LAWRENCE OF ARABIA

UK, 1962, 215 minutes, Colour.
Peter O'Toole, Omar Sharif, Alec Guinness, Anthony Quinn, Jack Hawkins, Anthony Quayle, Jose Ferrer, Claude Rains, Arthur Kennedy, Donald Wolfit.
Directed by David Lean,

Lawrence of Arabia was the second of David Lean's big blockbusters. It won him the Oscars for best film of 1962 and best director, Robert Bolt (who was later to script Doctor Zhivago and Ryan's Daughter for Lean and his own play A Man for All Seasons for Fred Zinnemann) also won an Oscar for this screenplay,

The film is made on large proportions: it lasts well over three hours, lingers magnificently on the desert scenery and reconstructs the Middle East World War I situation in some detail. It has a large cast and excellent actors and provided the first major screen roles for Peter O'Toole and Omar Sharif.

The film presents T, E. Lawrence as an enigma. Because it confines its interest to Lawrence's desert campaigns during the war, it could never have solved all the puzzles of his personality, drives and dreams. He lived another seventeen years after the war, working in the Middle East and in India, hiding at times from people, writing "The Seven Pillars of Wisdom" which later writers have questioned for its truthfulness. He was killed in 1935 in an accident which opens the film. Peter O'Toole shows us what Lawrence must have been like in the eyes of his fellow soldiers and the Arabs. He offers many clues towards his personality and leaves us with them. Given the scope of the role O'Toole does very well and seen now in the perspective of his work in, say, Becket, The Lion in Winter and Goodbye, Mr. Chips (the films for which he was nominated for Oscars), he can be Judged a fine actor. Omar Sharif, Lean's Zhivago, is at his best here.

But the film is spoken of as David Lean's and considered with The Bridge on the River Kwai, Doctor Zhivago and Ryan's Daughter. It 1s the most substantial of them all, exploring the personality of an individualist, as they all do, in the formative environment in which they live and suffer.

1. Why did this film win the Oscar for the Best Film of 1962? Why was it so popular - story, acting, scenery, magnitude?

2. How did the prologue of Lawrence's death prepare for what was to come - a daredevil who took risks past danger signs?

3. What did the sequence at St. Paul's add - especially Allenby 's statements (how were they shown to be ironical?) and Bentley's remark about Lawrence as an exhibitionist?

4. What did you make of Lawrence out of the whole film? At one stage, he could not explain himself but knew he had a destiny. After his flogging, he was not sure. Was all we got a look at what Lawrence did, while he himself remained too much of an enigma?

5. We sense many Lawrences vying with one another:
"The iron-willed mystic of the desert; the sado-masochist in all things sexual; the exhibitionist poseur and self-confessed 'posturing fraud'; the British exile who identifies himself with an alien land and its people; the illegitimate misfit, who never really accepted an aristocratic soldiering Establishment; the sensualist and the ascetic, the compassionate man and the barbarous man.... Only Lawrence the scholar is missing, to complete the round-up." (Colin Bennet in the Melbourne Age, 31 July, 1971,} Haw accurate is Bennett’s assessment of the Lawrence of the film?

5. What impression do the desert vistas make on the audience? How is the audience absorbed into the environment and atmosphere of the film?

7. What kind of men did Allenby, Murray, Dryden and Brighton seem to be? How did each of them respond to Lawrence's vision?

8. What part did endurance play in moulding Laurence - his not minding the burning match, not drinking in the desert?

9. How did Ali's entry and the shooting at the well introduce the Arabs and the Arab problems into the film?

10. How did the sequence of the air attack on the Arab camp and Prince Feisal's chasing the planes on horse with his sword visualise the Arab troubles and their attitudes?

11. How did the British relate to the Arabs - Brighton's diplomacy and wanting decisions, Lawrence's sympathy, sharing the Koran and the Arab spirit?

12. What was the purpose of Lawrence's night of reflection in the film — how did it show his concentration, mystic tendencies and intensity?

13. How was the three weeks' desert Journey to Aquaba one of the highlights of the film, the endurance, the desert, 'not drifting', the emotive force of the rescue of Gasim, the proof of Lawrence's greatness in proving that nothing is written unless a man Wants it written, the strategy of the attack and its moral force?

