CHRISTMAS IN CONNECTICUT

US, 1945, 102 minutes, Black and white.
Barbara Stanwyck, Dennis Morgan, Sydney Greenstreet, Reginald Gardiner, S.Z. Sakall, Una O’ Connor.
Directed by Peter Godfrey.

Christmas in Connecticut is a light Christmas story – one of those recurring on television year by year.

It is the story of a famous chef – who has a public story about a hardworking farmer and with family and children. However, this is not the case. She lives alone in New York, gets her recipes from her friend (played by S.Z. Sakall) and is inept in the kitchen. The publishers decide that a sailor should spend the Christmas with her – so her dilemma is to keep her true identity quiet and to pretend to be the cook. Needless to say, this is a comedy.

Barbara Stanwyck appeared in a lot of serious films, Double Indemnity just before this one. It is a change of pace for her. Dennis Morgan, an agreeable musical and comedy star at Warner Bros, is the sailor. The supporting cast includes regulars like Sydney Greenstreet.

The film was remade for television in 1992 with Dyan Cannon and Tony Curtis, with Kris Kristofferson as the sailor equivalent. The film was directed by, of all people, Arnold Schwarzenegger.

1. The appeal of this kind of comedy, romance, sentimental drama?

2. The film and the styles of the forties, black and white photography, music, the stars?

3. The atmosphere of reality and unreality, fantasy enjoyment? Escapism or necessary fantasy?

4. Audience response to the plot? Was it too contrived? Did contrivance matter? Audience anticipation of developments and the pleasure when these were fulfilled? Audience hopes for the discovery of the truth?

5. How important was the atmosphere of Christmas and its tone?

6. The background of the war, war suffering, the hero, the ship wreck and the eating, hospitalisation, romance? This as background for Jones?

7. The contrast with Elizabeth: her reputation, her career, the truth about her, the quandary in which she was placed, the details of the plans so that the deception could be carried out? How attractive a character was she? The strengths of her character, weaknesses? Her decision to marry? her involvement with Jones? The effect of the farcical situations on her, mistaken identity, deception? Her growing in love and the necessity of telling the truth?

8. What was the effect of all this experience on her character? Of trying to keep pace?

9. The importance of the character of Yardley? The overbearing and dominant type, his empire, his over-talking people? His arrangement of the whole Christmas in Connecticut? The importance for his magazine? His encounter with people in terms of the magazine? Pushing Elizabeth, arranging things with Sloane? Bargains about babies, etc.? The importance of food for him? His pressurising of Elizabeth to live up to her career?

10. The character of Sloane? Type of man, business man, relationship with Elizabeth but not loving her? His involvement in the farcical situations, especially about getting married? His warming to Yardley, his plans for big business, etc.? The satire on this type of man?

11. The incidental characters, for example the maid, the people in the village? The police? How humorous were the incidents, the coincidences? The attractive sentiment in the incidents?

12. How enjoyable a piece of Americana? The values that it stood for? Tradition?

THE CHOIRBOYS

US, 1977, 119 minutes, Colour.
Charles Durning, Louis Gossett Jr, Perry King, Clyde Kusatau, Stephen Macht, Tim Mc Intire, Randy Quaid, Don Stroud, James Woods, Burt Young.
Directed by Robert Aldrich.

One of the most denounced films during the late 70s. It has been rightly labelled obscene, violent, gross. Yet this is only what happened - most reviewers did not indicate why. Like Altman's *M*A*S-*H (with which it is linked in advertising), it shows very limited human beings trying to cope with sordid situations and criminals in a profession of high demands and expectations from the public (and which the public can then largely ignore except for headlines or complaints in times of need). Director Robert Aldrich has his eye on box-office success, but his message about the pressures on the police (even to suicide) has great validity.

The Choirboys is based on a book by policeman-turned-author, Joseph Wambaugh. A number of his books were made into films in the 1970s including The Onion Field, The New Centurions, Black Marble.

Wambaugh had the reputation of being able to portray how American police went into action, their tough work, their detection – but he also showed how they could let off steam. This is definitely a letting off steam kind of film. The antics that the police get up to would be frowned on now because of the political correctness. However, in the aftermath of the 60s, in the aftermath of the Vietnam war, in the changing aspects of the times, in the beginning of the war against drugs, the pressures on the police force were particularly strong and this is how many of them reacted.

The film is interesting in seeing a number of American character actors in action, many of whom had strong careers on screen, and very many on the small screen. They include in early roles, Charles Durning, Louis Gossett Jr, Randy Quaid, James Woods.

The film was directed by Robert Aldrich, who had served as a second unit director in many films of the 1940s into the early 50s. He began directing in television before moving into some striking films in the mid-50s like The Big Knife, Autumn Leaves, Kiss Me Deadly. He had a number of classic films in the 1960s including The Last Sunset, Whatever Happened to Baby Jane, Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte, The Flight of the Phoenix, The Dirty Dozen, The Killing of Sister George, showing a wide range of interest in themes. The Choirboys was his third-last film.

1. A black comedy about the police force? Black comedy trends in the 1970s? Realism, satire? Heightened material with satiric and comic touch? The kind of response the film ,was asking from its audience? Hostile critical reaction and condemnation?

2. The work of Joseph Wambaugh? His novels, experience of the police force, criticisms of the force? The ugliness of crime? Society's expectations on the police to cope? Their inability to cope? The wear and tear on their spirit? Depression, suicide? The need for such things as choir practice for letting off steam? The films of Robert Aldrich with their tough tone?

