THE LADY IN THE CAR WITH GLASSES AND A GUN

UK, 1970, 105 minutes, Colour.
Samantha Eggar, Oliver Reed, John Mc Enery, Stephane Audran, Marcel Bozzuffi, Bernard Fresson.
Directed by Anatole Litvak.

A complicated title for a complicated murder mystery. It needs and has a rather long explanation. The screenplay is by Richard Harris with screen writer Eleanor Perry. Direction is by veteran thirties and forties director Anatole Litvak who made such outstanding films as All This And Heaven Too and Anastasia. There is very attractive photography in French settings and a Michel Legrand score. Samantha Eggar does very well as the terrified heroine. Stephane Audran gives a persuasive dramatic performance. The film is escapist entertainment and quite an entertaining but rather elaborate murder mystery of the early seventies.

1. The appeal of a murder mystery, plot, characters, complications and clues?

2. The glossy production values: French locations, the world of advertising? Panavision, music, song?

3. The impact of the stars, style?

4. The importance of the initial setting, the introduction to, Dany? Type, background, psychological problems, her work? Relationship with Anita? Her sight and the glasses? setting out on the mystery with her? Identification with her? Work, her employer, the car, the trip?

5. The importance of the structure: the trip, the cruise, the mystery of recognition of her? Philippe, the body? Monsieur Kobe? The explanation and the retracing of the journey with explanation? How ultimately satisfying?

6. Samantha Eggar’s style as Dany? Character, memories and their visualising, especially the abortion? Her work, commitment to the Caldwells? The initial puzzle during the trip? The police moving her on? The trackies? Philippe and her giving him a lift, going to bed with him? The irony of the picnic and his robbing her? The reappearance with the body? The melodramatics of meeting him again? Her strengths, weaknesses? Her building on the crisis to solving it?

7. The contribution of the people on the way: the police, the lady at the shop, the people at the garage, the truck drivers?

8. Philippe as a mystery character? wastrel at the Riviera? Getting a lift, insinuating himself into Dany’s sympathies, love making? Payment? The irony of his romance and robbing her? The body and getting rid of it? The mystery of his disappearance?

9. The Caldwells: their links with Dany, Anita and her way of life, the murder? Michael and his hostility towards Dany? The setting, the importance of his appearance and the revelation of the truth? His hatred, motives, explanation?

10. A sordid atmosphere of evil? Victims and victimisers? A exploration at the popular mystery level?

LADY HAMILTON

UK/US, 1940, 128 minutes, Black and white.
Vivien Leigh, Laurence Olivier, Alan Mowbray, Gladys Cooper, Heather Angel, Henry Wilcoxon.
Directed by Alexander Korda.

One of Alexander Korda’s most famous productions. He also directed. Laurence Olivier, renowned on the English stage, had recently had film successes with Wuthering Heights and Rebecca. He was becoming known to an international audience. He plays Lord Nelson with great gravity and dignity as well as feeling. Vivien Leigh had just been the star of Gone with the Wind and Waterloo Bridge. They also married around this time. The film had all the aura of this kind of publicity. However, in retrospect, it is still a good historical film.

The supporting cast includes many Hollywood veterans for the film was made in Hollywood. Sarah Allgood in very effective as Emma’s mother and Alan Mowbray as Lord Hamilton. Gladys Cooper appears briefly as Lady Nelson. The score is by Miklos Rosza, who was to be an important composer for so many of the M.G.M. films of the forties and fifties including Quo Vadis and Ben Hur. Lady Hamilton could be compared with the more recent focus on Emma Hamilton in Bequest to the Nation with Glenda Jackson as Lady Hamilton and Peter Finch as Nelson and Margaret Leighton as Lady Nelson.

1. The quality of this British production in America, with American traditions, technology? An entertaining film, historical interest? Its status as a classic, impact now?

2. The reputation of the stars, the background of their marriage, their capacity for working together? Their reputation at the time? The audience interest in seeing early Olivier and Vivien Leigh?

3. The importance of the production values, the re-creation of history, sets, atmosphere, the battle sequences? Black and white photography, the historic, rousing score? Audience enjoyment of this kind of historical background?

4. The dramatic importance of the structure and the flashbacks? The introduction to Lady Hamilton - in her degradation, the shop and the drink? Calais, the fighting in the streets and the police, prison? Her telling her stories to the prostitutes? Lady Hamilton's memories and the reality and unreality of her past? The listener asking to hear whether it was true or not? The ending and the sudden death of Lord Nelson and her having no after and no further story in that English society?