14. What did Lawrence's confiding in Ali about his background reveal about him?

15. How did he become Lawrence of Arabia when he was given Arab dress and the title 'Aurenae'? How do you explain his delighted reaction?

16. How did Lawrence get Auda on his side - "Auda attacks Aquaba not for the gold but because it is his pleasure"? What kind of an Arab, shrewd and savage, yet leader of his people, was Auda?

17. How did the vendetta incident before Aqaba show the risks in trying to unite the Arabs? What was the effect of the execution on Lawrence? Why was he worried because he enjoyed performing it?

18. How did the restful sequences by the sea at Aquaba give the audience a chance to pause and reflect quietly on what they had experienced? - the victor's wreaths and Ali 's admiration, human capacity to achieve what is written in his head?

19. How important was Auda's comment that Aurence was great but not perfect because he did not tell the truth about the money?

20. Why did Ali resent Lawrence's going to Cairo to inform Allenby about the capture of Aquaba? Why did Lawrence call him an 'ignorant man'?

21. Lawrence saw a huge dust storm on the desert and saw it as a 'Pillar of Cloud'. In what sense did he see himself as a new Moses 'leading an Exodus in the Sinai Peninsula'?

22. What effect did the Arab boy's death in the sand have on him? Why did he want to make reparation by walking?

23. Why did Lawrence make a point of going into the officers' bar dressed as an Arab and with the boy? What was the effect? the contrast?

24. How did Allenby use sunning in exploiting Lawrence's revulsion at his enjoyment of killing in persuading him to continue fighting for the Arabs?

25. Did Lawrence enjoy his celebrity when walking with Allenby to the bar and the congratulations of the men?

26. Was Laurence naive in not expecting Allenby and Dryden to be unscrupulous in their treatment of the Arabs? Why was Lawrence so involved with the Arabs? Why was the desert 'clean' for him?

27. Had Lawrence changed by the time he went back and began blowing up the Turkish trains? Why did he allow Auda's men to loot?

28. Why did Prince Feisal and Bentley help each other in publicising Lawrence's work? What effect did Bentley's articles have?

29. Why did Lawrence defy the dying soldier to shoot him? Did he enjoy his triumph as he walked along the carriage roofs?

30. Did Lawrence enjoy shooting the boy wounded by the detonator?

31. How did Lawrence 'a attempts to rally the Arabs in the winter snows contrast with his lack of spirit after hie beating by the Turks?

32. Why did he dare the Turks to recognise him? Why did he kick the Bey? What was the effect of the beating - fear, the willingness to betray everyone, the consciousness that he was mortal? How did the suffering embitter him?

33. How did Allenby exploit Lawrence's wish to retire and his feelings against the Turks?

34. How disgusted were you with Lawrence's and the Arab's vengeance against the Turks? Did he have any grounds for such a massacre? Why did Ali participate in it? What was his reaction to Lawrence?

35. Why was the Arab assembly at Damascus a farce? Did Feisal have the capacity for succeeding in politics where Lawrence was unable?

36. Comment on the irony of the British orderly who knocked Lawrence the Arab out of his way but wanted to shake the hand of Lawrence the hero (and his previous comments at the beginning of the film at St. Paul's).

37. How did Laurence feel as he went home?

38. How much of Lawrence was heroism, how much obsession? Could such a drama have been played in any setting other than the infinite desert?

LINK

US, 1986, 103 minutes, Colour.
Elizabeth Shue, Terence Stamp, David O’Hara?.
Directed by Richard Franklin.

Link is a piece of science fiction, horror, written by Australian author Everett de Roche (writer of many thrillers in the late '70s, early '80s, Patrick, Long Weekend) and directed by Richard Franklin (Psycho 2, Patrick, Cloak and Dagger).

It begins in the science fiction vein, with Terence Stamp as a professor in London studying apes. Elizabeth Shue (Karate Kid, Adventures in Babysitting, Cocktail) becomes his assistant. However, the apes are not all they seem to be, especially Link who has a great deal of intelligence. Once the professor decides Link has to be put down, Link begins his revenge and the film turns into suspense and horror. (However, the film could have been tightened a little - and most of the suspense takes place in daylight, a change from the usual night sequences.) There is an evocative pounding score by Jerry Goldsmith - which is led into by the playing of 'Hot Voodoo' and Marlene Dietrich singing it from Blonde Venus.

An unusual suspense science fiction film.