3. The precedents for black satiric comedy in the 70s e.g. M*A*S*H and Catch 22? Wambaugh's other novels and films? The focus on police films in the '70s - the critiques as well as the glorifications? This film using both?

4. The importance of the Vietnam prologue? The tone of American society and issues in the '70s? Vietnam and its repercussions on Sam Lyles and his shooting the homosexual as a sign of violent chaos in American society?

5. The film's drawing of the Los Angeles world? Expectations from the audience? The world of crime? The police precincts? Standards and values? Permissiveness? Backlash for law and order? The police and their preparations for dealing with crime in the cities? The desperation for lack of manpower, training? Their ordinary human foibles? The comment on American government in the '70s? its hard-fistedness? Softness?

6. The title and its irony? The stained glass window with the male fist crashing through it? The credits? The fact of the choir practice? The need for it? The way the men lived it? Coping with crises? Further crises?

7. The structure of the film: the Vietnam prologue giving it a tone? The introduction to the precinct? The authority figures? The choirboys themselves? The individual stories and their intercutting? The sketches and the atmosphere of revue? The comic tone? Oneupmanship? Comradeship? The serious undertones? The movement to melodrama and crisis? The serious drama of the cover-up? The final oneupmanship? The changing moods throughout the film?

8. Audience response to the police? Admiration, expectations, criticism? How well did the film incorporate these? The recruits and their training? The variety of types and reasons for joining the police? Training? Friendships? The growing demands? The Vice Squad? The ugly city at night? Coping and not coping?

9. The portrait of the various policemen as men? ordinary men? .Strengths and weaknesses? Sense of right and wrong? Prejudices? Comradeship, shared grief? Who helps the helpers?

10. The focus on the authority figures? The roll call? Hard lines taken? The personalities of the various authorities? The importance of Grimsley and his arrogance (and his being exposed by Sperm Whale)? Riggs and his pep-talks? The medal for Roscoe? The evidence about Baxter's death? The interrogation with Sperm Whale and his being one-upped by the men? The critique of authority and its pomposity, cover-ups?

11. The sketch of Scudzi and his informal manner, laugh, the importance of his letting the homosexual off? The humane element in the Vice Squad?

12. The sketches of the various men:

Sperm Whale: his age, the father-figure, considered a slob, wanting to stay in the force until his retirement? Toughness? Arranging with the whore to expose Grimsley? His helping the younger men? The dilemma about the evidence for Baxter's death? His retiring and going fishing? The criticisms of him? His return? The confrontation with Riggs?

Roscoe as the bully, the callous threat to the girl who was jumping off the building and her jumping? His attitudes towards homosexuals? Blacks? Racist attitudes? The hostility of the group? The practical jokes - with the duck? The irony of his getting the medal? His own animosity and that of the others towards him?

Baxter as the ordinary young man? The scandal of his being found with the whore and the torture gear? Being discovered by Sam? The humiliation? The portrait of a tormented young man trying to cope? The pathos of his suicide and people's grief?

Lyles and his friendliness, the bond with Harold and Baxter? His antagonism towards Roscoe? His going into the whore's place and discovering Baxter? Protecting Harold? His grief? Drinking and being put in the van? The memories of Vietnam and his killing the homosexual? The cover-up?

Harold and the going to Vice Squad, the arrest of the two whores, and his embarrassment? Friendship with Sam and Baxter? The encounter with Blainey and inability to prevent his death?

Tanaguchi, the Japanese- American background, the joker, his Dracula impersonations?

Spencer and his role as policeman, at work?

Finque and his timidity, the practical joke with the duck?

Calvin Pratt and his strong presence? The black amongst the group? Efficiency at his work?

Dean Pratt and his working with Roscoe, going along with Roscoe, the shock with the girl jumping from the roof, his reaction against him?

13. The range of personnel presented e.g. Pete Zooney and the humour of the homosexual encounter in the men's toilet? The men and women on the force? The parties? The emphasis on sexual jokes and outlets?

14. The victims - the woman on the roof and her jumping after Roscoe's taunts, the homosexual and his pathetic story and his death, the prostitutes and their arrest etc.?

15. Audience response to the seriousness of crime and the work of the police? Society's willingness to let this world be taken on by the police and not wanting to know about it? The jolting aspects of black comedy?

CHINESE ADVENTURES IN CHINA.

France, 1965, 104 minutes, Colour.
Jean-Paul? Belmondo, Ursula Andress, Jean Rochefort.
Directed by Philippe de Broca.

Philippe de Broca directed Jean-Paul? Belmondo in a number of films including some rollicking adventures like That Man in Rio. This film was inspired by that film as well as by aspects of Jules Verne’s stories like Around the World in Eighty Days.

Jean-Paul? Belmondo portrays a playboy adventurer who travels to various parts of the world – with a mixture of action, suspense – and slapstick. He has several leading ladies – the principal one being Ursula Andress who four years earlier had emerged so dramatically from the sea in Dr No.

1. Did you enjoy this film? Its humour, adventure, colour, farce? Which aspect was meant to predominate?

2. The film was strong on fantasy. It invited audiences to let go and indulge their fantasy and whims. Now successful was it in this? How enjoyable an occupation is this? How does film give the opportunity for such indulgence in imagination and fantasy? As regards adventure, wealth, loving, reality and unreality, machines, distant lands and adventures etc.?