5. The introduction to the young Emma after seeing her telling her story? Vivien Leigh's style, vivacious, her arriving with her mother, the personality and her impact? Her hopes, plans of marriage? Her coyness, scheming yet sweet? Her shock with the news of Lord Hamilton and her being bought like a work of art? The basis of her agreement to be Lady Hamilton and her turning against him later? (And his comments about his works of art always being with him?) The achievement in her early years after the mistakes of her background, her happiness in Neapolitan society, British status? The continued influence of her mother - as illustrated by her mother's presence at banquets and chatter, protecting her daughter, guiding her role in society?

6. The introduction to Lord Hamilton and his way of life in Naples, his age, attitude towards women? Making Emma his wife and the reasons for this? His care for her? His ambitions? His being a collector? Society, parties etc.? Emma’s fitting into this way of life?

7. The introduction to Nelson and the casual style of this? The introduction to the Napoleonic wars? Nelson's needs and his urgency about the war? The contrast with Emma and her chatter about banquets, dancing? Her helping of Nelson especially the audience with the Queen (and the parody side of the presentation of the court of Naples?) Nelson's reaction to her help and this as the basis of his thinking about her over the years?

8. The transition of five years and the effect on Nelson and Emma? Audience anticipation of their relationship? The Napoleonic wars and the details, Lord Hamilton's explanation with the globe? (and the patriotic remarks relevant to World War II when the film was made?)? Nelson and the change from his experience, the loss of his sight, arm? Emma’s arrival at the ship, her being carried on board, her shock at Nelson's condition? Her continued helping of him?

9. Nelson's being in Naples and the urgency to persuade the King for help? His being feted? His illness and Emma’s looking after him? Mrs Hart and her flurrying about? Emma’s constant attention and the credibility of their falling in love? Nelson's acknowledgement of his wife? His son and the introduction to him earlier, his place on the ship, his presence in Naples, in the tavern? The opera and Nelson’s presence with Emma, the discussion in the tavern, the toast? The credibility of their relationship?

10. His leaving and the impact on Emma? Her husband's discussion of this with her, his acquainting her with the works of art, her justification of her leaving him emotionally? The importance of Nelson's return and their final time together? Romantic, historical? Their comments about the morality and their judgment of the situation? The importance for Nelson of Emma’s emotional support, her understanding of his work as Admiral, her help? The contrast with the storm, the move to rescue Lady Hamilton and the British? The dilemma for the Admiralty and their censuring of Nelson? His homecoming and its turning into a triumph?

11. The portrait of Lady Nelson, the contrast with Emma, the greeting of Nelson on his return and its cold formality, the pain for Lady Nelson, the encounter with Emma and the keeping of the proprieties? Audience response to both women and Nelson's relationship with each?

12. Lady Hamilton as Nelson's mistress, the bond between the two, her living in the country? The importance of his being commissioned again and her accepting of his going?

13. How well did the film present the Battle of Trafalgar, the action in which Nelson was involved, his being wounded? The character of Hardy and the assistance? The scone of Nelson's famous death? His death?

14. Hardy and his grief? His decision to go to Lady Hamilton? Their meeting and discussion, her grief and his riding away? The fact that there was no aftermath for her, that her life with Nelson and in this environment was ended so suddenly?

15. The film as a romantic love story? As a glimpse at history? The relationship, the nature of love, moral judgments?

THE LONG SHIPS

US, 1964, 126 minutes, Colour.
Richard Widmark, Sidney Poitier, Russ Tamblyn, Rosanna Schiaffino, Oskar Homolka, Edward Judd, Lionel Jeffries, Gordon Jackson, Colin Blakely.
Directed by Jack Cardiff.

The Long Ships is in the tradition of such films as The Vikings. This time it is Richard Widmark who is the Viking who tells the legend of a bell, gets the interest of the Moorish prince, played in stately manner by Sidney Poitier, escapes from him and gets a ship to recover the bell, being involved in action adventures. The film has a mainly British supporting cast although American Russ Tamblyn is on board as well as Italian Rosanna Schiaffino.

The film is well paced and exciting, was written by Beverley Cross who had a particular interest in myths and legends, writing the screenplays for such films as Genghis Khan, Jason and the Argonauts, Sinbad and The Eye of the Tiger and Clash of the Titans.

The film was directed by award-winning cinematographer Jack Cardiff (Black Narcissus) who directed only a few films which include Sons and Lovers, The Girl on a Motorcycle and Young Cassidy.