1. Impact of the thriller? Science fiction, horror? The work of Richard Franklin?

2. English atmosphere, the university, the mansion, the countryside and the sea? Jerry Goldsmith's score? The 'Hot Voodoo' song?

3. The presentation of the apes, the training, acting skills, editing to make them seem credible and almost human?

4. The title: apes, the chart of ape to human evolution, the Missing Link? Link the ape?

5. The prologue: the animals, subjective camera, the parents watching Blonde Venus and Marlene Dietrich on television? The child and her fear? Musical score? The purpose of the prologue?

6. The lecture, Professor Phillip and Imp, the students trying to get him out of the cage, his point about presuppositions, Jane and her answer, her request to be his assistant, his questions, acceptance?

7. Jane and her arrival, Link acting as the butler, the absentminded professor, the nature of the house, its environment, the sea and its beauty, isolation, the dogs?

8. The work with the apes: Voodoo and her death, Imp, Link? The treatment of the apes, their fierceness, computer learning and signs, response to language, the killing of animals? The tapes and their learning? Hearing? Jane and the intelligence test? Acting on instinct?

9. The professor, his book, absentmindedness, being at home with the apes, welcoming Jane, her working with him, cooking? His plans, the phone calls, the decision to put Link down, his mysterious death?

10. Link and his human qualities, behaviour, welcoming Jane, clothes, at the table, microwaving the telephone, listening to her call, the deaths, voodoo's dying, putting Imp in the well, his being forgiven, killing the dog to save Jane, following her, Jane and her search, his changing attitude, hostility to Bailey, pushing the car to the cliff, on the roof, locking doors, cleverness, shot through the door, pursuing the boys and killing them, the cigar and the gas, going onto the roof like King Kong, falling to his death?

11. Imp and Voodoo, Voodoo's death, the training, Imp chased by Link, Imp's surviving - and the suggestions at the end? Only a baby?

12. Jane and her experience, attractive, puzzled, the bizarre experiences, Link and the microwaving of the phone, her refusal to let Bailey in, coping, chased by the dogs, rescued by Link, the phone call from David, Link's change, the car, the cliff, discovery of the bodies, the boys, with David and his broken leg, fighting back in the house, her ingenuity with the gas?

13. The boys, happily singing, the arrival, the search, the violence?

14. Enough science fiction, enough suspense, enough horror to make this a distinctive film?

THE L-SHAPED ROOM

UK, 1997, 124 minutes, Black and white.
Leslie Caron, Tom Bell, Brock Peters, Bernard Lee, Cicely Courtnidge, Emlyn William, Nanette Newman, Gerald
Sim.
Directed by Bryan Forbes.

The L- Shaped Room fits into the pattern of English realist, or "kitchen sink" drama of the early 60's,. (A Taste of Honey, Saturday Night and Sunday Morning, A Kind of Loving, This Sporting Life.) By this time, former actor Bryan Forbes had begun to produce, write and direct his own films like The Angry Silence, (wrote and produced). Only Two Can Play, and Whistle Down the Wind. He was later to have success with King Rat, Seance on a Wet Afternoon, The Wrong Box, The Whisperers.

Lynne Reid Bank's popular novel of an unmarried mother finding some friendship in a flat 1n London has been transferred to the screen as a very sympathetic human drama. Leslie Caron is excellent as Jane and the supporting cast gives fine cameos of English 'types'. Recommended viewing.

1. What symbolic role did the room play in the film?

2. Did the audience get to know Jane very well - her background, her character, her worries? How did the film communicate this - merely by dialogue? What kind of woman was Jane?

3. What did the musical background add to the film?

4. Did the black and white photography have any advantage over colour photography? Why?

5. The doctor, towards the end of the film asked Jane if she had friends and she replied affirmatively. How hostile was she when she first went to the room - to Toby, Mavis? How suspicious towards John? How frightened was she? What changed her?

6. How did the sequences with Doris give humour and atmosphere to the film as well as highlight Jane's situation and attitude towards her being French, the amount of rent, the bugs and the mattress?

7. How did Jane and Toby fall in love? Did Toby really love her - how well did they communicate? Why was he so shocked about the baby? Why was he so hostile to Jane? She said people don't change because one "knew more about them. Is this true?