3. How well did the film use its Jules Verne basis? How did it outdo it in satire and parody? The hero and his mock-heroism? The parody of film styles: the butler, the gangsters, Eastern villains, Himalaya sanctuaries, Dr. No and Bondian adventures, car chases etc.? Comment on the detail of the adventures - the exaggerated humour and their success, such details as the opposite of the striptease?

4. How much did the film depend on Jean Paul Belmondo and his personality and style? Did he create a character in Arthur, or a comic-strip character? How sensible, how stupid? Parodying the conventions of an adventure hero? The opening suicide attempts? The learning to live for life? The daredevil attitude towards the adventures? His relationship to his butler, to Mr. Go, to his prospective in-laws, to Alexandrina?

5. How attractive was Ursula Andress as Alexandrina? How fitting was it to be in this kind of film? What did she add to the film and its fantasy?

6. The importance of the butler? was he too much for this film or essential to its style, especially in the Himalaya adventures, and the ending?

7. Which of the adventures seemed the most interestingly filmed and enjoyable? The sequences in China, in the mountains, on the beaches and the cast of thousands, the car chases, the planes and the jumping from one plane to the other etc.? How important was the editing for the success of these adventure fantasies?

8. Are audiences able to take this kind of farcical entertainment? Can they respond well to such Gallic comedy? And the comic mentality behind such films with its presentation of human foibles and the foibles of film audiences?

CHINA SEAS

US, 1935, 87 minutes, Colour.
Clark Gable, Jean Harlow, Rosalind Russell, Wallace Beery, Akim Tamiroff, Lewis Stone, C. Aubrey Smith, Robert Benchley.
Directed by Tay Garnett.

China Seas is a romantic adventure melodrama from M.G.M. in the thirties. It seems to show its age now rather badly. Clark Gable and Jean Harlow had made a great impression in Red Dust in 1932. Here they are teamed for dynamic romantic action on the China Seas.

Gable is his ordinary tough heroic self. Jean Harlow seems rather brash and loud as the heroine. There is a counter-point in the sophisticated English heroine played by Rosalind Russell. There are assorted MGM supporting stars on the ship like Sir C. Aubrey Smith, Akim Tamiroff, Lewis Stone as a coward sailor with a chance to make good. Wallace Beery is an eccentric sailor with Malay pirates. Contrived far-fetched adventure of the thirties.

1. An entertaining romance adventure? Of the thirties? Impact now?

2. The luxury liner conventions? passengers, difficulties, the role of the captain, pirates? The romance - the bold, brassy blonde and the sedate English lady? A Clark Gable-Jean? Harlow romance?

3. Photography, studio sets, the atmosphere of the China Seas - or not? Score? Special effects especially for the storm?

4. The Hollywood world? The real world? Enough plausibility for plot purposes? For the conventions of China and the South Seas? Romance? The ship, the captain, the owner, the range of passengers, their presence in this part of the world? China Doll and her involvement with Macardle? The pirates?

5. The qualities of the Clark Gable hero? Strengths and weaknesses? Man of action, masculinity, relationship with China Doll, with the refined English lady? Heroism, treatment of passengers, the pirates, the torture, rectifying everything? Final decisions? Conventional but attractive hero?

6. The contrast of Jean Harlow’s style as China Doll and that of Rosalind Russell as the refined English lady? Jean Harlow's particular style, coming on strongly, loud, blousy? Spurned, joining Macardle, her being saved by Allan at the end? The English woman and her refinement, her passion for Allan, presence on the ship, clash with China Doll? Losing at the end?

7. Macardle as villain? His presence on the ship, pirates, handling of the situation especially the league with China Doll? His death?

8. The minor gallery of characters on the ship - pianists and jewellery, ladies, cosmopolitan Eurasians? The hero who had been cowardly and who saves the day etc.?

9. The impact of the storm sequences? The pirate invasion?

10. Conventional Hollywood adventure material? An unreal world? Audience presuppositions of right and wrong. good and bad? Entertainment?

CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT

France/Spain, 1965, 119 minutes, Black and white.
Orson Welles, Jeanne Moreau, Margaret Rutherford, John Gielgud, Marina Vlady, Walter Chiari, Tony Beckley, Alan Webb, Fernando Rey, Keith Baxter.
Directed by Orson Welles.

Orson Welles had a love for Shakespeare. His many films and plays had a somewhat Shakespearean tone including his classic Citizen Kane. In the late 1940s and early 50s he made screen versions, in black and white with a small budget, of Macbeth and Othello. They still stand the test of time.

Welles always had difficulties in getting films made, with studio interference, with his own erratic ways and budgets. However, he made a number of classics including A Touch of Evil and, in the early 60s, The Trial, based on Kafka’s novel. To finance his films he appeared in a host of films ranging from A Man for All Seasons to Italian biblical epics.

Chimes at Midnight is a combination of material from Hollinshed’s Chronicles and Shakespeare’s plays, especially Henry IV Part 1 and 2. John Gielgud portrays Henry IV. Keith Baxter is his son Prince Hal, the roistering young man who spent his time in bad company but who turned against his mentor, Sir John Falstaff, and became Henry V.

Orson Welles gives himself the central role of Sir John Falstaff which he obviously enjoys. Jeanne Moreau and Margaret Rutherford represent the merry wives of Windsor.

Made in black and white, the film captures the essence of Shakespeare’s drama as well as the Falstaff comedy. It raises the issues of history, those born to lead and royalty, senses of responsibility, devil of fun figures who are irresponsible. While Falstaff is larger than life, he is also a tragic figure, especially as Prince Hal turns away from him. Orson Welles was able to capture this in what is a classic Shakespeare film.