1. A good action adventure film? For whom was it made? How was this indicated?

2. The film's settings and its atmosphere, fairy-tale heroes and situations, myths and the background of myths? Audience response and liking of this kind of mythic storytelling and of fairytales?

3. Audience response to stories of Vikings? How were these expectations fulfilled?

4. The use of colour, wide screen, action with ships, battles, spectacle?

5. How interesting a hero was Rolfe? his telling stories about the bell, as a hero with vigour, how sympathetic? His sense of zeal for a quest? His encountering dangers, his taking the ship? His encounter with Ali Mansuh and his wife? The superstitions and his confronting them with his fellow Vikings? The exercise of leadership? The finding of the bell and its effect on him? How much characterization? How much comic-book hero?

6. Ali Mansuh and Sidney Poitier's style? As a Moor, leader, greedy for the bell, interested in the quest, jealous of his wife? The inevitability of his death?

7. The picture of the Vikings: Sven and his scepticism, the kings and their rivalry? Orm as a hero and his loved one? The men who were afraid, their fighting, their attacks on the Moors, their response to the bell, life and death?

8. The humour and the picture of the harem? Aziz? The contrast of the Moors and the Vikings?

9. The presentation of ships, storms, fogs. sands and desert, mountainous islands, the fighting, the strategy of getting the bell and its effect, its falling, into the sea etc.?

10. What was the significance and symbolism of the bell? Was this communicated well, or did it remain on the comic-book adventure?

LISTEN, DARLING.

US, 1938, 75 minutes, Black and white.
Judy Garland, Freddie Bartholomew, Walter Pidgeon, Mary Astor, Alan Hale, Gene Lockhart.
Directed by Edwin L. Marin.

Listen, Darling was a short second feature designed to promote Judy Garland. At sixteen she was an attractive youngster, able to carry a feature film and able to project her singing voice well. She has three songs in this film including Zing Went the Strings of My Heart. Freddie Bartholomew who had emerged from films like David Copperfield, Captain Courageous, Kidnapped is a prim and proper lead. Mary Astor is charming as the mother - later to be Judy Garland's mother in Meet Me in St. Louis. Walter Pidgeon, at the beginning of his career, is a pleasant hero. Good support from Alan Hale and Gene Lockhart. Soon after Judy Garland made The Wizard Of Oz and began a successful, though tragic, career.

1. Entertaining romantic comedy ?

2. The popular family films of the times for eg. Andy Hardy ? The conventions of the children, family values, searching for a husband for mother, comic sequences, songs ? The brief running time of the film?

3. M.G.M’s production values, black and white photography, musical score, the stars? A piece of contemporary Americana?

4. The plausibility of the film - for plot purposes? Establishing the characters of the children, the family situation, the banker suitor, the humour of the kidnapping of mother and son, the search for potential step? fathers, comedy adventures? The happy ending?

5. Judy Garland's style as Pinky? Her friendship with Buzz, singing at the play, her love for her mother, her love for her brother, her friendship with Buzz? Antagonism towards the banker? Concern for her mother and her weeping ? Contriving the kidnapping plot? Her fears? The first reaction to Richard? The enthusiasm for Slattery and his kindness? Her enjoying her mother being happy with Richard? Pouring out her heart to Slattery and contriving the happy ending? The potential shown by Judy Garland in this film?


6. Mary Astor's charm as Dottie? The widow and her concern for her children, pride? Marrying the Banker? Being thrown at Richard? Enjoying his company? but fearing his lack of responsibility? The happy ending? Richard and the encounter with the skunk, the attraction towards Dottie, his being unable to commit himself? The marriage?

7. Buzz and his speech, straight up and down attitudes, the law? Love for the family? The kidnap? Interrogating Richard? His plans for Slattery?

8. The Banker as potential suitor? and his paying court to Dottie? Slattery as so different. helping Scotty with the Daniel Boone suit, entertaining the children, listening to them. arranging the happy ending? His Butler?

9. The conversion of the songs for Judy Garland? Comedy sequences? Audiences being able to identify with the sentiments, family values, love in the family? An optimistic piece of domestic comedy?

LUST FOR LIFE

US, 1956, 122 minutes, Colour.
Kirk Douglas, Anthony Quinn, James Donald, Pamela Brown, Everett Sloane, Niall MacGinnis?, Noel Purcell, Henry Daniell, Jill Bennett, Lionel Jeffries, Laurence Naismith, Eric Pohlmann.
Directed by Vincente Minnelli.

