by Blake Edwards.

One does not usually call a spy film nice, but this one is - how otherwise with Julie Andrews as heroine (fully clad, nicely spoken and always at the centre of director-husband Blake Edwards' attention)? Omar Sharif is nice too, as a Russian spy. It's the kind of film a reviewer is not supposed to like - long lush widescreen photography, Barbados, Paris, London, romance, some cliches. But it is a very enjoyable film. All the foregoing ingredients support an interesting plot and some suspense. Solid acting support comes from Anthony Quayle, Sylvia Syms and Dan O'Herlihy. It may or may not be real, but it is pleasant and competent entertainment.

1. The significance of the title and its use. the seed itself, the legend, the hero being burnt under the tree, its allegorical fulfilment? Did this add to the atmosphere of the film?

2. Was this a good spy story? A successful romantic spy story? The impact of the stars and the film being built around them? Designed for popular consumption? How successful on this level was it? What values did it stand for? How seriously was it meant to be taken?

3. The design of the credits, the use of colour, the accident, the photography throughout the film, locations, the song and the music? How effective?

4. The importance of Julie Andrews for this film? The focus of attention on her, the camera on her continually, her personality and style, too prim or successful? The impact of her walk along the beach and her memories, her affair and the regrets, her memories of her husband, her job and her dedication to this? How attractive a heroine, audience sharing her plight, her involvement with the Russian, her growing in love? The audience sharing her danger, her suffering? Was the film successful in engrossing the audience in Judith Farrow's life?

5. How important was the theme of patriotism in the film? To Britain. to Russia? Any insights into spying and relationships between East and West? The manipulation by authorities of ordinary people? The lack of privacy etc.? What attitude did the film take to this?

6. How important was the personality of Omar Sharif for the film? Was he convincing as a Russian? The nature of his disillusionment with Russia, his loyalty to Russia, to his wife, to his work? Why was he suspect? Why did he fall in love with Judith Farrow? Did he intend to recruit her? Why did he become involved in the double-game? Did the film show the dangers to him convincingly? His being followed in London, his taking of the file. the nature of his escape, the threat to his life in the Barbados?

7. How did the film convincingly show the workings of international spying: the use of others, the techniques for intruding into privacy, the nature of blackmail, the use of information to threaten other people's lives etc.?

8. How interesting a character was Jack Loder - as a person, his work. his dedication to his work, his shrewdness. his help in getting Svirdlov out?

9. The irony of Stevenson and his wife, was this convincing? The quality of their marriage and mutual fighting, infidelities? The fact that Stevenson was a traitor? The manipulation that he went on with? His techniques? The threats of his wife and her using the information for her career? The irony at the end; that this would not be fulfilled?

10. Comment on the presentation of the British and Russian personnel in the embassies and their various assignments, need for security, loyalty etc.

11. Did the film generate adequate suspense? Judith's phone calls, being followed, her helping of him, the flights, the relaxation at Barbados, the bomb, thinking Svirdlov dead, the ending?

12. How satisfying was the suspense with the escape, the pursuit by boat of the assassins etc.?

13. How satisfying as entertainment was this? How successful in the spy genre?

THE TALL BLOND MAN WITH THE ONE BLACK SHOE

France, 1972, 89 Minutes, Colour.
Pierre Richard, Bernard Blier, Jean Rochefort, Mireille Darc, Jean Carmet.
Directed by Yves Robert.

The Tall Blond Man with the One Black Shoe's unusual title is a fair indication of the tone of the film. It is a French comedy, but not too exclusively Gallic in its humour as some films are for our taste. It is quite stylish in its technical
aspects. Featured is Pierre Richard, a generally restrained comedian - the kind who wanders unscathed through misadventures quite oblivious of what is going on. And what is going on is espionage, bugging and the whole range of the techniques of security surveillance. The methods of surveillance are satirised effectively (implying telling comment on the invasion of privacy) and are lampooned quite hilariously. The sequel continues hilariously.