1. The meaning of the title, as spoken by Falstaff and Shallow, the deep nostalgia about age, old age, happiness in life? How does the title echo the major themes of the film?

2. How successful a Shakespearian film was this? The Shakespearian mood, the quality of the adaptation of two plays?

3. Comment on the quality of the black and white photography, its suitability for this film, the medieval music and its importance, the location photography, the atmosphere of the Middle Ages?

4. What was the quality of the diction for the poetry? The impact of Shakespeare's poetry? The quality of the encounters between the characters, the use of close-ups? Was this a successful cinematic version of Shakespeare?

5. How well did the film communicate the political atmosphere of the film? How important was the atmosphere for the themes? The significance of the narration at the beginning and the end? The heritage of Henry IV, the death of Richard II, troubles in the English kingdom, the Mortimers, the inheritance of Henry V and his achievements? The insight into politics and monarchy?

6. How important was the fourteenth century atmosphere of the film? The court sequences, the Gothic background, thrones, crown and robes, the visualising of the inn, the pilgrims and robberies?

7. How important was the war atmosphere for the film? The war background of ordinary 1ife? War interrupting ordinary life? People’s characters being tested by war?

8. How attractive a character was Falstaff? The quality of Orson Welles performance? How was Falstaff central to the film? How much good in him was there, how much evil? How much of a Satan-tempting figure was he? How much a fool figure? What was the capacity of his character? Himself, in the group, his influence over Hal, his relationship with Mistress Quickly, his love for gold? His bawdiness, his drinking? his roistery, his cowardliness, the good influence on Hal and the bad? What judgment was made on Falstaff by the end of the film? How much did he belong to a fantasy and dream world?

9. How was Hal the centre of the film? Could audiences identify with him? His involvement with Falstaff, the roistering, the robbery, the happy life in the inn? The contrast with his real self revealed in his soliloquies, in a dream world and waking? How much did he enjoy this life? How callous was he in rejecting his relationship with his father, the success of the wars, his visiting his death bed, the crown sequence? Hal in contrast to Poins? Hal in contrast to Percy and his defeat of Percy in the war? What did Hal achieve when he became king? banishing of Falstaff`? Why? What insight into a medieval prince was given in this portrayal?

10. The insight into the character of a king through Henry IV? His historical background, his role in the kingdom, his ruthlessness with the rebels, his exiling of the Percies, his role in battles and consolidating the kingdom, his illness and weariness, disappointment with Hal, uneasiness in death, the importance of the reconciliation with Hal?

11. How important was the portrayal of the Percies and their rebellion? Their plotting and their disgust with Henry IV, their support of Mortimer? The importance of the sequences of Harry Percy ranting and raving, the sequence of his life at home, preparing for battle, the rash impulsive soldier, the comic figure, his relationship with his wife, the importance of his fighting with Hal, the surprise of his death?

12. The picture of Poins, Bardolph, and the other members of the inn group? What comment did the film make on them, as good or bad, their influence on Hal? The various adventures they had in the robbery, the chatting in the inn, the re-enactment of Hal’s visit to his father?

13. The comic character of Pistol, a successful comic character, the affectation of the time in an ordinary person?

14. Mistress Quickly and her managing of the inn? Margaret Rutherford’s style, wanting payment from Falstaff, her enjoyment of the charade about the king and Hal?

15. The importance of Doll in the film? As part of the life of the inn, the love for Falstaff and support of him, her role when all the magic of the life of the inn was put out?

16. The importance of Shallow as showing the character of Falstaff? Their reminiscences about the chimes at midnight? The unreality of their memories? The happiness of memories? Falstaff showing off to Shallow? Shallow's turning against Falstaff and his disillusionment with him? As a means of audience disillusionment with Falstaff?

17. How enjoyable was the robbery sequence, the tricking of Falstaff? The visit of the sheriff?

18. How did this contrast with the battles? Their visualisation? The role of the Percies? Hal and Prince John? Falstaff and taking the body of Percy?

19. The dramatic significance of the coronation? The change in Hal, his reaction to Falstaff, Falstaff’s disillusionment?

20. How much pathos was there in the rejection sequence? Falstaff’s exile?

21. The pathos of Falstaff’s death? The tone that it gave to the film?

22. The summing up of the film in the epilogue? What values were presented in this film, were presupposed in the audience? How well explored?

THE CHILDREN’S HOUR (THE LOUDEST WHISPER)

US, 1961, 107 minutes, Black and white.
Audrey Hepburn, Shirley Mac Laine, James Garner, Miriam Hopkins, Fay Bainter, Karen Balkin, Veronica Cartwright.
Directed by William Wyler.

The Children’s Hour has an interesting theatre and cinema history. The play was originally written by Lillian Hellman in the 1930s. It was filmed by William Wyler in 1936 as These Three. The play had a lesbian theme but the motion picture code of the 1930s did not allow this to be presented on screen and so the film became a film about a scandal which was heterosexual. Miriam Hopkins, who had a supporting role in the later film, and Merle Oberon were the two teachers. Joel McCrea? the doctor. The young Bonita Granville was the vicious child who spread the rumours about the relationships and who was believed, creating a scandal, getting the various personnel dismissed from their jobs. Bonita Granville was nominated for an Oscar for best supporting actress.