8. Did you like Johnnie? Why? Did the film make clear why he was so upset about Jane and Toby? His asking forgiveness.

9. How convincing Was the sequence with the abortionist? Why did it persuade Jane that she wanted to have her baby? Why was she surprised that everyone Was trying to help her get rid of it? Why did Mavis help her with the pills? Why did Jane take them? Why was she glad that the baby was saved?

10. What did the sequence of the visit by Jane to the prostitute's flat add to the film?

11. What did the visit to Movie' room and her talk about her friends add to the film?

12. Why was the doctor so kind? Was he too good and generous?

13. What was the significance of Toby's giving Jane the story as a gift in the hospital?

14. Why did Jane decide to go home? What had she learnt? Should she have kept the child? Would she have made a good mother?

15. What was the significance of the conversation with the girl who took over the room? How did it bring home the themes of the film?

16. What was the significance of the ending - that the story would have been marvellous with an ending?

17. Was this a valid picture of contemporary living?

18. How optimistic was the film?

19. Did the film give you insight into real people?

20. This film is considered by critics as excellent - why?

LOVING

US, 1970, 90 minutes, Colour.
George Segal, Eva Marie Saint, Keenan Wynn, Sterling Hayden, Nancy Phillips, Roy Scheider.
Directed by Irvin Kershner.

Loving is an ironic title for a small movie on modern marriage. The central marriage is that of Brooks and Selma. He is a commercial artist, she is a normally ambitious wife and they have two (rather obnoxious) little girls. Brooks seems to be undergoing some kind of crisis of nerve and direction in life, unsure of himself in work, extra-marital affair, behaviour and tact.

The film shows us, often wordlessly (as in the credit sequence), very ordinary situations but in careful detail. The audience observes closely the situation and the character's reactions and assesses their significance for themselves. On the whole the film is rather low-key, but nonetheless effective for it.

George Segal gives another excellent, and different, performance as Brooks. (He might be compared to Tina in Diary of a Mad Housewife which the film is akin to.) Time Magazine considered Loving as one of the ten best films for 1970.

1. How ironic was the title of the film? Why?

2. During the first ten minutes of the film only one word was spoken audibly ‘Grace’, yet plot and character were well communicated. How was this done? What did we learn about Brooks' situation, feelings, emotional crisis, about Grace, about Selma and the family situation? How were the city and school backgrounds used commentary? (Symbolic?) Bow did the sense of movement and running add to the film?

3. What kind of crisis was Brooks going through? How ordinary a man was he? Were we meant to regard him as in any way special? Was he a good father, husband, a good artist? How hypocritical did he feel his life was?

4. How did rather long sequences of family life and day-to-day things communicate the reality of the world in which these people lived?

5. How loving was Selma? Did she take Brooks too much for granted? Bow ambitious was she? Did she understand him?

6. Why did Brooks have the affair with Grace? Why did she break it off? Did he love her? Did she love him?

7. What picture of the business world, of industry and advertising did the film give? How realistic was it? How attractive or disgusting? Edwards, Lepradon, the style of commercial advertising, the pressures on Brooks (the sequence of photographing Selma and himself), the Illustrator's Club and his behaviour there?

8. Did you expect Brooke to capitulate to Lepradon - especially with his story of being a truck-driver?

9. How effective and significant was the sequence where the two go to look over the house of the about-to-be-divorced couple? How did the wife communicate the meaning of the scene? How ironic was the comment on Brooks and Selma'a marriage?

10. Why were Brooke and Selma fitting on the way to the party? How did this typify their lives? Did it help to explain Brooke' behaviour at the party?

11. Why was the party sequence effectively filmed? How?

12. Why was Brooks so cantankerous, why did he go off with Nelly? How funny was this? How serious was this? How pathetic?

13. What comment on friends and neighbours was made in the party's watching the television screen? What was the effect on the other partners? How was their surprise gradually shown?

14. What effect did the fight have on Brooks? On Grace?

15. Why did Selma hit Brooks so hard?

16. Did the final image of the film indicate whether they were reconciled? They were both exhausted? Could they begin again? (Brooks said they would soon forget about it; Selma had already agreed to let the Lepradon contract go when she did not know he had it. Would these attitudes have helped reconciliation?)

17. Comment on the musical commentary and the use of art as commentary on the situation -e.g. the slide of Grace superimposed on Selma's face, Brooks' flashbacks to Grace.