1. The tone of the title, comedy, irony, audience expectations? Was the film a successful comedy? A successful satire with dramatic overtones? What would audiences expect from the title and genre of this film?

2. How particularly French was the film? Aspects of French style? In contrast with British or American treatment?

3. What were the main features of the comedy: the situations, parody, satire, farce, humorous lines and characterization? Which sequences illustrated each of these facets best?

4. How serious were some of the elements underlying the comedy: spying, ambitions, ruthlessness, invasion of privacy? The importance of the final sentence and comment? How serious were these comments?

5. How successfully did the film involve its audience at the beginning: the New York sequences, Milan and his tricks, Toulouse and his counter-tricks?

6. How well did audiences become further involved during the wait at the airport and the choice of the victim? The emergence of the man with the one black shoe? By this stage how well had the film offered serious and comic tones to get audiences on its wavelength?

7. How enjoyable a hero was Francois? was he a hero? An ordinary and comic everyman? How good a comic was he? The background of his life and the explanation from the file, the good aspects of his character, his weaknesses, his fears, his capacity for loving, his puzzle about life, his blithe disregard for dangers around him? How engaging and endearing was the characterization of Francois? In which sequences did he gain audience sympathy best?

8. How well did the film build comic situations around him: his being pursued, his room bugged, the sequence of the searching of his room, his bike-riding, his misinterpretation of the clues, his relationship with Christine, the appearance and disappearance of dead bodies?

9. What comment on officialdom did the film make? What right has officialdom to such espionage and counter-espionage measures?

10. The importance of the guards, the car and bike chases, the inevitable and comic shootings?

11. The atmosphere of death - yet audiences laughing and the wry comment on such deaths, the revealing of the trick to Milan as he died?

12. Was the ending appropriate? The value of love over spying?

13. Was it important for the minor characters to be portrayed as characters or merely sketched in: Toulouse, Milan, the bodyguards, Maurice, Paulette, Christine?

14. Was this a satisfying comedy? Is humorous and satisfying comedy a successful way of communicating to popular audiences about such serious issues as the invasions of privacy?

TALES OF BEATRIX POTTER

UK, 1971, 90 minutes, Colour.
Carole Ainsworth, Sally Ashby. Frederick Ashton. Avril Bergen, Michael Coleman.
Directed by Reginald Mills.

Tales of Beatrix Potter is ballet-souffle, the Royal Ballet taking time off to don wonderful animal costumes and show their paces (and many other steps and dances) in the beautiful green settings of England's Lake District. They put some of Beatrix Potter's children's stories to music and pigs do a pas-de-deux, a frog leaps and mice pirouette. I suspect that the ballet-goer rather than children (except for girls who like and/or study dancing and music) will enjoy the film, which is quite charming and delightful, but may pall for those who do not appreciate the skills of the dancers within their costumes or who prefer sterner stuff.

1. Was this an enjoyable film? Why?

2. How good a ballet film was it? How clever and attractive was the dancing? How did the film use colour and costumes, settings and decor? Why were these so attractive? Did they correspond well to the original books?

3. How attractive was the music? The themes?

4. The film presented the Victorian world of Beatrix Potter. How interesting was this for the film? Did it explain why Beatrix wrote her stories? What kind of a world did she live in? How isolated was she? Her relationship with the servants? Her reading? The dark and silent house? Her piano playing? Her running out into the fields? Her observation, so close, of the mice and other animals? Mrs. Tiggywinkle - what did she represent? The motherly character? Doing the washing, etc?

5. Peter Rabbit and the lettuces and his continual looking around and searching. Why was Peter Rabbit so attractive?

6. Why did the mice get so much attention in the film? What was so pleasant about the mice in the hallway with the half-opened door? What about the bad mice who smashed everything? What of the mice at the picnic? The tidy mice and the intruding mice? And all the mess?

7. Why did the pigs get so much attention in the story - the story of the pigs leaving home, the pigs going to market, the pig finding the attractive girl pig and their dancing together?