In the present version, Lillian Hellman has adapted her play for the screen of the 1960s, just before films became more permissive in terms of these themes. To that extent, it is a daring film for 1961, for the high-profile cast, especially the two actresses, and for William Wyler, the veteran director who had won Oscars for Mrs Miniver, The Best Years of Our Lives, Ben Hur as well as directing many stars to Oscar-winning performances. Fay Bainter was nominated for best supporting actress for the film which received a number of nominations for cinematography and art direction and costumes.

In this version, Audrey Hepburn and Shirley MacLaine? portray two teachers at an exclusive school. The Shirley MacLaine? character is infatuated with Audrey Hepburn who herself is in love with the doctor, James Garner. Once again the spiteful child begins to spread rumours, that there is jealousy involved, that the relationship was unnatural. These rumours are believed and the grandmother of the child removes her from the school. This brings conflict for the doctor and the teachers who are removed from their work – and a consequent court case with national repercussions.

In the light of succeeding decades, The Children’s Hour might seem quite reserved in its presentation of its theme. However, its reserve probably gives it a great deal more humanity than other treatments of this theme.

I. What is the irony of this title in view of the film? An alternate title was The Loudest Whisper. Is this a better title? Why? the original play and film were called These Three, was this a better title? The film was based on a play of the thirties. Was this evident in the screenplay? In the style of the film and the treatment of its subject? Where? Why?

2. Comment on the varying change of moods within the film. How was this achieved? The effect of the photography and the music? The dramatic changes within sequences?

3. Where was audience sympathy meant to lie? What of the audiences sense of justice in view of false accusations and hurt?

4. How did the opening sequences communicate a sense of happiness? The school itself, the choir work, the happiness of Karen and Martha? The fussing of Aunt Lillie? The parents? How important was this opening for the rest of the film?

5. How did the film communicate the tensions within the school ? Between Martha and Karen? Martha’s unknowing jealousy of Karen and Joe? The tension between Martha and her aunt? The sexual relationship and the overtone of lesbianism?

6. Was Karen an attractive character? Why was she working at the school? Her devotion to Martha? Her waiting for the marriage? The sequence of her outing with Joe and its significance for their wedding and for the whole film?

7. How attractive a character was Martha? Why had she founded the school? How much was it part of her life? Her jealousy of Karen? Her seeming dislike of Joe? Her exasperation with her aunt? The importance sequence of their quarrel, overheard by the girls?

8. How was Joe the hero of the film? How sincere was he? How loving and supportive? (Were you surprised at his change at the end? Why?)

9. What did Aunt Lillie add to the film? What kind of person was she in herself? Why so selfish? Why so self-deceiving? Did the audience feel as exasperated as Martha?

10. Impressions of the girls? their life at the school? The details of their life that the film showed? For instance, their scenes in the dormitory, their chatter amongst themselves, their dominance by Mary? their classes?

11. What did the film have to say about accidents and their effect on people? Especially on impressionable people like young girls? Eg, overheard conversations, curiosity, looking at scenes and misinterpreting them? How well were such sequences filmed? Eg, Mary looking at Karen and Martha reconciling after their quarrel? The kiss? The word ‘unnatural’?

12. Impressions of Mary? Was her performance exaggerated? the nature of her tantrums and Joe’s treatment of her? Her feelings of hurt and jealously? Her domination of Rosalie? Her running away? How well did Karen treat Mary in the incident of the flowers?

13. How effective was the sequence where Mary told her grandmother the story ? The whisper? Our not hearing what Mary said? the look on Mrs Tillford’s face? Was this too melodramatic? Or was it effective for this film?

14. Reactions to Mrs Tillford telling the other parents and their withdrawing them from the school? The mystery of why the children were leaving and the bewilderment of Karen and Martha?

15. How melodramatic was the confrontation with Mrs Tillford? How exasperated and frustrated did it make the audience feel? What more could Karen and Martha have done? How cruel was Mrs Tillford? How badly did she exaggerate the situation? Was this a throwback to the thirties? Would modern people react in this way? As regards a school? The confrontation of Mary and Rosalie? the sequences where Mary dominated and terrified Rosalie?

16. How well did the film show the suffering of Martha and Karen? Their loneliness in the empty school? The support of Joe? The inquisitive errand boy? Their going for a walk? The men on the truck gaping? (Was this authentic?)

17. The repercussions of the scandal on Joe: his losing his job and his suspicions? Were his suspicions credible?

18. What was audience reaction to Aunt Lillie’s returning and her avoiding giving testimony at the trial? Was Martha right in her reactions?

19. The importance of the sequence where Joe made his decision to go away? Did Karen do the right thing? How hurtful for her was this?

20. Final reaction to the showdown with the two girls? the look Mrs Tillford gave Mary? The realisation for Mrs Tillford of what had happened?

21. The tensions in the sequence where Mrs Tillford apologised? The effect on Karen and the effect on Martha?

22. The importance of Martha’s discovery about her relationship with Karen? The effect that this knowledge had on feelings? Her feelings of guilt about her relationship? What insight into Martha’s character? the repercussions on her life? The effect of this even after the apology? The credibility of her hanging herself? Audience response?

23. The emotional overtones of the funeral sequence? The feelings of responsibility and guilt? The importance of Karen’s final assertive walk?

24. How well did the film treat the lesbian theme? How well did it treat the theme of gossip and justice? Of jealousies and the inadequacy of human responses? What insight into hurtful human behaviour did the film give?

A CHILD IS WAITING

US, 1963, 104 minutes, Black and white.
Burt Lancaster, Judy Garland, Gena Rowlands, Steven Hill, Paul Stewart, Lawrence Tierney, John Marley, Elizabeth Wilson, Bill Mumy.
Directed by John Cassavetes.