18. Was the film cynical or realistic? (Or both?)

THE LOVED ONE

US, 1965, 117 minutes, Black and white.
Robert Morse, Anjanette Comer, Jonathan Winters, Rod Steiger, Robert Morley, John Gielgud, Liberace, Dana Andrews, James Coburn, Tab Hunter, Milton Berle, Margaret Leighton, Roddy McDowell?, Lionel Stander. Directed by Tony Richardson.

The Loved One is Tony Richardson's iconoclastic version of Evelyn Waugh's famous novel. Waugh's book was considered iconoclastic in its day, and, although the satire is strong, it nevertheless seems fairly restrained to-day. It has literary merit and uses some literary ideas to make its points. Mark Twain and Henry James wrote of American ‘Innocents Abroad’ who, fresh from the new world, were taken in by the old Europeans. Instead an old world man comes to the new world of Los Angeles here and wins. The film keeps this basic structure, but concentrates fully on attacking America from the national anthem at the beginning to the commercialisation of the space programme. It is advertised as the film that has something to offend everyone and this is probably true.

But there is a snarling, adolescent, vitality in this all-out attack on America that impresses and rings true despite the exaggeration. The Whispering Glade sequences are very funny indeed. Many guest stars appear in amusing cameos. The principals do well enough, but it is Rod Steiger as a mincing Mr. Joyboy (his range is certainly extraordinary) and his mother, absolutely repulsive, that make an impression.

Tony Richardson is a director of erratic talent - the excellence of Look Back in Anger, A Taste of Honey, Tom Jones to the mediocre Ned Kelly. Here he has everything in the one film.

1. The Loved One was advertised as the film that has something to offend everyone. How true is this? Is offending people the goal behind the screenplay and the director's treatment of the situations? (Did Evelyn Waugh intend to offend everyone?)

2. The film was accused of being in bad taste - crude and offensive situations, overdone. Do you agree e.g. Mrs Joyboy, Salesman - Liberace, the erotic shrine of the dead, the rocketing of Aimee 's corpse to space, etc. (Evelyn Waugh, for example, made Mrs. Joyboy a fanatic on political broadcasts, not food.)

3. Why could The Loved One be called an all out attack on the American way of life as well as of death?

4. Was Dennis Barlow a satisfactory hero for the film and Aimee (literally 'The Loved One') a satisfactory heroine?

5. What was being satirised in both their characters, note Aimee 's pathetic background and her dedication to her work? - and Dennis' lack of dedication to his,

6. What was being satirised in the Hollywood sequences - the artificiality, the tycoons, the unwanted artist, the phoniness etc?

7. How were the English satirised -e.g. Sir Ambrose Abercrombie?

8. What aspects of American character and sentiment were satirised by the pet cemetery. Dennis’s job there (and casualness towards the whole thing) and the couple grieving over the dead dog?

9. How effective was Dennis' visit to Whispering Glades - the attendants, the caskets etc. Liberace, the grounds, the snobbery sections and the all-functional chapel? The guide with the. tourists and the words of the Blessed Reverend?

10. Did Dennis love Aimee? Did she love him?

11. Did you enjoy Rod Steiger's interpretation of Mr, Joyboy? Why? What was morbid about his love of his work (adjusting Sir Francis' smile)? Did he love Ainee?

12. Was the attack on American Momism too heavy-handed? "Momma's little Joyboy"!

13. Dennis's use of the English poets was meant to satirise American culture. Did this come across?

14. What was the point of Aimee’s consulting of the Guru Brahmin and his turning out to be a drunkard?

15. What was being satirised by the Blessed Reverend and his deals with the military - the girls in the coffins?

16. Why did Aimee commit suicide? Were you sorry?

17. What was Mr. Joyboy's reaction to her death? How selfish was he?

18. What Was Dennis's reaction? - and his blackmailing of Mr. Joyboy?

19. Was the space launching ("Resurrection Sow") of Aimee too ludicrous? How did it compare with Waugh's ending?

20. What is the effect of heavy satire? Do people learn from it? Or what is its purpose?

THE LOST WEEKEND

US, 1945, 99 minutes, Black and white.
Ray Milland, Jane Wyman, Howard Da Silva, Doris Dowling.
Directed by Billy Wilder.