8. How comical was the story of Jemima and the fox - her trying to lay the egg? The fox's reading the menus? The fox trying to get Jemima? The laying of so many eggs? The fox having to run away from the hunt?

9. Why was Jeremy Fisher a likeable character? A comic character?


10. Did you enjoy the squirrels and their dancing? Why did the squirrel taunt the owl? What lesson did the owl teach the squirrel?

13. Was the cat very frightening? Did the cat frighten the mice? Why did the cat join in with everyone else?

14. Were you glad to see all the main characters gather together at the end? How enjoyable was this? What was the point of telling these stories?

TALES FROM THE CRYPT

UK, 1972, 92 minutes, Colour.
Ralph Richardson, Geoffrey Bayldon, Joan Collins, Ian Hendry, Peter Cushing, Robin Phillips, Richard Greene, Barbara Murray, Roy Dotrice, Nigel Patrick, Patrick Magee.
Directed by Freddie Francis.

A above average horror chiller that sets itself up as an explicitly modern morality play, hosted by a mysterious friar, Ralph Richardson, who sends five people back into their consciences to become aware of their potential for evil. Five brief tales concerning Joan Collins, Ian Hendry, Robin Phillips, Richard Greene and Nigel Patrick, provide adequate variety. The last two are particularly frightening in their conclusions. Top-class British actors take part effectively. Peter Cushing stands out, not as a basically horrible character, but as a sympathetic, lonely old man. Well-produced and imaginatively directed, it is well worth seeing with the caution that some sequences are quite frightening.

1. The overall appeal of horror films? The nature of audience interest, excitement, fear? The realms of dreams and fantasies? Audiences indulging their fears and dreams in horror films? Being able to cope with the horror? The effect of this film?

2. The overall impact of five stories in one film? The impact of each, their cumulative effect? The variety of fear?

3. How effective was the framework of the film and its mystery? Audience interest and involvement in the tour of the crypt, the words of the crypt keeper and the guide, the invitation to the five people concerned? The background of the moral fable? The points being made, the tone? The revelation that these people were ultimately in hell? The moral fable as focussing on sin, guilt, repentance?

4. How well portrayed were themes of justice, sin and crime, punishment and retribution? Did it reveal something of what hell is, to live eternally with one's guilt?

5. The story and all through the house: the ordinariness of the setting, the irony of the Christmas atmosphere, the atmosphere of wealth, Joanne and her glamour, her suddenly turning vicious and murdering her husband? The device of the broadcast to talk about the maniac? The daughter and the irony of her joy at Christmas? Joanna and her fear, the shock of the Santa Claus? The irony of the daughter letting Santa in and murder being done? The basic message of this fable?

6. The story reflection of death: the use of the dream structure, subjective photography, the irony of the two crashes and the sense of menace? What kind of person was Maitland? The nature of his guilt? His treatment of his wife, of Susan? The dream and the nightmare and his new awareness of his life, his wife and of Susan, people recoiling in horror against him, the mirror and the revelation of the truth? Audience response to the fact that he was dreaming and about to crash again? The message of this fable?

7. The story, 'Poetic Justice": the atmosphere of quiet and gentleness, the atmosphere of the town? The overall emphasis of evil and horror at the end? How sympathetic a person was Grimsdyke? Audience pitying him, a victim of Elliot, of the town? The pathos of his suicide? The contrast with the arrogance of Elliot and his harshness? The filling in the story with the ordinary types as the Vicar and the Postman etc.? The ugliness of Grimsdyke's revenge on Elliot and his not having a heart? The message of this fable?

8. The story 'Wish you were Here': a portrayal of evil people, the world of big business and finance, the types, as revealed in their discussions and poses? The irony of having three wishes? The wife's foolishness in applying these? The husband and his suffering? The irony of his being in heart attack, the irony of the eternal corroding of the embalming fluid? Audience horror to this kind of visualization of eternal punishment-- The message of this fable?

