INDIAN UPRISING

US, 1952, 75 minutes, Colour.
George Montgomery, Audrey Long, Carl Benton Reid.
Directed by Ray Nazarro.

Indian Uprising is a short and small-budget western – but it tackles a large subject, the Apache uprisings, the role of Geronimo, the role of the military in trying to keep the peace and the final confrontation with Geronimo and his exile with the Apaches to Florida.

The film focuses on the man in charge of dealing with Geronimo, Chase Mc Cloud played by George Montgomery (a regular in small-budget features, Philip Marlowe in The Brasher Doubloon and later director and writer of small-budget television films). Geronimo is played by Miguel Inclan. One of the interesting features of the film is that the conversations between the Indians and the whites are all spoken in Spanish with a translator.

In the late 1940s and early 1950s, there was a change of attitude towards treatment of the Indians in films with such features as The Devil’s Doorway and Broken Arrow. This film follows in that vein. The whites express the traditional prejudices against the Indians, considering them as savages and less than human, exploiting the gold mines in the mountains, using the military to enforce the greed, the difficulties of politics and Washington and the orders for the military. It presents the Indians both sympathetically and unsympathetically. However, there is a lot of argument for the rights of the Indians. This was featured in several films about Geronimo (with Chuck Connors) and Walter Hill’s 1993 film with Matt Damon as the officer who negotiated with Geronimo.

The film is of interest in its presentation of the clashes between Indians and whites as perceived by Hollywood in the early 1950s.

1.Brief interesting western? Locations? Battles? Musical score?

2.The title, the reference to Geronimo, the Apache uprising, the clashes with the military? The actions of Geronimo – justified or not?

3.The film’s giving the background of Indian-white relationships? The harsh attitudes of many of the settlers, the greed of the miners? The lobby groups in Washington and the harsh decisions made by politicians? The administration of these decisions by the military?

4.Geronimo, his son and his son trying to ape his father? The other Indians and their following Geronimo? The miners and their confrontations, framing the Indians? The Indians not able to believe the whites? The possibilities for treaties? Geronimo, the battles, finally going to Florida?

5.The military, sympathy for the Indians, the harsh administration? The new commander?

6.Captain Mc Cloud, his attitude towards the Indians, following orders, his having to mellow? His friendship with Norma, her work as a teacher on the reservation? Modifying his views? His dealings with Geronimo’s son? With the miners? Fighting – and their reporting him to Washington for violence? His being relieved of his post, no promotion? The new commander? The build-up to the confrontation with Taggert? The killing of Old Sagebrush and making it look like an Indian murder? The build-up to the final battles, Mc Cloud and his fight with Taggert?

7.The miners, the claims, their rights? Sagebrush and the genuine miners? Taggert and the money dealers? Pretending to be on the side of the law? Double-dealing behind people’s backs?

8.An insight into the relationships between whites and Indians in the 19th century – in a modest film?

AL JENNINGS OF OKLAHOMA

US, 1952, 79 minutes, Colour.
Dan Duryea, Gale Storm, Dick Foran.
Directed by Ray Nazarro.

Al Jennings of Oklahoma is based on a book by Al Jennings himself. Jennings was a lawyer in Oklahoma in the 1880s and 1890s and, after his brother was killed in a gunfight, he sought vengeance and then had to go on the run with another brother. He joined a group of outlaws and excelled in all kinds of robberies, leading two train robberies. After trying to settle down in New Orleans and become respectable, he was arrested and served a prison term. After being released, he wrote a book about himself and then, in fact, went to Hollywood where he was an actor and an adviser on many westerns, dying in 1961.

It is said that the real Al Jennings was far more ruthless than the more genial type presented in the film. (At the same year, Universal Pictures released The Lawless Breed about another character who was a reformed criminal, Joe Hardin (played by Rock Hudson) who also wrote a book and reformed – although, it is again said, he was far more ruthless in real life.)

Dan Duryea was often a villain in films of the 40s and 50s and gives an ambiguous charm to Al Jennings. Gale Storm was in a few films but made her mark for many years in television and with recording songs. Ray Nazarro, the director, directed many routine westerns over several decades at Columbia Pictures.

1.Interesting western? Based on fact? The book by Al Jennings himself? The film’s sanitised treatment of his character and activities?