The Lost Weekend was considered a very daring film for 1944-5 and most of those involved in it were advised by friends not to go on with it. A film about a desperate alcoholic during a three-day bender would not be popular with cinema audiences. As it was, Billy Wilder went on to make a very harrowing film about alcoholism as well as to win the Oscar for Best Film, Best Director, Best Screenplay and Best Actor for Ray Milland.

Seen to-day, the film jars at times with some moralising, and the hopeful ending might seem too facile, but, by and large, this film has enormous impact, especially through the direction and Ray Milland's performance, Some of the sequences - as in the night-club, the hospital and in the famous desperate walk down Third Avenue with the money-lending houses all closed - are most moving and compare well with more modern treatments of the theme (for instance Blake Edwards' Days of Wine and Roses).

Billy Wilder makes interesting and entertaining films, ranging from The Apartment to Sunset Boulevard to Stalag 7 and Some Like it Hot.

1. How good a documentary of an alcoholic was this film? Why?

2. Was the ending realistic enough? Or was it a happy moralistic ending? How did this affect the rest of the film or could the film stand without its ending?

3. How effective was the flashback technique of the film? Did the film run smoothly?

4. What impression did Don Burnam make on you when you first met him? Did he have a pleasant personality? Was he a weak character? How shrewd was he in getting drink?

5. Did you sympathise with him and with Helen? What else could they have done?

6. Did Ray Milland's performance give you insights into the behaviour, motivation, cravings of an alcoholic? Which scenes impressed you most? Why? How did Ray Milland use his eyes to convey craftiness and suspicion?

7. What contribution did the musical score and its style, especially in drink-craving sequences, make to the whole film?

8. How moving did you find the various set speeches in the film that got across to the audience the feelings of an alcoholic, the quiet desperation, the sense of failure, the double personality inside him?

9. Why didn't Don let Helen help him? Was she sincere in her efforts or too self-assured? What did the flashbacks reveal about his relationship with her?

10. How did Don depend on Nat, the barman, on Gloria? How did they help him?

11. Why were the sequences of his going home to begin his novel, his smashing his apartment to find the hidden bottle, the agony of his walk through flew York to find all the pawnbrokers closed, his humiliation at the safe after he stole the woman's handbag, so compelling and moving?

12. Why were the sequences at the City hospital so frightening? Why did Bim act so harshly? What effect did the scene of so many with the D.T. 's have on you?

13. How did his begging Gloria for money show his desperation?

14. Alcohol brings on delirium and the diseases of the night. Were the scenes of Don's delirium well done - the reality of the mouse and the bat? How did you react to this?

15. Why did Helen and Don finally clash? Could more have been asked of Helen?

16. Was Don's final despair credible? his "fear, shame and moral anaemia"?

17. How much compassion did this film ask of its audience?

18. Was the "ending too contrived and optimistic? Why?

19. How would this film affect a person's attitude towards alcohol and alcoholism?

THE LION IN WINTER

UK, 1968, 134 minutes, Colour.
Peter O'Toole, Katharine Hepburn, Jane Merrow, Anthony Hopkins, John Castle, Nigel Terry, Timothy
Dalton.
Directed by Anthony Harvey.

The Lion in Winter is an excellent example of history in modern style. The contemporary language and idiom helps Henry II and his family of 1183 to communicate their personalities and preoccupations to us so that we understand the way they think and feel. The film, while quite spectacular in its vivid re-creation of the twelfth century, is not principally a historical spectacular. In fact the main part of the action takes place in about twenty four hours, in the one place and, generally, Inside the castle of Chinon, where Henry is holding his Christmas court.

Henry II has been a popular enough subject for literature, especially in his relationship with his chancellor Thomas Becket and Becket's subsequent murder. This was the subject of T. S. Eliot's Murder in the Cathedral and, more recently, Jean Anouilh's Becket. The older Henry features in Christopher Fry's Curtmantle, Eleanor of Aquitaine, Henry's wife (and previously wife to the king of France), was also legendary in her lifetime and later, being associated with the spread of the medieval troubadours and the traditions of courtly love. Henry's sons are also well remembered in history: Richard, the Lionheart, who succeeded his father, and John, who strove with the Barons and was forced to sign England's Magna Carta; however, this film, which James Goldman adapted from his play, shows us a day of ambition and intrigue within this family in view of the succession to Henry and the possession of French counties.