9. The story 'Blind Alley*: the atmosphere of the blind men's home and its sense of menace? The men overpowering Rogers and the horror of his two alternatives? The horror of his dogs? The visual and sinister presentation of the corridor of razor blades and darkness? The moral of this fable?

10. Comment on the fact that these stories came from horror comics. What influence on their filming?

11. The value in entertainment and instruction of horror moral fables?

A TALE OF TWO CITIES

US, 1935,121 minutes, Black and white.
Ronald Colman, Elizabeth Allan, Basil Rathbone, Edna May Oliver, Blanche Yurka, Reginald Owen, Donald Woods, H. B. Warner.
Directed by Jack Conway.

A Tale of Two Cities is considered something of a movie classic. Made in the mid-30s, it had a very lavish MGM budget. The black and white photography is striking - although some of the sets for 1789 France are not as good as would be found in later versions.

Ronald Colman brings a strong dignity to the role of Sidney Carton, especially the final scene at the guillotine. Elizabeth Allen is Lucy Manette. Edna May Oliver brings her starchy presence to Miss Pross. The villains are always very striking and Blanche Yurka is Madam Defarge and Basil Rathbone as the Marquise Everemonde (to be played by Christopher Lee in the 1950s version). Dirk Bogarde starred in the 1950s version and there was a version in the 70s made for television starring Chris Sarandon.

Once again it shows how striking Dickens' stories can be for the screen, how dramatic, full of character, full of drama and a constant appeal for audiences.

1. The classic status of this film? Hollywood production values of the '30s? M.G.M. budget, production gloss? The filming of Dickens' work and making it available for wide audiences?

2. The quality of the adaptation and dramatisation? The spirit of Dickens' novel? Dramatising the main elements of plot, highlighting the central characters? The main themes? Drama and excitement, romance and sentiment, a sense of history? Human nature, self-sacrifice? The perennial appeal of this novel of Dickens?

3. M.G.M. production values, black and white photography, the re-creation of the 18th. century in England and France? The score and the echoes of classical music? The high quality cast? The echoes of silent films with the variety of captions? The special effects and the staging of the French Revolution?

4. The focus of the title on Paris and London? The difference between England and France? Styles of life, of government, of oppression, democracy? The importance of the American references and the American Revolution? The credibility of the French Revolution - the taking of sides? The famous opening of the novel about the best and worst of times and the way this introduced the film?

5. The initial atmosphere of the film: the dark English roads, the coach and its being bogged, messages, codes, imprisonment, intrigue? The introduction to the Marquis and the French Revolution in the offing with the death of the boy in the Paris streets and his disregard? The Defarges and their representing the Revolutionary spirit? The Doctor Manet story and the tale of two cities?

6. Dr. Manet and his story, the drama of his release and rescue? His being taken to England? Lucy and her presence in France and her knowing the Defarges? The beginnings of later ironies? The irony of Darnay and his clash with his uncle, his leaving France, his siding with the Revolution, his encounter with Lucy? The trip to England? The betrayal and the spies? His being tried? Acquitted? His marrying Lucy and revealing his identity to Dr. Manet? The later news of his identity and its tragic consequences? His going back to France to help his friends? Dr. Manet testifying for him? His failing and his mental collapse? The vicious circle of Dr. Manet being released from the Bastille and being trapped by his friends the Defarges in their vengeance?

7. Lucy as heroine - the news of her father, going to France, falling in love with Charles on the trip, his trial and acquittal? Her friendship with Sidney Carton and his falling in love with her? Her reliance on him? The marriage, her child? The happiness in England and the grief of the Revolution? Her going to France to save her husband? The importance of the escape? Sidney Carton’s letter to her from prison? An attractive, if conventional, heroine?)

8. Charles Darnay and his background, his tutor, his anger at his uncle, his knowledge of the American Revolution and application of it to the French situation, his arrest and trial, friendship with Dr. Manet and honesty with him, love for Lucy, their life in England? The appeal of his tutor, his return to France, the imprisonment? His escape? The final encounter with Sidney Carton and his being rescued? A hero - Carton’s laying down his life for him and for Lucy?