Lust for Life is a celebrated biography of Vincent van Gogh. He was the subject of a number of films including Paul Cox’s docudrama with readings from van Gogh’s letters by John Hurt, Vincent; Robert Altman’s film Theo and Vincent; Maurice Pialat’s Van Gogh.

Kirk Douglas portrays van Gogh in an intense way, Oscar-nominated (losing to Yul Brynner in The King and I). Anthony Quinn won an Oscar as best supporting actor for his portrayal of artist Paul Gauguin. The other members of the family are portrayed by James Donald and Henry Daniell as the artist’s father.

The film was directed by Vincente Minnelli, best known for his range of musicals like Meet Me in St Louis, An American in Paris, The Band Wagon and the Oscar-winning Gigi. However, he also directed a number of melodramas which were quite striking including The Bad and the Beautiful, Two Weeks in Another Town.

The film is lavish in its re-creation of the world of Holland and then of Provence, the visualising of the landscapes were van Gogh painted as well as his paintings, and the friendship with Gauguin and his return from the Pacific Islands.

The film has a strong supporting cast mainly of British actors.

The film was based on the novel by Irving Stone who also wrote the novel about Michelangelo, The Agony and the Ecstasy.

1. The significance and meaning of the title? The zest for life, the greediness for life, the irony and Van Gogh's loss of life?

2. The importance of the colour, widescreen, musical accompaniment? The visualizing of Van Gogh’s life, landscapes, still-life, settings? The portrayal of his paintings? The sets? The audience being immersed in the world of Van Gogh?

3. Audience expectations of biography films? How true to life? How true to character and times? The facts? insight into a person’s life and its meaning?

4. The historical setting of the film and its importance? The nineteenth century and Europe in the nineteenth century? How interesting was the film in its portrayal of the artist in his historical time and place? The quality of the film as biography and presenting the life and meaning of the artist? The presentation of Van Gogh as an artist and what drove him? His skill? The presentation of Van Gogh as a human being? With what understanding?

5. The importance of the religious setting of the film’s beginning? Setting a mood for a film? Human nature, religion? The minister's discussion, life in the remote mining settlements? Van Gogh's sermons, people's non-apprehension, practical characteristics, the hypocrisy of the elders? The repercussions throughout Van Gogh’s life? Van Gogh in his Dutch setting? The religious background,. his father and his rigidity,. his mother and the sense of duty, his sister? Van Gogh’s compulsion to do things? His wanting to be used for a worthy purpose?

6. The portrayal of Van Gogh’s artwork? The nature of his talent? The force and drive of his talent? His capacity for poetry and beauty? The insights into landscape, colour, people, work, their sense of achievement? His achievement and feeling for his painting?

7. His reaction to his parents especially in the part of his life at home? His love for his cousin, his terrifying her? reaction of his sister? His dependence on Theo and Theo’s support of him? The device of using his letters to Theo? Theo’s actually reading them? The nature of the relationship between the two brothers? Theo’s admiration and business skill? Vincent’s need for support and interest?

9. The encounter with Christine and her child? Helping him after his suffering with the candle? Their living together? His painting her? Her anger and disillusionment? His ability to leave them?

10. Hie relationship with his cousin? His dependence on people’s money? The change in Paris? His coming alive? The visualizing of the paintings of the time? The device of having the artist explain their theories of painting?

11. The impact of Gauguin? As a painter, as a man, the independent type? His love for Gauguin, his hatred of him? His desire for his companionship? Their quarrels?

12. Provence as a setting for Van Gogh’s skill? The exuberant paintings? A part madness? A lust for life?

13. The dramatic impact of the growing unbalance? The mixture of zest and seizures? The encounter with Gauguin, the fight and the desperate emotional turmoil? The melodrama of the cutting of his ear? His wanting to be committed? His inertia in the institution? His attitude toward suicide earlier in the film? The desperation? The fact that he would shoot himself? The significance of the note?

14. Van Gogh seen in the light of the people who liked his work? the people in Provence who got him the house? Van Gogh seen in the light of the people who ridiculed him? The people outside the house after the ear incident?

15. Was this an adequate insight into the life and the passion of a tormented spirit? The happiness and unhappiness of such a life?

16. What insight into the excesses of human nature via the life of an artist? The nature of happiness and unhappiness? Success and failure? Self-confidence and security?