2.The Oklahoma west, the prologue with the action in the civil war, the Jennings father and the evacuation of his house, the burning of the house? His wife giving birth? The household, the boys? The father becoming a judge? The boys becoming lawyers? The confrontation between Al and his father, his moving with Frank to another town? Setting up in business? With the other brothers?

3.The incident in the saloon, the death of the brother? Al and his hotheadedness, confrontations, going to shoot the killer? His having to go on the run? Taking Frank with him because he was implicated? Their going to the farm, being employed? Finding the man there who had tried to rob them on their way into Woodwood?

4.The joining the gang, the collage of the robberies? Al and his skills, becoming the leader? The train robberies – and being seen by the rail detective?

5.The initial encounter with Margo, going into town, Al being flirtatious? Finding that his brother was defending her uncle? The court case, the insults to the Jennings by the lawyer, Al and his hotheadedness? The fight in the courtroom?

6.Their going to New Orleans, Frank and Al setting up in business, respectable? Meeting Margo again, the bonds between them, the preparations for the marriage? Frank and his meeting Alice? New Orleans society?

7.At home, the father and the brother remaining at home, the father as a judge? The sheriff, his friendliness? Trying to persuade Al to return? The detective discovering them in New Orleans?

8.The return, the chase, over the border after the robbery? The failed robbery? The arrest, the court case, the father defending his son? His use of jurisdiction? Margo at the trial?

9.Al, the severity of the judge’s decision, the influencing of the jury? Al and his going to jail? The time in jail, his release? The promise of going straight?

10.The portrait of the other brothers, especially Frank, a rather bland character following Al? Margo as a strong character? Alice and high society? The men at the ranch and their robberies? The manager and his wife? Her betrayal of Al? The sheriff, genial? The detectives?

ZWARTBOEK (BLACK BOOK)

Holland, 2006, 145 minutes, Colour.
Carice Van Houten, Sebastian Koch, Thom Hoffman, Derek de Lint.
Directed by Paul Verhoeven.

Director Paul Verhoeven made his name in his native Holland with such films as Turks Fruit, Spetters. He then went to the United States in the 1980s and made a number of significant films – in a rather in-your-face Dutch style: Robocop, Total Recall, Basic Instinct, Showgirls, Star Troupers. He has now returned to his country to make this memoir of Dutch participation in World War Two.

While the film is very reminiscent of the big-budget war memoir and action films of the 1960s (Operation Crossbow, The Dirty Dozen), it is reminiscent also of the tribute films made in the 1950s. MGM’s Betrayed (1954) with Clark Gable, Lana Turner and Victor Mature is very similar in its plot outline.

The film begins and ends on an Israeli kibbutz in 1956, also giving some insight into the consequences of World War Two and Hitler’s treatment of the Jews. The kibbutz has been set up with moneys confiscated by the Nazis from Jews. However, the film goes back in time to focus on a young woman who is being hidden by a Catholic family when their house is destroyed and she discovers that her parents are on a boat to be taken to freedom. She joins them – but Dutch traitors have sold out and the Jews are murdered and their goods confiscated. She joins the Dutch Resistance.

The film is also a portrait of the Dutch Resistance, the relentless leaders, the raids, the dangers experienced. The young woman, using her wits very quickly on a train, is able then to infiltrate Gestapo headquarters, have a relationship with the chief. This leads her to be able to plant a microphone in the office. However, there is a traitor amongst the Resistance and the plans go awry. With some detective work, especially after the end of the war, the traitors are revealed. There are some very powerful sequences at the end where the young woman, branded as a traitor herself, is humiliated by angry Dutch citizens and officials after the war.

The film does not paint a black and white picture of Dutch participation in the war – some people are heroic, others are traitors and greedy for their own gain, not scrupulous in betraying their fellow Dutch and, especially, Jewish citizens.

While Paul Verhoeven evokes memories of past films, his own franker style of film-making means that some of the sexual implications of the stories as well as scenes of violence are much more explicit in this film.

Carice van Houten shows great versatility in the central role. Sebastian Koch is a more sympathetic Gestapo leader. Thom Hoffmann (who had appeared in Verhoeven’s The Fourth Man) is the traitor.

The film always keeps the interest, is an example of somebody who is able to help a nation examine its conscience and look again at the history of the past without romanticising it – or, while romanticising it, look at some of the realities and the darker side as well.