9. Ronald Colman and his presence as Sidney Carton? The introduction to him in the office, his cynical attitudes, his drinking, his supplying all the information to Stryver? His contacts especially with Gerry? The encounter with Bassadd and their drinking together, his leading him on and finding the truth, his appearance in the court and hold over Bassadd? His drinking with Charles but clashing with him? His love for Lucy e.g. the Christmas visit, his not going to the wedding? His visiting Lucy prior to Charles' return to France? His decision to go to France? His plans especially with Bassadd? His getting himself into the Bastille? The rescue of Charles? His final night, the letter? His friendship with Jarvis Lawrie? Lawrie's allowing him to go to death? The encounter with the seamstress and helping her in her death? The final words spoken over the execution scene? His life, its potential, his drifting and drinking, his legal work, friendship with Charles, love for Lucy, his nobility, death? Christ-figure - laying down life for friend?

10. Edna May Oliver and her British style as Miss Pross? Her place in the household, love for Lucy, bossing people around? Her help in the final escape from France? The build-up to her clash with Madame Defarge, the fight and Madame Defarge's death?

11. The way of life in England: the initial coach scene, Gerry Cruncher and his wife and her prayers, his son? The bank, home life, the lengthy trial scene and the attitude of the judge, the Christmas sequence, the aristocrats escaping from France and trying to have their possessions at the bank? The contrast with the English monarchy and democracy with the aristocracy in France and the Revolution?

12. France prior to the Revolution - the cruelty of the Marquis at home, his wealth, oppression, taxes, disregard for people's death, the child in the street? The murder and the poetic justice? The incentive for a revolution? The poverty of the populace in the Paris streets? Life at the Defarges'? The Jacobins and the spies? Madame Defarge and her control, her husband, the old crone? The build-up to the siege of the Bastille - the spectacle of the Revolution itself, the draw of the soldiers taking sides, the court cases and the frenzy of the crowd, the impossibility of appeal to fair-mindedness and justice? The guillotine sequences? Madame Defarge and her vindictiveness against the family, no matter who? Antagonism towards Charles? Her discovery of his child and wanting to kill her? Her not listening to the appeal of Dr. Manet? Her explanation for the past and her hatred for the Marquis? The build-up to the trial of Charles, the witnesses, especially Dr. Manet and then his collapse? Her clash with Miss Pross and the fight to the death? The irony of her missing Sidney Carton’s death? The characterisations of the French?

13. Bassadd as villain - on the way to England, at the trial and his righteousness, Sidney Carton tricking him, his back-tracking, going to France and spying, the irony of his helping Carton to change places in the Bastille?

14. The build-up to the climax, audiences' emotional involvement with Carton in his final night? His help of the seamstress? The cross-cutting to the escape? The finale?

15. The film as classical Hollywood entertainment? The dramatisation of the classic? The basic themes of history, of adventure and romance, self-sacrifice?

A TALE OF TWO CITIES

US, 1980, 140 minutes, Colour.
Chris Sarandon, Kenneth More, Flora Robson, Peter Cushing, Billie Whitelaw, Barry Morse.
Directed by Jim Goddard.

A Tale Of Two Cities is a lavish Norman Rosemont production for television. Charles Dickens' novel has been adapted for the television screen by John Gay, writer of many similar adaptations. Direction is by Jim Goddard (Parker, Shanghai Surprise, Hitler's S.S.).

Chris Sarandon takes the part of Sidney Carton as well as Charles. He lacks the charisma of such actors as Ronald Colman and Dirk Bogarde who have embodied Sidney Carton so well. There is a good range of character actors in the cast including Kenneth More as Jarvis Lawrie, Flora Robson as Miss Pross, Peter Cushing as Dr. Manet, Barry Morse as the Marquis, Billie Whitelaw as Madame Defarge.

The film has colourful settings, reasonable acting, has the essence of Dickens' story - but is fairly lengthy, lacks the dramatic impact of previous versions.