A Child is Waiting is one of the earliest films by John Cassavetes. An experimental film-maker, he achieved a great reputation during the 70s and 80s, especially with such films as A Woman Under the Influence, Opening Night, many of his films with his wife of many decades, Gena Rowlands. She also appears in this film. However, this is a commercial film made under the production banner of Stanley Kramer who eventually removed John Cassavetes from the film. However, it is a tough film, in the Cassavetes vein, written by Abby Mann (who wrote Judgment at Nuremberg and Ship of Fools at this period).

While Burt Lancaster is credible as the doctor, it is Judy Garland as a young woman who comes to an institution to work with children who is surprising. It shows what might have been had Judy Garland been allowed to develop her talents as an actress as she grew older. However, this was frustrated with her death.

The film was quite moving, especially in the light of the early 1960s, in its presentation of children in institutions, dealing with the mentally impaired, the theorising about what were the best methods for dealing with the children, how much compassion and affection there should be compared with rigorous discipline. The film is a precursor of many later films about mentally impaired people – which later became star vehicles for such actors as Dustin Hoffman in Rainman and Robert de Niro in Awakenings.

1. The evocative title and audience response? The expectations for this film at the box-office? The purpose for its being made?

2. Comment on the motivation for making a film like this for popular consumption. What is the expected effect on audiences? Sympathy and understanding of the plight of the children?

3. The importance of the black and white photography, the documentary-like presentation of people and places? The music, the use of popular stars? The sentiment involved in the presentation?

4. Comment on the credit sequences and the drawings. People's reaction to the children? People’s reaction to retardation? The motivation to help? The question of 'what is normality?’?

5. The film’s focus on Reuben for understanding the plight of the children and the problems? The impact of the preparations? Picturing people's hostile attitudes towards him and his hostile attitude towards others? concerning him during the film, their occurrence, illustrating the nature of the institution and its work?

6. How important was it that the audience saw the institution through Jean’s eyes? Learning about it through her experience: her arrival, meeting the staff, visiting the classes, asking questions, the picnic etc.? Her being hurt by the doctor's treatment of Reuben? The sentiment behind her behaviour? Her making mistakes and deep mistakes? Her learning through this experience? How was the film a learning experience for the staff?

7. The presentation of Doctor Clark and his ideals: his background in psychiatry, his personal story, his manner of running the institution, his meetings and his methods? His attitudes and dealings with Reuben? His dealings with Jean?

8. What kind of person was Jean? Her lonely background, her wanting to do good and make something of her life etc.? Her dependence on Reuben and his dependence on her, her being shifted from the house, her getting in touch with the parents, her experience of her mistake and its effect on Reuben, her ability to redeem the situation?

9. The presentation of the other teachers, the kind of help that they gave to the children, the doctors?

10. The contrast with the administrators, their inspection of the institutions, the crises, Doctor Clark, their wanting tangible results? The film’s comment on their attitudes?

11. How important were the details of the children and their way of life? In the classroom, at meals, on visiting days, with their relations? What incidents beet illustrated their life in the institution?

12. The details on Reuben's files, their visualization by flashback? The attitude of the mother and what she did wrong in Reuben's regard, the father? The crisis for the family, force? The trauma of Reuben's being left at the institution?

13. This contrasting with the visit and the trauma for Reuben ? Why was he so afraid? The effect on him?

14. The thanksgiving celebration and the happiness and the possibility of some growth? Audience response to this?

15. How pessimistic was the film about retarded children, the optimism about the quality of human life? The attitudes, Doctor Clark’s philosophy of running the institution?

16. The film as a contribution to humane understanding of the quality of life?

CHIEF CRAZY HORSE

US, 1955, 86 minutes, Colour.
Victor Mature, Susan Ball, John Lund, Ray Danton, David Janssen.
Directed by George Sherman.

Chief Crazy Horse comes from the mid-fifties when there was a movement in Hollywood of sympathetic portrayal of the Indians. Starting from Jeff Chandler's portrayal of Cochise in Broken Arrow, 1950, there were quite a number of spectacular Indian films such as White Feather promoting sympathy for the Indians. This of course was long overdue. Victor Mature is effective in this kind of role and shows something of the heroism and the dreams of Chief Crazy Horse. Much more sympathetic films were made in the late sixties and seventies emphasising the life of the Indians as in A Man Called Horse or the atrocities wrought by both parties for example, Soldier Blue and Little Big Man.

1. A good Western? A 50s tribute to the Indians? Impact in the style of the time, now?

2. Production qualities: colour, Cinemascope, Universal production - with its quality B-grade Western tradition? Victor Mature as star? His presence?

3. The structure of the film with its flashback, the atmosphere of the history of the West? In retrospect, the mystique of the Indians?

4. How well did the film emphasise the mystique? The old times with the buffalo roaming the plains, the Indian nations and their attitudes towards their heroes, the religious overtones? The initial death of the Chief and the prophecies of destiny? the ingredients of the prophecy and their fulfilment in Crazy Horse’s life? The colourful visual presentation of these visions?

5. The presentation of the Sioux and their situation? The American exploiters, the gold seekers in the black hills, the treaties and their being broken? The comment on American history? Guilt?

6. Victor Mature's style and portrait of Crazy Horse? As a noble human being? The rivalry for marrying, his heroism? The stances that he took? The fulfilment of prophecy? His status among the tribe? His decision to be Chief? His exercise of leadership?

7. The humane Crazy Horse with his wife and the courting the child? The support of the wife and the pain of the child's death?