1.A story of Holland, World War Two, Resistance, collaboration? As remembered from sixty years later? The work of Paul Verhoeven, his Dutch background, his time in Hollywood, his coming back home, looking at the war past, the national experience, heroism and villainy, the consequences?

2.The film in the style of the old-time war movie, of the movie spectacular of the 60s? Better effects, more direct and frank treatment?

3.The opening in Israel, the beginning and the end? The Jewish questions, the State of Israel? Israel in 1956, the kibbutz, the money from the traitors establishing the kibbutz? The end – and the conflict between Israel and Palestinians – and the resonances for the following fifty years?

4.Holland in 1944, the towns, the buildings, the war experience, occupation, the hiding places, bombs dropped to get rid of the load and destroying homes and people, the boats on the canals? Authentic? The range of the musical score – and the inclusion of German and patriotic songs?

5.The Jewish issue, Rachel and her family, her being separated, her being given a hiding place, her identity, concealing herself as a Christian, reciting the gospel text after memorising it? The difficulties, the lawyer arranging the place? Her being on the water, in love – and singing the English songs from her time as a cabaret artist? The bombs dropped, the destruction of the house? The arrest of the young man? Her going to the lawyer, getting the family money, the agent and his coming to the house to warn them, her following his advice, going with the group onto the boat, the captain and his sailing east instead of west? The betrayal and the slaughter of the Jewish passengers, the robbery of their goods? Rachel and her going overboard, hiding in the reeds?

6.The picture of the Dutch Resistance, the men and the women, their covers, the different raids, the discussions with the SS in order to provide peace, traitors in the group, the suffering they caused? Dutch anguish during the occupation? After the war?

7.The dealing with collaborators after the war, rounding them up, their work, Ronnie and her escape, the parties, Hitler’s birthday, her being with the liberators? The contrast with the traitors, their deals, exploitation of their own people? The rounding up of collaborators, the shaving of the heads of the women in the streets, the prisoners and the brutal treatment by fascist-like guards, the tipping of the excrement all over Rachel? The authorities coming in and rebuking these guards and dismissing them? The confusion, the brutality?

8.The portrait of Rachel, as symbol: Dutch, Jewish, the Resistance, external collaboration, the harsh treatment after the war, vindication? As a character, strong, her cabaret career, her hiding and coping, as a Christian, going to the lawyer, getting the money, van Gein and the group, reunited with the family, the brother and his operation (and the irony that Hans had done it)? The attack and the massacre? Her escape?

9.Her meeting the Resistance, helping, the portrait of the group, their cover, the trucks? The vegetables concealing the weapons? The raids, the garage? The man in charge, his son, Tim? Hans and his prominent place, leadership, the other members? Their personalities? The achievement by 1944? The air drop, the pick-up, the cover, broken and outdated medications? The chloroform not working in the attack on von Gein or for the removing of the bullet?

10.The SS and the Gestapo, the occupation, their presence, the contrast between Muntz and Franken? Rachel on the train, the cover being blown, Hans and Rachel together, her calling him a pervert, slapping him, hurrying with the bags, meeting Muntz, the discussion, her being saved, the issue of the stamps? Meeting Hans at the end?

11.The decision about Rachel, the cover, going to see Muntz, giving the stamps, getting the job, meeting Ronnie, the encounter with Franken – and seeing him as the man who ordered the massacre of the Jews? Her relationship with Muntz, sexual, the story about his dead wife and family? The effect on her? The issue of planting the microphone and her ability to do it?

12.The arrests, Tim and the others, the details of the torture, Franken and his brutality, the contrast with his behaviour with Ronnie, the sex, playing the piano at the socials?

13.The socials, Ronnie, Rachel singing, Franken and the piano and singing with her? Her overcoming her revulsion?

14.The plans to rescue Tim and the others, Hans and his leadership, Rachel letting them in, waiting, the Germans there, the shooting, Tim’s death, Hans and his escape?

15.The war coming to an end, the lawyer and his plans, suggesting the raid, the issue of the lists of Jews that Franken was using, Rachel unmasked by Muntz, her telling him about the jewels, the captain and the failure of finding any of the jewels?

16.Hitler’s birthday, the raid coinciding with the party, the preparations, cheerful upstairs, slaughter downstairs?

17.Rachel seen as a traitor, the talk over the microphone, her being blamed? Her becoming a prisoner? The excrement poured all over her? Getting out?