1. A television adaptation of the famous novel? The memory of film versions?

2. The re-creation of the 18th. century, colour photography, locations, decor, costumes? Musical score?

3. The strength of the cast, especially the British supporting cast?

4. The portraits of the characters: the Marquis and his cruelty, the death of the child, his murder? The Defarges and their work in Paris, Madame Defarge and her relentlessness, the executions, the denunciation, the use of Dr. Manet's letter, the fight with Miss Pross and her death? Charles and his decision to leave France, work in England, the trial, Sidney carton, love for Lucy, the marriage, the return to France, the imprisonment, the exchange with Sidney Carton, happy ending? Dr. Manet and his imprisonment, release, happiness in England, the memories of the Bastille, losing his mind, the return to France, the support for Charles? Lucy and her love for her father, the marriage with Charles, her child, France, the Defarges, the trials, the escape? Miss Pross and her devotion, the fight with Madame Defarge? Jarvis Lawrie and his discovery of Dr. Manet, in England, the work with Charles, in Paris? Sidney Carton and his drinking, seeming indifference in the court, his helping Charles, love for Lucy, devotion, his going to Paris, his plan for substituting himself, the execution and his support of the young woman? The spy and the court case, his exposure, the return to France? Carton using him for the escape? Carton's associate and his love for Lucy? The gallery of characters?

5. Dickens' comment on the best of times and the worst of times? Cruelty? Oppression in France, the revolution, its violence? The heroism?

6. The contrast with France and England? The refugees to England? Safer life there? The dangers in France? The madness of the French populace, the courts, the executions?

7. Adventure, Dickens' touch of the melodramatic? Coincidences?

8. The happy ending - and the heroism of Sidney Carton's execution: and his famous farewell speech, 'It is a far far better thing I do ...?

9. The perennial popularity of Dickens' story?

TURKEY SHOOT

Australia, 1981, 83 minutes, Colour.
Steve Railsback, Olivia Hussey, Michael Craig, Carmen Duncan, Noel Ferrier, Gus Mercurio.
Directed by Brian Trenchard Smith.

Turkey Shoot is one of Anthony Ginnane's international thrillers: Patrick, Thirst, Harlequin, Race for the Yankee Zephyr. As regards technical and production qualities, the film is excellently made with fine Queensland location Panavision photography and Brian May's atmospheric score. The film also has an excellent cast ~ some hamming their performances as Noel Ferrier, Gus Mercurio, Roger Ward. Michael Craig plays his part straight. International hero and heroine Steve Railsback and Olivia Hussey are competent.

The film is action science fiction of the comic strip variety. It is in the vein of Soylent Green, Escape from New York - with the contrast of the tropical Queensland setting from destroyed cities. In a fascist totalitarian regime, deviants in rehabilitation prisons are sent out into the bush to be pursued by authorities for a lethal Turkey Shoot. The film becomes quiet violent - but not in the effective Mad Max mythical way, rather and emphasis on the contrivances and the gory skills of the special effects. Director is Brian Trenchard- Smith, who directed The Man From Hong Kong, Death Cheaters, Stunt Rock and documentaries on stunt work. The film works on comic strip level - but draws attention to itself rather than to its themes.

1. The impact of the film as popular entertainment: the blend of serious, comic? Cinematic traditions - the chase film like The Hounds of Zaroff and its derivatives? Futuristic science fiction? For what audience was the film made?

2. Technical quality: Queensland locations, the camp, Panavision photography? Special effects? The attention to deaths and woundings - gory and contrived? The film moving gradually over the edge? The atmospheric score?

3. The effectiveness of the basic concept: the futuristic totalitarian-fascist regime? Themes of freedom as obedience and work as life? The arrest of alleged deviants and their rehabilitation in camps? The echo of concentration camps and slave labour? Brainwashing? Torture? The blend of this idea with chase action? Escape films? The suspense of the pursuit? The cruelty of humans hunting humans? How well was the concept used?