17. Van Gogh’s achievement in art and life?

LEAVE HER TO HEAVEN

US, 1945, 110 minutes, Colour.
Gene Tierney, Cornel Wilde, Jeanne Crain, Vincent Price, Mary Philips, Ray Collins, Gene Lockhart, Darrell Hickman, Chill Wills.
Directed by John M. Stahl.

‘Leave her to Heaven’ are the words of Hamlet when judgment is made on his mother, Gertrude. It is one of the myriad titles of films and plays taken from Shakespeare’s Hamlet.

The theme of the film is jealousy. Gene Tierney, cold and charming, portrays Helen who infatuates a young writer played by Cornel Wilde. They marry, but mysterious things, violent things seem to happen. He and the family discover the intense jealousy underlying Gene Tierney’s character.

Finally, there is a court case which involves the half-sister, played by Jeanne Crain at the beginning of her career. Also in the cast, Vincent Price.

The film is photographed in lavish Technicolor (as was Duel in the Sun at this time), Instead of a film noir in black and white, we have a film noir in extravagant colour. Leon Shamroy won an Oscar for his cinematography.

The film was directed by John M. Stahl who directed heightened melodramas in the 1930s including Magnificent Obsession, Back Street and Imitation of Life (all of which were remade lavishly in the late 1950s). He also directed at this time The Keys of the Kingdom and The Foxes of Harrow.

This is Hollywood film-making – all stops pulled out – at its best. Gene Tierney was nominated for an Oscar – but lost out to Joan Crawford in Mildred Pierce, a black and white film noir.

1. Was this a good melodrama? On what conventions do melodramas work? Are they a valid art form? What response do they gain from audiences?

2. How realistic are melodramas? Is it necessary for them to be realistic or to be heightened emotional confrontations? Why?

3. The significance of the title and its origins in "Hamlet"? Leaving Ellen to the justice of Heaven? As illustrating the theme of the film?

4. Comment on the structure of the films the flashback technique, the knowledge that Dick was in prison, not knowing who he was going to meet? Did this add to the suspense and audience curiosity? Would a straightforward narrative have been better? Why?

5. How did the film make Ellen central? the initial meeting on the train, her romance, the building up of her possessiveness, the details of her possessiveness of Dick, her father? How did she become a monster? Why was she so cruel? Could audiences identify with her and her feelings? Did she elicit any sympathy? Why was she so possessive and cruel? The effect on her father, mother, fiance Russell, Ruth# Dan, Dick? How many people's lives did she ruin? Are such jealous and possessive characters credible? Her device of wreaking vengeance after her death?

6. How interesting a hero was Dick? As a writer, infatuated by Ellen, marrying her, finding happiness with her, looking after Dan? The change of affections? The realization of her cruelty? Audience sympathy for him, during the trial? His telling of the truth? Was his jail sentence credible? Were audiences satisfied with his meeting Ruth at the end?

7. How attractive a character was Ruth? As a contrast with Ellen? Her support and love for Dick? As a victim of Ellen's anger and circumstances? The ordeal of the trial and audience sympathy?

8. How effectively communicated was the relationship between Dan, Dick, Ellen and their friend looking after Dan? Ellen’s removal of the friend and her decision to let Dan die?

9. The malicious impact on Russell and his memory of being jilted, his political pursuits instead of letting Ellen possess him, his defence of her?

10. The importance of Ellen's destructive power on her mother and father?

11. How did this melodrama rely on images for its impact: Ellen's scattering her father's ashes, the swim for Dan's death, the walk on the beach, her causing the miscarriage, letting the poison work in her and her death?

12. How do audiences respond to such films about jealousy? As the deadliest of sins and as a reality in the audiences’ lives?

13. Does this film now seem dated or is it still enjoyable as it was in the forties? How did it illustrate the film conventions of the forties?

LEASE OF LIFE

UK, 1954, 99 minutes, Colour.
Robert Donat, Kay Walsh, Denholm Elliott, Adrienne Corri, Walter Fitzgerald, Reginald Beckwith, Jean Anderson.
Directed by Charles Frend.

Lease of Life is an impressive religious film. It focuses on a typical small British village of the 1950s, a typical community with its small sins, centred on the Anglican church and parsonage. Robert Donat plays the parson, a kind man, limited, supported by his wife (Kay Walsh) and his daughter (Adrienne Corri).

When the parson discovers that he has a terminal illness, he decides to make sure all is well in the parish, within his family, enabling others to do good in the message of the Gospel.