18.Muntz, more genial, the human face of German military? His being imprisoned, the captain and his attack on him? His having to be rescued? His escape? The irony of his being found, Ronnie and her love for him? His being ordered executed, the captain using the Canadians and the law to execute German officials?

19.The lawyer, his wife, Rachel confronting him, the truth about the lists, his wife, their deaths?

20.Franken, the attempted escape, the jewels, his being killed?

21.Rachel and her liberation, the reconciliation with Tim’s father? With Hans, the bonds of the past, going to visit him, the doctor being welcomed home, the revelation of the truth, his story, students, the deals with the doctor, killing off the partners, robbing Franken? His being abducted by Rachel and Tim’s father, in the coffin? Their sitting while he died? His appeals – and his abuse? Justice seen to be done? The cruelty and brutality?

22.The aftermath, the money from the Jewish victims paying for the kibbutz? Ronnie’s visit with her Canadian? A seeming peace – but with the prospect of Israel and Palestinian battles? A film from the early 21st century contemplating the realities of the middle of the 20th century?

MUSHISHI (BUGMASTER)

Japan, 2006, 118 minutes, Colour.
Jo Odagiri, Nao Omori.
Directed by Katsuhiro Otomo.

Katsuhiro Otomo directed Akira and made a breakthrough in styles of Japanese animation films. He began an industry – many of the films drawing on the comic books, the manga. He also directed the very striking Steam Boy, based on an English story set in the United States and England in the 19th century.

This is also a manga story. It shows a mystic shaman travelling through mediaeval Japan. The film shows his origins, his supernatural experience, his becoming a shaman. He also has the ability to see supernatural creatures, bugs, the mushi who move in and out of people spreading plague. As he travels through the countryside, people rely on him, this has an effect on his personality and on his relationships with others.

The film is made for a Japanese audience and a Japanese sense of storytelling which makes it far more complex for a western audience to follow. However, it also invites the audience to surrender to the beautiful landscapes, to the mysterious special effects for the bugs, to the mystical implications of the travelling shaman.

1.Japanese myths and legends? For Japanese audiences? Worldwide audiences? The use of the imagination? 19th and 20th century legends? Impact? How credible today?

2.The beauty of the photography, the mountain locations, the roads, the villages, the woods? The musical score and its atmosphere for legends?

3.The title and the myths? Introducing the audience to bugs as signs of good and evil, life and death, illness?

4.The visualising of the bugs – the white vapours, the black, insect-like letters? The special effects for their spreading everywhere?

5.The prologue, the boy and his mother, the beauty of the mountains, the sudden landslide, the chaos, the death of the mother, the boy surviving? Found by Nui, herself a bugmaster, her appearance, her eye, her hair? The boy and his surviving but forgetting? Growing up, the white hair like Nui?

6.The bugs and their effect on Nui, destructive? The quest to find the main bugs, their nests, where they resided, in whom they resided? Ginko and the bugs, the fish in the stream, his becoming a bugmaster?

7.Ginko in himself, genial, kind, travelling in the rain, staying at the inn, the owner and her kindness, asking him to see the staff, their deafness, his being able to heal them, the potions?

8.Continuing on his travels, his searches, finding Koro and his companionship, on the road, the difficulties?

9.His being urged to return by the woman of the inn? The girl, the contamination of her leg, its effect? Her having listened to the stories and written the scrolls? The bugs in the letters, their disappearing from the scrolls? The effect on Ginko, his own illness? Finding the cure, the woman caring? The story about the guests?

10.The girl, her recovery, her way of grasping the letters, swinging them from the wall and the rewriting of the scrolls?

11.Ginko, his illness, the search for what would cure him, his growing health and recovery? The impact of the letters? On the floor, on the roof, on the walls?

12.The build-up the story of Nui and Ginko meeting, her desperation in the woods, Koro and his help, watching? Her blindness? Ginko not knowing, discovering the truth? The flashbacks, the story, the resolution?

13.Japanese legends and symbols for life and death? The bugs as symbols? A story of healers and carers?

NUOVOMONDO (GOLDEN DOOR)

Italy, 2006, 120 minutes, Colour.
Charlotte Gainsbourg, Vincenzo Amato.
Directed by Emanuele Crialesi.

SIGNIS award winner at Venice, 2006 and winner of other prizes at the festival including an official jury award. Nuovomondo was chosen as Italy’s official nominee for the Oscar for Best Foreign Language film.