8. How obviously villainous was the Sioux villain? The rivalry, the going to the Army, the presence with the Army and the shouting, the vengeance? Fulfilment of prophecy?

9. Twist and his reminiscences, trappers, loyalties to the tribe, gratitude to the Indians, friendship with Crazy Horse and helping him with his marriage? His divided loyalties and his decisions throughout the Indian wars?

10. The portrayal of the Army and their attempts to control the situation? Circumstances demanding particular responses and their almost going against principle?

11. The contract with Crazy Horse and his use of Army strategy? An honourable soldier and people respecting this? His daring in going against popular decisions, defying the Army?

12. The background of the greedy whites, especially the exploiters of the gold fields and breaking the treaties about entering the black hills? The irony of the Army chief murdering the gold prospectors after the death of his son? The ugliness of this and of the American white heritage?

13. Crazy Horse's achievement and the pathos of him death? The life and death of a hero? A portrait of Indian heroism and American conscience?

THE CHEYENNE SOCIAL CLUB

US, 1970, 103 minutes, Colour.
James Stewart, Henry Fonda, Shirley Jones, Sue Ane Langdon, Robert Middleton.
Directed by Gene Kelly.

The Cheyenne Social Club is a euphemism for a western brothel. This was 1970, the beginning of a more permissive era in stories and the way that they were treated. This is symbolised by the fact that such a stalwart as James Stewart plays a cowboy who inherits the Cheyenne Social Club, travels with his partner, Henry Fonda, a thousand miles and discovers what it really is. The film then is a tongue-in-cheek, bawdy blend of western and comedy with the two veteran stars relaxing. They are supported by Shirley Jones, who had made her mark in musicals like Oklahoma and Carousel and won an Oscar for her role in Elmer Gantry.

After his dancing career finished, Gene Kelly began directing films. At the same time, he directed Barbra Streisand in Hello Dolly.

1. How successful was this film as a Western? Was it an enjoyable western? What Western conventions did it use?

2. Was this film successful as a comment on Westerns and Western behaviour? How?

3. How successful was the film as a presentation of human beings and human behaviour? Did it have strong human interest or not? Where?

4. How successful was the film as a comedy? Was it funny? How humorous was it? Which situations constituted of the best comedy?

5. How did the opening sequences set the tone of the film? the Panavision beauty of the West, the cowboys and their work, the values of the cowboy life? Was the cowboy life idealised in any way? (Later to be contrasted with the life of the town of Cheyenne?)

6. Did you like John? Did you like Harley? The impact of their journey - its length, the seasons, the landscapes? Harley’s incessant talk? how humorous? Its significance? The friendship and companionship between the two? What was the relationship between the two - how genuinely friendly?


7. How did the film prepare the audience for the nature or the social club? Did it give the audience an anticipation and eagerness to find out what was happening? The background of D.J. as a person?

8. How did the film show a confrontation of morals and reality? How well did the audience identify with John? In his discovery of what the Social Club was? How did the film then test moral attitudes? How did it test moral attitudes compared with the realities of human behaviour?

9. How was the audience meant to identify with John? Was it meant to identify with Harley? Or Jenny? Could audiences identify with each of them? Could this alter their attitude to the response to the film?

10. The film had overtones of bawdiness. Was it rude or not? Was the film made in good taste? Having James Stewart and Henry Fonda in a film with these themes?

11. Did the film present John’s dilemma convincingly? What was his dilemma? What solutions were possible?

12. How did the film present the girls at the social club? As human beings? as caricatures? As comic personalities? Their response to John? Their qualities? The presentation of their work? The place of the club in the town - any social comment?

13. The picture of the welcome in Cheyenne at the hotel? The impact of Cheyenne on John and Harley – compared with their cowboy life in Texas? What comment was made on American behaviour here?

14. Comment on the impact of John's decision for the girls? How did his attitude contrast with that of Harleys?
What was the reaction to John’s decision? Did you agree with his decision?

15. How well were the fights and the feuds in the town presented? Was this conventional western material or did it add to the significance of this film?

16. How is John presented as the typical American hero? The James Stewart character? The comic presentation of evils? (And the fact that Harley came back?)

17. How convincing was the picture of John doing the right thing in leaving the club to Jenny? Was this the right thing to do?

18. The significance of the ending with the cowboys returning to their work? What effect had the whole experience on John? The effect of Jenny's letter? What effect did the experience have upon Harley? And he and John having a tiff at the end?

19. Was this an enjoyable film? Why?

CHEYENNE AUTUMN

US, 1964, 154 minutes, Colour.
Richard Widmark, Carroll Baker, Karl Malden, Sal Mineo, Dolores del Rio, Ricardo Montalban, Gilbert Roland, Arthur Kennedy, Patrick Wayne, Elizabeth Allen, John Carradine, Victor Jory, Mike Mazurki, James Stewart, Edward G. Robinson.
Directed by John Ford.

Cheyenne Autumn was one of the last films directed by Ford after a career that began in the 1920s. He made his mark with action films in the 1930s, especially with The Hurricane and Stage Coach, launching John Wayne as a star after his being the leading actor in a lot of programmer westerns. He made a big impact during the 1930s with The Informer, winning best director, an award he also won with The Grapes of Wrath, How Green was My Valley and The Quiet Man.