The film was written by novelist Eric Ambler and directed by Charles Frend (Scott of the Antarctic, The Cruel Sea).

Robert Donat made an impact in British films in the 1930s with The Count of Monte Cristo and The Ghost Goes West, winning an Oscar for his sympathetic performance in Goodbye Mr Chips. Suffering from chronic asthma, he did not make many films – and his last film was The Inn of the Sixth Happiness with Ingrid Bergman four years after Lease of Life. Kay Walsh had made an impression in such films as Oliver Twist and Adrienne Corri was to have a long career (including the striking invasion and rape theme in A Clockwork Orange). The film is an early film for Denholm Elliott.

1. The significance of the title and its theme: life and vitality?

2. What was the main impact of the film: humanity, religion. the value of life, optimism? How convincing?

3. How typically English was the film? Why? Its presentation of people and places? The village and the city, the countryside and colour, the emotional conflicts, the background of village, school, Anglicanism? How interesting and convincing was this?

4. Could the film have been made anywhere but in England? Why? What are the main characteristics of this kind of English filmmaking?

5. How interesting and sympathetic a character was Will? Our first impression at his non-communication to the children, his life and vocation as a minister, his career as a minister, the fact that his past was fairly ineffective and uneventful? The nature of the family's poverty, their suffering? His role in the family, relationship with his wife, hopes for his daughter? His relationship with the people in the village? The grave digger, the ladies, his responsibilities? How good a man was he? The challenge of giving the school sermon? The challenge of his dying? The challenge of his wife's ambitions? The fact that he came alive?

6. The theme of death, and its relationship to life? Will's coming alive and the relief, of knowing he was to die? The sequence with the doctor, his helping the dying man and his selfish wife, the spontaneity of the sermon, his relationship with his wife and her knowing the truth? How well explored was this theme of death? The optimism inherent in Will's attitude?

7.How central was the sermon to the film? Its impact and content? Its results on himself. his family, the boys and their attention, the headmaster and the Dean and their reaction against it, the implications for his job, his being exploited by the paper and the sightseers, h assertion against the sightseers and its effectiveness?

8. How real a person was Vera? In herself,. in her relationship with her husband, supporting his work,. her ambitions for her daughter,. her scheming? Her supporting, the temptation to steal and her succumbing to it? Was the ending just? What had she learnt from her daughter and her husband? How valuable the lesson?

9. Was Susan an important character in the film? The presentation of her musical talent, her life with her mother and father, the poverty, the ambitions? Her character influenced by her father and mother? By her music teacher? The necessary move to independence?

10 How conventional a character was the music teacher? His support for Susan and his love for her?

11. The importance of Will's working for the dying man, warding off the greedy wife, the sequence at the graveside? The importance of these incidents as part of the plot?

12. The film's comment on the Anglican way of life and religion? Village parsons and their work? The Dean at the Cathedral? The discussion of chaplains and their appointments? The expectations of chaplains in a college etc?

13. Were the aspects of the stealing of the money too melodramatic for this film or did they fit in well?

14. What insight into religion did the film give?

15. How valuable an affirmation of life was the film?

16. Was the film typical of the 1950s? How?

THE LEAGUE OF GENTLEMEN

UK, 1960, 116 minutes, Black and white.
Jack Hawkins, Nigel Patrick, Roger Livesey, Richard Attenborough, Bryan Forbes, Kieron Moore, Terence Alexander, Norman Bird, Robert Coote, Nanette Newman.
Directed by Basil Dearden.

The League of Gentlemen was talked about as a comedy. However, in retrospect it is far more serious. The comedy is in the irony, the sardonic characterisation as well as the crisp dialogue.

The film is ironic in its presentation of a disillusioned major, played by Jack Hawkins, getting some revenge on the Establishment by inviting to lunch a whole range of disgruntled ex-officers with all kinds of moral, immoral and amoral backgrounds. They are a star-studded list in the sense of the top actors, character actors, of British cinema from the old days like Roger Livesey, from the immediate past like Nigel Patrick and up-and-coming stars like Richard Attenborough and Bryan Forbes – who had adapted the novel for the screen was a performer in a lot of films but made his name principally as a director.

The film spends a lot of time focusing on the characters and their interactions, the difficulties that the characters have with one another as they plan a robbery. Part of the film is devoted to the execution of the robbery – with military precision.

However, in films, crime doesn’t pay. However, the film is very strong in its cinematic qualities and very interesting as a reflection of comedy at the end of the 1950s, the era of the kitchen-sink drama, the end of the Ealing comedies and socially the beginning of the 60s and the disintegration of the British Empire.