Nuovomondo is well worth seeing.

Another reason for seeing the film is its subject. The Nuovo Mondo, the New World – or the Golden Door of the film’s title in English – is that of the United States one hundred years ago. Migrants from all over Europe, from Ireland, Italy, Russia and Eastern Europe, many of them refugees, many economic migrants, made their way to the new world in hopes of a better life.

We now take these migrations for granted and see the benefits that the newcomers brought to their adoptive country, especially in terms of the workforce – even if so many of them were exploited. The point to be made now is that different populations from all parts of the contemporary world are on the move. There are even more refugees. There are more displaced people. There are more economic migrants. The pattern of the past remains, where previous migrants are so settled into their new homes that they begrudge favours to newcomers who want only the same as what they wanted when they arrived.

This is why it can be valuable to watch a film life Nuovomondo so that these patterns are not necessarily repeated, that welcome is offered to newcomers, that opportunities are made available and that discrimination is not to be taken for granted.

Nuovomondo comprises three chapters.

The initial location is Sicily at the beginning of the 20th century. Life is hard. Peasants are poor. The terrain, though beautiful, is harsh. The film opens with young men racing up a steep mountain with rocks in their mouths as part of the endurance so that they can pray at a shrine for a sign as to what they must do for their future. After much discussion and heart-searching, they apply to sail to America. The film has some marvellous detail of their preparations for the voyage, their buying clothes, the families at the wharves to farewell them.

The second part of the film is the voyage. The re-creation of the boat and life on board, sometimes exciting, at other times harsh with the crowding and the nervousness of people who have no real idea of what lies ahead of them, is so detailed that audiences will feel that they are sharing the voyage. This part introduces Charlotte Gainsbourg as a widow from England trying to find someone who will marry her and enable her to land in America lawfully. She makes friends with the three men from Sicily.

The final section of the film is the arrival in the United States. While they watch the statue of Liberty in New York’s harbour, they land at Ellis Island, the point of entry to America for so many of the migrants. They are herded into quarters, interrogated in a language they barely understand, they are prodded and poked for disease or anything that would disqualify them from entry. Since one of the men is mute, we see the lengths the others go to to help him enter.

The film ends as they arrive at the Golden Doors which will open to their new life.

Interesting, moving, thoughtful – and still relevant today.

1.Acclaim for the film? Impact for Italian audiences? Americans? Worldwide?

2.The title, the 19th century and the dreams of Europeans migrating to America? The images on the postcards – money growing on trees, large hens and animals, pools of milk, giant vegetables like carrots? The emigration experience and hopes?

3.The screenplay in three acts: Sicily, the voyage, Ellis Island?

4.The Sicilian background, the mountains, the villages, the pier? The contrast with life on the boat, at sea? The interiors of the boat? Below decks? The storm experience? Ellis Island, the corridors and stairwells, the wharves, the halls?

5.The opening, Salvatore and Angelo climbing the mountain, the rocks in their mouth, the vastness of the steep mountain, their pilgrimage to the top, the shrine, placing their rocks there, the religious emblems? Their vigil, praying for a sign, Pietro running up the mountain, bringing the postcards and the photos? The decision to go to America?

6.Life in the village, for the men, for the women, Pietro as mute? The girls and their being promised in marriage? The postcards and the dreams? Salvatore’s mother, unwilling? The brother already in America? The preparations for the trip, especially getting the clothes, the hat?

7.Salvatore, in his mid-30s, a good man in himself, wise? Angelo as younger? Pietro as mute, inexperienced? The mother and her age? Isolation in the village? Determined to find the brother already in America – because they looked alike? The scenes with the man getting them the clothes, putting everything in order, the documents, the photo? The presentation of the vision – the giant vegetables, the giant carrot, Salvatore in the pool of milk?

8.At the wharf, going on board, the crowds, finding the proper places to go, Salvatore trying to keep the family together? On the boat, the men separating from the women, getting the bunks, trying to settle in, not having much luggage? The visual impact of the boat separating from the crowded wharf? Emotional departure from the motherland?

9.Luce, her style and manner, English, the stories about her, leaving her husband, being stranded in Sicily? Her joining the family at the photo session and the humorous scene for the photo? Her standing with them? Standing together with them, getting on the boat, taking her place with the bunk, saying that she could read that her bunk was there while the other woman could not read? The mother and her suspicions, being adjacent to Luce, warming to her, especially after the storm?