4. The picture of futuristic society: the opening and the transport of prisoners, the flashbacks for the arrests of Paul for his broadcasting of freedom programmes and Chris for her unwitting sheltering of a fugitive and her compassion? The arrival and the conventions of introduction to the camp? The guards and their violence? Thatcher and his governorship of the prison? The indoctrination? The proclamations about the running of the camp - the focus on promiscuity but deviance in sexual matters as capital crime? The representatives of the authority: Mallory, Jennifer, the hunter? The rules, corrections, violence?

5. The focus on torture: Ritter kicking the girl to death as a demonstration, Paul being tortured, Chris and her fears and the attack in the shower block? The showers, the dormitories, the work gangs? Paul advising Chris not to be afraid but to watch and not be cowed?

6. The prisoners and their work, Griff and the stealing of the knife, Dodge and his place in the camp and his knowing what was going on?

7. Thatcher and his rule, his defying Paul who threatened him with failure? Organisation, the rules, Thatcher in action? Cruelty? His sense of superiority? His relationship with, Mallory and Jennifer? The setting up of the turkey shoot? His pursuit of Paul but not killing him at the waterfall? His killing of Griff? Putting his body in the camp? The pursuit of Paul, the return to the besieged camp? His explosive death? Michael Craig's investing the character with some semblance of understanding rather than stereotype?

8. Jennifer and her wealth, manner, style, clothes? Her deadly weapons? Participation in the hunt? Her cruel killing of Griff with the arrows? The pursuit of Rita? The lesbian overtones and the cruelty? The irony of her similar death from Chris? Mallory and his pomposity, casual shooting and injuring people, his hunting with Ritter, his being shot by Chris, being burnt in the canefields? The hunter and the mutant? The torture and the biting of the toe? The killing of the mutant with the tractor? The hunter and his being axed by Paul? The cruelty of the pursuit of Dodge?

9. Ritter and his place in the camp, cruelty, his helping Mallory? The final fight with Paul, his arms being chopped off by Chris? Red and his cruelty, the mocking of his castration? His death?

10. Paul as hero, his background, compassion for Chris, confronting of Thatcher? The last to go in the hunt? The pursuit over the cliffs, his helping Chris? His escaping from the mutant? The canefields, the beach? The final siege? Chris and her story, fear, modesty, her escape, her changing and her brutal self-defence?

11. Rita and her story, prostitute, survival, the pursuit, her death? Griff and Dodge as symbols of the prisoners and the killings?

12. The success of the film as hunting action, the editing and the pace, the use of the terrain from mountains to canefields to sea? The planes and the bombing of the camp?

13. The emphasis on gore and the effectiveness of the special effects? The over-focus on the violence?

14. The comic strip style? Audience acceptance of conventions and stereotypes? The blend of reality and unreality? How valid were the themes put in this pop-art form?

THE TRUE STORY OF ESKIMO NELL

Australia, 1974, 104 minutes, Colour.
Max Gillies, Serge Lazareff, Paul Vachon, Abigail, Bruce Spence.
Directed by Richard Franklin.

Australian film-makers haven't stopped to blush about current frankness and permissiveness on today's screens. But the Australian films tend to emphasise the bawdy (as much different from the leering, the prurient or the coyly exploitive). Eskimo Nell is in the bawdy tradition, set in
the days of the Ballarat goldfields. Two phoney boasters search for Eskimo Nell, the eternal vision of the eternal male myth. Their adventures are not really as funny as intended. Max Gillies is good as Deadeye Dick, but Serge Lazareff is
wooden as Mexico Pete. Well-photographed, with even a steal from D.W. Griffith of peril on ice-floes, but only moderately entertaining.

1. Was this an enjoyable comedy? The value of a bawdy film? The validity of bawdiness in this kind of legend? The value of this film as an Australian bawdy legend? Was the film a success?

2. Comment on the values of the production of the film as Australian work. How successful in terms of photography, colour? The contribution of the acting and the screenplay?

3. Was the material in this bawdy legend offensive? Censorable? Or is this kind of bawdiness acceptable to adult audiences when it is accepted as it is? Why?