The British comedy team with its outrageous parody took its name, The League of Gentlemen, from this film.

1. This film was highly praised by critics. Do you agree? Why?

2. Some considered it a comedy. Was it? How much humanity was there - in the treatment of human foibles?

3. Others considered it as more serious. Was it a serious film? The focussing of attention on criminals, the different and perverse backgrounds of these criminals,, the workings of the criminal mind? How ugly was the tone of this presentation of criminals and their work? Or how much sympathy did these men elicit for the audience? Did this carry over into their crimes or exploit it?

4. Was the technique of introducing each character by an incident successful? Did it arouse audience curiosity and interest? Comment on the visual techniques for varying this introduction to each character. How important was dialogue in these introductions? In subsequent portrayal of character?

5. The irony of the mention of gentlemen? What did the film say about gentlemen and their styles? Their conventions and behaviour? Gentlemen and the effects of the Army in civilian life? Hyde’s resentment about his treatment? The implications of the film for the degeneration of English standards for gentlemen?

6. Were the characters interesting in themselves? In their ordinary lives? The criminal aspect of their background, their need for money? Which .members of the League made the most impression? The Major with his
Heartiness and his relationship to his girlfriend? The man who was a failure with his wife supporting him and her reaction to him with a lover? The timid man with the talkative wife and the father watching the TV? The coach and his homosexual background? Race and his woman? The padre and his conmanship?

7. How did the film retain interest in the plans and phases of preparation? The styles of meeting, dinners, lectures etc.? The conviviality and dependence?

8. The value of having a crime planned as an operation?

9. How well executed was the robbery? All the preparations? the banter and humour of the mistakes? The robbery of the arms and the risks with the police?

10. How well executed was the robbery itself? How well filmed, its brevity and force?

11. How well did the film portray the accidents and mistakes? Did the film need a moral ending? Did the moral ending fit in well with the film?

12. What was the point of having money arrive in the last moments of the film? The hilarity counterpointing the tension – the humorous last line?

13. How successful was this 1960 crime-drama comedy compared with similar films now? How did it keep its interest? How enjoyable was it? How much an exploration of values of modern society and crime?

THE LAW AND THE LADY

US, 1951, 104 minutes, Black and white.
Greer Garson, Michael Wilding, Fernando Lamas, Marjorie Main.
Directed by Edwin H. Knopf.

The Law and the Lady is based on a play by Frederick Lonsdale (The Last of Mrs Cheyney, The Maid of the Mountains). It is a light Greer Garson vehicle – not so well known in later years. She joins Michael Wilding as a conman travelling the world to con people at cards – especially Marjorie Main. However, she begins to fall in love with Fernando Lamas.

The light touch, amusing dialogue, seeing Greer Garson in a different light. This was the period for Michael Wilding in transition from many English films with Anna Neagle to a Hollywood career and marriage to Elizabeth Taylor.

1. How enjoyable a comedy? What conventions of comedy were used and how well? The tone of the title?

2. The comedy styles of the early fifties? The light touch, the Greer Garson elegance, wit and manner?

3. Was it evident that the film was based on a play? The structure of the scenes, the locations, the emphasis on dialogue, the farcical ?situations, the Edwardian atmosphere? San Francisco and costume comedy?

4. How much of a satire was the film? On the English way of life at the turn of the century, on the international luxury set, on America, on San Francisco pretensions?

5. How much satire on class and money? English, American, Latin American? What points were being made via the satire?

6. How attractive a character was Jane? Greer Garson's style, her role as a maid and her self assertion, the personal vindication and revenge, her being fascinated by Nigel, the attractiveness of swindling people, moving on around the world, finding a place in American society, playing up to Julia’s pretensions, the change of atmosphere in Juan and falling in love, the presentation of her choices as regards love, robberies? Her coming good at the end, reversing to a ‘nice’ criminal? How seriously should the character be taken? How lightly?

7. Nigel as an attractive rogue? The introduction and his stealing, his likeness to his brother? His charm, falling in with Jane, the success of their tour in swindling? His capacity for fulfilling the ‘butler’ role? The jealousy? His skill in stealing? His manoeuvring the truth about all the characters? The happy ending for him?

8. What points were made about character, good and bad, the making and holding of money, truth, pretensions? The satire on American heritage?