10.Life on board the ship, their managing, the men talking with one another, the American going to Sicily to sign on women to be promised to his clients? His surveying the women, looking at Luce? Salvatore and Angelo and their trying to look at Luce surreptitiously? The impact of the storm, people below decks, falling from one side to the other, the havoc? The aftermath, carrying the dead?

11.The arrival in New York, Ellis Island, Luce and her request to Salvatore, his saying yes, she saying that she did not love him but was marrying him to get into America? The possibilities for a deeper relationship? In Ellis Island, the interminable line-ups, the people being herded, the variety of costumes and languages from different countries, confusion? Salvatore and his managing? Angelo? Pietro and his being mute and their having to cover for him? His shrewdness? The mother and her continued bewilderment, not wanting to be touched?

12.The variety of tests: putting the blocks in order, Salvatore building the house, Angelo not being able to do it, Luce doing it very quickly? The maths and their using their fingers? Pietro and the placing of the chair, opening the door, the book? The health examination, the men having to be naked, Pietro’s bewilderment? The mother not wanting to be touched in the physical examination? Her new experience of the shower, the women having the shower and being clean?

13.The halls, the men on one side, the women on the other, the ritual about arranging marriages? The two girls from the village and their reluctance in saying yes after seeing the men? The older Hispanic woman and the younger man? The New York agent and his putting forward the men for the brides? Luce, her explanation to the authorities, the documents, her writing them, Salvatore unable to write, declaring his love for her?

14.The family together, standing before the board, the decision to send Pietro and the mother home, thinking that she was soft in the head? Salvatore’s speech, asking who could play God?

15.The final image of Salvatore and Luce, clothed and hatted in the milk, the crowds in the milk, swimming together – symbolic of the hopes for life in America?

16.The migration of the 19th and 20th centuries, the thousands from Europe, the different backgrounds? The United States and the demands on these emigrants? Rigorous? The poor of Europe – becoming the prosperous of the United States?

17.The resonances for 20th and 21st century migrations, the millions on the move? From what and from where – to what and to where? The humane response?

OSTROV (ISLAND)

Russia, 2006, 112 minutes, Colour.
Pyotre Mamonov.
Directed by Pavel Lungin.

Island is a very impressive film, the closing film for the Venice film festival in 2006.

The film was directed by Pavel Lungin, noted for much more boisterous films like Taxi Blues and The Wedding. This film is the exact opposite.

The opening is set in World War Two, a difficult moral decision for a mate on a ship faced with the Nazis. He decides to save himself rather than a comrade. The film then moves a quarter of a century later where the man has retired to a Russian Orthodox monastery and lives an ascetical life. He is also an eccentric compared with the other members of the community. He has developed a reputation around the countryside of being a holy man, even a healer.

The film is fascinating in its presentation of life in the monastery, the role of the man who is an eccentric and something of a hermit, the interactions of the other monks and their lives.

The surprise of the film is when the man that he thought had been killed arrives and asks his intercession for his daughter who is ill. What follows is the possibility of reconciliation and forgiveness.

This film is an interesting presentation of religion, church, spirituality emerging from what once was the centre of the Soviet empire.

1.The quality of the film? Impact? For Russian audiences? Worldwide? Russian Orthodox? Spirituality?

2.The title, the focus on the visuals of the island, isolated and bare, winter, the water surrounding the island, the rocks, the snow, the pools? A convincing and realistic atmosphere?

3.The monastery, its isolation, the view from the outside, the different buildings, the interiors, the chapel, the superior’s room, Anatoly’s hut? The tower?

4.The musical score, religious chant, the piano accompaniment? Anatoly and his reciting the different psalms throughout the film?

5.The opening, rowing, the boat and bailing the water, on the island, prostrate, praying for forgiveness? The introduction of the explicit Christian language? Russian Orthodox spirituality? Themes of sin and forgiveness?

6.1942, Russia at war, the Nazis, the stoker, his work in the boat, the captain at the bridge, the approach of the Nazi boat? Their hiding? The Germans, ruthless and cruel, shooting into the coke, the stoker pleading, his age, his fear, his becoming desperate? Saying he could not understand the language? Showing them where the captain was and digging him out? The contrast with the behaviour of the captain, calm, silent, getting the cigarette? Their ordering the stoker to shoot the captain? His fear, pulling the trigger, the captain falling overboard? His own collapse – then his joy at surviving, defying the Germans? The explosion?