4. The irony of the title with the true story? The contrast with the legend? The fact that the legend was all talk and that the true story was all talk? How humorously ironic was this?

5. How important was the quest structure of the film? The escapades of the quest? The inevitable lack of fulfilment? The imaginary fulfilment for Dead-Eye? Dick? The comment on the human imagination? The male chauvinist imagination? The sexual search? The nature of a womper and this kind of jargon? Masculine-feminine relationships in this quest?

6. How typical a nun for a quest in a bawdy legend was Dead- Eye Dick? The initial voyeurism? The fact that he was old and dying? His persuasiveness as regards Pete? His creation of the past? The nature of his fantasies? His so-called toughness? His interaction with Pete? His decline? His vulgarity? The nature of the encounter with Nell and the sexual failure? The achievement in death? What comment was made on this kind of character via the legend and the quest?

7. How did Mexico Pete compare with Dick? The same kind of fantasy? The stud taking himself seriously, a fake, more tough than Dick, willing to help, sharing the quest? But flat and unimaginative compared with Dick? He sees the reality? He achieves the fulfilment with the unreal Nell that Dick dreamed about? What point was being made by the portrayal of Mexico Pete and the fulfilment of the legend?

8. The Australian background of the bush, the mines, the country towns, their Australian traditions of bawdiness, mateship, enterprise? Any comment being made by the film?

9. The portrayal of life on the mines? Bogger and his type of humour? As a mining type? The portrayal of the inns? The whores? Dick's compassion with Elli? The gambling background? The circus background and Esmeralda? The final inn and the real Nell? What comment was being made on the world by this kind of portrayal?

10. The quality of the bawdy verses and the incidents for enjoyment?

11. The Alaskan background and the legends? The humour in these stories? The importance of the parody of D.W. Griffiths' silent film with Nell on the icefloes and Dick rescuing her? The importance of its recurrence during the film? Compared with the imaginative Nell and the real Nell?

12. What did Nell really stand for in this film?

13. What is the value of making this kind of film for popular entertainment?

A TOWN LIKE ALICE

UK, 1956, 110 minutes, Black and White.
Virginia Mc Kenna, Peter Finch, Marie Lohr, Renee Houston, Jean Anderson, Maureen Swanson, Geoffrey Keen.
Directed by Jack Lee.

A Town Like Alice was one of the successful films of 1956. Virginia Mc Kenna was a very popular English actress at the time - The Cruel Sea; Simba, Carve Her Name With Pride - and Peter Finch was beginning to make his mark in international films. They both won British Academy awards for their roles.
The film was based on Neville Shute's story and tells a very worthwhile and moving story of war, survival, humiliation and courage that makes the film fairly popular for most audiences.

1. This film was made ten years after the end of World War II. Does it still have relevance today?

2. How effective was the flashback structure of the film?

3. How did the film create its atmosphere of Singapore and the war? Did it communicate the terror of war for ordinary people - fear, uncertainty?

4. How heroic a woman was Jean? Did she have a great deal of commonsense and pluck? Would anyone have done what she initially did?

5. What did the film offer on the theme of women's courage and endurance? Consider the cross-section of types and their response to the challenge of their imprisonment - Jean, the young mother, the teacher, the arrogant woman, the beefy Britisher, the pill-taking hypochondriac, the young woman who wanted comfort? Why did some survive and others not? What were the most important events for them during their captivity?

6. How painful was the separation from the men? The subjection of the British, empire-minded women, the bowing, the hunger?

7. Was the presentation of the Japanese just? (Cruelty, the ordinariness of the guard, his sufferings with them, his death?)

8. Did you like the Australians? What did Joe offer Jean by way of hope (a town like Alice), and love?

9. Comment on the way the film moved from humour about the chickens to the deadly seriousness of punishment and death.

10. Did Jean have reason to be bitter about Joe's torture?

11. What did the women learn by their years in Malaya?

12. Were you glad that there was a happy ending? Why?