While he had a wide-ranging repertoire, Ford is best remembered for his westerns. During the 1940s he made such classics as My Darling Clementine and Fort Apache as well as the cavalry films, Wagon Master, She Wore a Yellow Ribbon, Rio Grande. During the 1950s he made the classic The Searchers. He contributed to How The West Was Won and this was his almost-swansong. He contributed to Young Cassidy and his last film, in 1966, was Seven Women.

A lot of Ford’s regulars appear in the cast led by Richard Widmark who appeared in Two Rode Together. The film was written by James R. Webb, a regular writer of westerns who began his writing career in the 1950s with some smaller-budget films but made a big impact in the 1960s with such films as The Big Country, Cape Fear, How The West Was Won (for which he won an Oscar) and Alfred the Great.

The film takes the side of the Indians, showing how they were put into the reservations, supplies not given to them, harassed. The Cheyenne then break out of the reserve and make a trek back to their hunting grounds. They are pursued by the cavalry. This is a film of the 1960s, emerging in 1964, the year after the civil rights march on Washington. There is a criticism that native American Indians were not used in the film – but this was the state of play in film-making at the time. Ford is very sympathetic to the Indians and their plight.

The film has an interlude in Dodge City with James Stewart and Arthur Kennedy as Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday – which does not quite fit into the whole mood of the film. Ford said it was inserted so that the audience would have a kind of intermission from the main story and not have to go out of the theatre but stay with his film. The themes that Ford explored came to the fore in the late 1960s, early 1970s with such films as Little Big Man and Soldier Blue.

1. How interesting a western was this? How typical? Was it a spectacle or was it sortething more? As a tribute to the Cheyenne? How much did it presuppose, the background of the Cheyenne movement? Its setting? as a historical footnote?

2. How well did the film’s create its atmosphere in the beginning with the fort, the soldiers, the senate expectations of the fort, the military drill of the soldiers and their response to this? the preparing of the conflict between soldiers and Indians?

3. Your impression of the assembly of the Cheyenne for the senate visit? their standing all day, their collapsing? the humiliation of the Indians? How well did these sequences highlight what had happened to the Indians on the reservations? Preparing audience sympathy for the Indians and their flight? Did this adequately prepare for a just presentation of the conflict?

4. How did the film highlight Captain Archer as the hero of the film? How did it highlight his responsibility? How did it highlight his attitudes? Was Richard Widmark sympathetic in this role? Did this all prepare for a sense of realism in our watching the Cheyenne Autumn?

5. How attractive was Deborah as a heroine? The importance of her being a Quaker and the background of her non-violent Christianity? As a teacher, her relationship with her uncle? Her expectations of government and of Archer?

6. How well did the film introduce the government and Washington? How did this spread the responsibility into higher fields than army and Indian? the portrayals of attitudes when the official returned to Washington? The intricacies of Washington politics? Carl Schultz as minister of' the interior and his attitudes? manoeuvres and power struggles? What comment did the film make on public opinion?

7. The importance of the decision to migrate? What role did Dull Knife and Little Wolf have in this decision? What about the attitudes of Red Shirt? The Spanish woman? Deborah? How heroic a thing was their migration? If it had succeeded, what would have been the future of the Cheyenne?

8. Comment on the use of the blackboard technique for the messages between Deborah and Archer.

9. How well were the hardships of the flight visualised? Audience sympathy in these, eg the crossing of the river?

10. The drama and the suspense of the pursuit? How well was this handled, the intercutting of the two parties, the chase, suspense? Archer’s attitudes, Scott with his attitudes of his father killed in the massacre? The varying motivations of the soldiers pursuing the Cheyenne?

11. How impulsive was Red Shirt in firing the shot? The unnecessary fight? hostility that was growing? Was this inevitable?

12. What were your reactions to the information that went east? The papers and public opinion? Was this also inevitable?

13. How did the film show the pertinacity of the Cheyenne and their flight? Despite the difficulties? Was this convincing? The nature of their suffering?

14. How important was the interlude in Dodge City? How did it contrast with the rest of the film? Its insight into the white man, and his attitudes? the contrast of the decadence of Dodge City and the gambling, drinking, racist attitudes and the integrity of the Indians? The picture of the man who shot the Indians? The picture of Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday? Why were they intertwined The use of James Stewart and Arthur Kennedy? Heroes of the West not acting heroically and contrasted with the Indians?

15. How important was the lobby of the eastern senators? Why?

16, What happened to the people involved in the chase? The skirmishes, Scott and his changed attitude, the major killed? the ordinary soldiers, top sergeant?

17. What happened to the Indians as they progressed further - under the train bridge, the snow? Deborah sharing their hardships, the death of the chief? the authority going to Little Wolf? attitudes of Dull Knife?

18. How important was the decision to split? Which side was right? Was it better to go into the fort? How hard was life in the fort? How ugly was the personality of Captain Wessels? His drink and his use of the letter of the law? His cruelty in locking up the Indians in freezing weather?

19. Did the doctor have any alternative but to attack Captain Wessels? The importance of Archer’s visit to the Secretary of the Interior and his presentation of the truth?

20. How desperate were the Indians and how necessary was their breakout? the ugliness of' the massacre and their escape? How necessary was it that Captain Wessels be relieved? Was this all inevitable? How necessary was it?

21. The importance of Archer’s return with the Secretary of the Interior? The importance of their encounter with the Indians and the reconciliation? Red Shirt being shot?

22. How well did the footnote end? To whose credit was the ending of the footnote? Could the whites be trusted? the irony of the comments in agreements with the Indians?

23. How important a western was this? insights into the Indians? The insights into the red man, the white man, war and oppression, civilisation and culture, power lobbies, money, endurance, courage?