Peter O'Toole takes up the role he had in Becket, but shows Henry as less moody and neurotic; here he is ageing, more humorous, but with plenty of leonine vitality in his winter. (This role, as in Becket, gave him another Oscar nomination.) Katharine Hepburn has greater scope for acting range than usual in her portrayal of old Eleanor, fully conscious of her regal state and with intrigue in her blood. (She won her third Oscar for this performance.) The film also set Jane Merrow, Anthony Hopkins and Timothy Dalton on strong film careers.

The film was the second film directed by Anthony Harvey (who edited a number of Bryan Forbes1 films), the first being the unusual Le Roi Jones' drama, Dutchman. Since then, he and author Goldman have made They Might Be Giants (1971). The Lion in Winter is an impressive film on all counts.

1. What was the point of the film? Was it meant to be a spectacular historical, pageant?

2. What does the title mean? What do you know of Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine? (Note Becket, Murder in the Cathedral, Curtmantle.)

3. How modern did the film seem to you - its language and colloquialisms, its psychology of the characters? Did you feel that their interests and issues were close to contemporary interests and issues? How well do you think you understood this family?

4. One of the principal themes of the film was intrigue. How attractive did it make a life of intrigue? Why do people like intrigue and spend their lives at it, even if it means futility and imprisonment like that of Eleanor?

5. How much cruelty did the principal characters show? By the end of the film we realise that some really did love each other e.g. Richard loved his father. Other examples. Why did they spend their lives hating and plotting if, underneath, there was some love?

6. Consider each of the principal characters and try to understand the complexity of their personalities and motives, considering especially their ambitions, selfishness, self-will, capacity for love and hatred, using of others, ability to lie and intrigue, moral standards - as medieval royalty.

7. This was a film about a family. Comment on the frequency with which the sons complain that their parents never showed that they loved their children and how the parents continually say that they do not like their children much.

8. Did you feel sorry for Alois? How sincere in her feelings was she? Comment on the way her position and emotions were 'used'.

9. How happy were each of the characters?

10. What scenes remain in your memory? Why?

11. What happened ultimately to each of the characters? Did history show that Henry won, or did Eleanor?

MISSING PIECES

US, 1983, 96 minutes, Colour.
Elizabeth Montgomery, David Haskell, Ron Karabatsos.
Directed by Mike Hodges.

Missing Pieces is a private eye thriller with a difference. The private eye is a woman played effectively by Elizabeth Montgomery. She takes on a job after the brutal killing of her husband. Eventually the pieces fit together - and the audience is surprised with her disillusionment and the criminal involvement of her journalist husband and the reasons for his death.

The screenplay is rather arty - in the sense that the heroine's nightmares keep recurring throughout the film visually and are part of the character development. There are inserted glimpses of her memories of her husband's murder and stylised dream sequences. The screenplay was written by Mike Hodges who made the tough thrillers Get Carter and Pulp in the early '70s. He also directed such films as The Terminal Man and Flash Gordon.

There is constant voice-over by the heroine, a focus on corrupt politics in California, drug-running and cover-ups. An interesting contemporary private eye telemovie.

1. Interesting and enjoyable thriller? Private eye genre? The female private eye? The background of California, journalism, drugs, political corruption?

2. The Californian locations? Authentic atmosphere? The insertion of the memories and the nightmare sequences? The importance of editing and pace? The use of the voice-over?

3. The title and its focus on Sarah's investigation, puzzle, her being hired to find a missing husband and the irony of her own husband's involvement in the crime syndicate?

4. The opening with Andrew's death? Its effect on Sarah? Her relationship with her husband? Her relationship with her daughter - the balancing of the investigation with the home scenes, Valerie and her coping, her relationship with her mother? Supporting her? Sarah at work? Her partnership with Papazian? Mrs Richmond and the investigation, Sarah's skills in trailing Dr Richmond, her discoveries, the drug centre, the senator, the ex-actress? The airport sequence and the death of Dr. Richmond? The second murder? The victim's wife and her rejection of Sarah and Sarah's emotional upset? The encounter with Martinez - and discovering his link with the ex-actress? Following the trail? Eventually going to Sacramento? The discovery of the corrupt senator and the killer? The truth about her husband? Papazian coming to the rescue? The shattering of her idealism and her memories? Her recovery and going back to work? Elizabeth Montgomery's credibility in this role?