9. How attractive a character was Juan? the Latin American style, the humorous presentation of this, the romance, the importance of the sequences with the grandmother? The truth about him? His gallant leaving Jane to Nigel?

10. How important for the impact was Julia? Her place in San Francisco society, her wanting to do the right thing, her snobbery, the ball, her jewels, friendship with Jane, the truth about her and the humorous ending?

11. The significance of the truth about the guests and their background?

12. The effectiveness of the resolution and its staginess and talkativeness?

13. How dated does the comedy seem? Does this matter for its enjoyment?

LAW AND DISORDER

US, 1974, 99 minutes, Colour.
Carroll O’ Connor, Ernest Borgnine, Anne Wedgeworth, Karen Black, Jack Kehoe, David Spielberg.
Directed by Ivan Passer.

Law and Disorder is a serious comedy set in the New York of the 1970s, a city where there is a great deal of street crime. Two men, aged men, after being robbed decide that they will join the police force as auxiliary cops. They persuade some of their friends to do likewise – in an effort to clean up the streets. However, there is a series of comic adventures as they go about their work, confronting the criminals and the drug lords.

Carroll O’ Connor who had made such an impact in All in the Family teams up with Ernest Borgnine who had won an Oscar in 1955 for Marty and had appeared in many films after that like The Poseidon Adventure. Karen Black appears briefly.

The film was directed by an outsider to the United States, Ivan Passer who had migrated in the 1960s from Czechoslovakia. He and directors like Milos Forman had great reputations in Czechoslovakia. Forman succeeded in the United States, especially with Oscars for One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and for Amadeus. However, Ivan Passer had a much more limited career, making such films as Born to Win (with Karen Black), Ace Up My Sleeve (also with Karen Black), Silver Bears and Cutter’s Way. His career during the 80s and 90s was very limited. However, he made something of a comeback in 2005 with Nomad.

1. The meaning and implications of the title? As an indication of the themes of the film: the comedy touch, the satire, the parody? The dramatic implications of law and injustice?

2. How successful was the film in itself? What were the aims of the film-makers? For what audience was the film made? Was it particularly for Americans? Or would it be just as successful for overseas audiences? Why?

3. What were the main features of the film as comedy, its comedy, situations, parody? Where were its main strengths as comedy?

4. What were the main features of the film as drama: the crime aspect, the police drama, the portraying of justice? The portrayal of ordinary men, their lives and ambitions? The drama of modern violent American society? Where were the main strengths of the film as drama?

5. How did the film echo and portray the violent and crime atmosphere of America in the 1970s? The opening sequences (despite their humour) of the stolen T.V., the dismantling of the car etc? The extreme and skilful nature of the robberies to highlight the point?

6. Did the film show that the vigilante approach is credible? Why is the vigilante approach attractive to exasperated citizens? The relationship between vigilantes and the law? The importance of protection of civil rights? The inadequacy of the police and the constitutional right of citizens to protect themselves? Did the film explore these themes well?

7. How did the film satirise the ordinary men at their playing at police, the meetings and their applause for the police and then running them down? The games with the uniforms, the guns? The nature of the patrols and the chasing of criminals? The using of the police drama techniques and satirising them? Was this effective?

8. Did the film show enough of the home situations of the men? The family life and the necessity of protecting rights? For example, the daughter and the rape situation and the chasing of an innocent man and interrogating him? Comment on the nature of family life? The relationships between husbands and wives, love and lack of love, shouting, ambitions etc?

9. Comment on the crime wave busting sequences, the chasing the criminals in the lifts etc the patrolling of the streets.

10.How important were the sequences of the men's ambitions? The presentation of them in their jobs: the taxi business, the hair stylist? The importance of improving their jobs, using their money, the negotiations of buying the restaurant and the failure? Did this add reality to the satirical tones of the film?

11. What was the significance of adding the character of Gloria? her kookiness? The way she ridiculed the customers? As a sex object? The significance of this in terms of law and disorder with the rest of the film?

12. The growing climax as the two friends drank and became just as anarchical as the criminals? The message that all men are the same whether vigilante or criminal? How were they satirised in their practical jokes and violence?

13. How did the joke atmosphere change to being serious and then culminate in death? Was this credible, well handled dramatically?

14. The significance of the final taxi ride, the bickering couple, their criticisms of the driver and his abandoning them? In terms of law and disorder?

15. How good were the intentions of the film in exploring this theme? Did the film match the intention? How strongly did it echo the questions of law and anarchy in modern America? The themes as regards law and disorder?