5. The background of private eye investigations? Sarah’s voiceover? The repartee and ironic comments?

6. Sarah’s memories, dreams, revelation of herself and of what happened? The surreal elements of the visual style – drawing attention to themselves?

7. Sarah tracking down her boss – the sleazy atmosphere and her discovery?

8. Her work in tailing the doctor, his different destinations, his contacts, drugs, money, his being knocked down, the flight attendant and the bag, her death?

9. Sam and his relationship with Sarah? The senator’s home and bugging it? Drug rehabilitation?

10. Sarah going undercover, the clinic, the dangers, escape, help and resolution?

11. The arty style blended with the conventions of the private eye investigation?

ROMANCE ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS

US, 1989, 96 minutes, Colour.
Cheryl Ladd, Stuart Wilson, John Gielgud, Renee Asherson.
Directed by Lawrence Gordon Clark.

Romance on the Orient Express has overtones of past ages of gentility - as well as murder mysteries and Agatha Christie. However, this is a romantic film of the mid-'80s, Mills and Boon style. It is glamorous, has attractive European settings. While a British production, with guest roles from John Gielgud and Renee Asherson with Stuart Wilson in the central role, the star is the American, Cheryl Ladd - with amusing support from comedian Ruby Wax.

The film is the familiar story of the past love affair, the tyrant father who makes demands on his son to follow in the family business, the pregnant woman who doesn't tell the truth to the father and who makes a career for herself. They meet again almost 10 years later on the Orient Express - they clash, they remember, they reconcile. It is the kind of material for easy matinee viewing.

1.Pleasant romantic tale, characters? The Orient Express setting? European settings? Familiar and predictable - and enjoyable because of this?

2.The Orient Express, Venice, the European countries, Paris? The musical score? The cast?

3.The title - and the clarity of the plot and theme? Romantic treatment?

4.The portrait of Lily: successful businesswoman, friendship with Susan? The decision to go on the Orient Express? The memories of the encounter with Alex - and the flashbacks punctuating the journey? Her age, inexperience, falling in love with Alex? The possibility of marriage? Her pregnancy? His disappearance, dominant father? Her not telling him the truth? Bringing up her child, the magazine work? Meeting a possible husband, the plans for her daughter? The impact of meeting Alex again, the meal, resisting him? Renewing the affair and her reaction against him? Avoiding him, in Paris? Undecided about her future, Susan's advice? Meeting Alex again, giving him the chance to tell the story? The reconciliation? The chance for a future? The credibility of the plot - done in soap opera and glossy style?

5. The portrait of Alex, when young, the first encounter with Lily, romantic, his sudden disappearance? Ten years later, the businessman? The reason for his leaving Lily, the pressure from his father, the family business and his giving in? Re-awakening the love, revealing what happened? Susan revealing the truth about Lily?

6. The portrait of Alex’s parents? The classical performers and John Gielgud’s screen presence? The critique of the dominant father? Alex’s mother?

7. The role of Susan? Friendship, comedy, confidences?

8. Popular ingredients for romance, the Mills and Boon traditions, British style?

THE STAR SPANGLED GIRL

1. The work of Neil Simon, the stage tradition, the cinema tradition? The appeal of his comedy and the qualities of comedy in terms of character, lines, situations? The original play not being a success?

2. The 1960s and the background of change, social values, protest? The film as critique, satire? The emphasis on dialogue, jokes and criticism?

3. The settings, the American cities of the period? Sets and costumes? The opening song and mood?

4. How attractive a character was Amy? Sandy Duncan’s style? The all-America girl? the reference of the title? Her country background, swimming, political blows, her relationship with Norman and Andy, her work? Norman ruining her work with the paint, duck etc? Being fired from the YWCA? Norman and her warding him off? Falling In love with Andy? Her real character?

5. The portrait of the left wing paper, the boys, their political point of view, lifestyle, protest? How serious was the leftwing overtime?

6. Audience response to Norman, his work on the paper, Friendship with Andy, infatuation with Amy? His phrenetic pace and style? His upsetting people?

7. The contrast with Andy as hero, friend, persuading Amy to smile, falling in love with her?

8. The comic contribution of Mrs Mac Kaninee and her athletics, the ending?

9. Ordinary comedy, social Issues? The range of political arguments? High pitched style and pace? What went wrong?