7.His being washed up on the island, found by the monks, carried in? Thirty-four years passing? The atmosphere of 1976? The audience and the clues to identifying Anatoly as the stoker? The passing of the years, the gaunt figure, his age, beard? The monks not knowing what had happened to him? His eccentricities, being seen as a prankster? People seeing him as a holy man, the pilgrims coming for healing? His behaviour, his hard work, the hut, the tower, the coal? His going to the chapel to pray?

8.In himself, his age, his sense of sin, the oppression of guilt, his prayers, the rituals, going to the church, facing the other way, reciting the psalms? His icon and his praying? His prostration on the ground? The ascetical spirituality of his life? His work?

9.The people coming to see him, his telling them that Anatoly was cranky and asleep? The desperate girl and her abortion, his speaking sternly to her, encouraging her to have the baby, to have life, the comfort, saying that he had killed someone? The mother with the boy, crippled, his rituals, keeping the boy in the monastery and curing him? His ability to know the future? The possessed girl, taking her to the island in the boat, her refusal to go, his kneeling on the ground, laying her on the ground, prayer, the devil going out of her, her being healed? His knowledge of his own death?

10.Job, the strong man at the monastery, irritated by Anatoly, rebuking him? The visits, the fascination? Concerned about the way Anatoly faced the wrong way in the chapel? His being asked about Cain and Abel, his refusal to answer – and the later answer about jealousy? His change, Anatoly asking him whether he would mourn him? The fire and it not being Anatoly’s fault? The coffin, his looking inside, his sandpapering it, bringing it to the hut? Desperation, wanting to put soot all over it again? Anatoly sending the incense as a sign of his death? His caring, grieving, carrying the coffin?

11.Filaret, the superior, inviting Anatoly to come to his hut, wanting to care for him? The egg, the yolk, the restoration of the icons? His interactions with Job? The fire in his hut, his decision to ask Anatoly to stay with him, the explanation of the comfortable boots, the mattress gained on pilgrimage, Anatoly locking the door, creating the smoke, wanting to get rid of all the devils, Filaret choking, the boots and the mattress in the fire? Anatoly’s letting Filaret out? Throwing the mattress into the water? The lessons about asceticism, detachment? Facing God? Filaret watching the boat at the end?

12.The admiral and his daughter, in the train, their discussions, her illness? The background story, her husband dying, the four and a half years’ insanity? Anatoly and his response, the admiral wary about devils? Letting Anatoly go in the boat with the girl? The ritual of the exorcism? The bond between the two, her bird calls on the boat and his response and laughing? Restoring her? Talking with her? The discussions with the admiral, reassuring him that the Communist Party would not know? Anatoly, his realisation who the admiral was, that he had not died? His confessing to the admiral? Telling the story? The admiral telling his story, forgiving Anatoly, the reconciliation? The screenplay making the recognition explicit? Showing the patterns of providence?

13.Anatoly ready to die, Job, the message? The preparation for the coffin, his getting in? Job carrying the cross on his back, the boat and taking the coffin in the boat?

14.The background of the Soviet Union, World War Two experiences, the aftermath, monasteries surviving during the communist era, the life of the monastery and prayer, people coming, pilgrims, wanting healings and miracles, faith and hopes, prayer?

15.The Russian Orthodox perspective of the film, prayer, chant, icons, the iconography, the sign of the cross? The spirituality tradition?

16.Themes of sin, the burden of sin, atonement, forgiveness, reconciliation? Anatoly seeing himself as God’s unworthy instrument for healing? Doubts and troubles? Not fearing to die but fearing to meet God?

17.The director’s comments about people’s need to reflect more on sin, guilt, conscience and eternity?

WORLD TRADE CENTER

US, 2006, 130 minutes, Colour.
Nicolas Cage, Michael Pena, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Maria Bello, Stephen Dorff, Jay Hernandez, Michael Shannon.
Directed by Oliver Stone.

This is a solid piece of drama, geared completely for its American audience with the memories and griefs of September 11th 2001. It is a tribute to the police and the firefighters personnel who went to the Center and into the towers to rescue people and who lost their lives – hundreds of them.

That, perhaps, is the difficulty for audiences around the world. It is patriotic in the best sense. But, it also has its moments of jingoism, which tend to put non-Americans on alert or even to make them hostile. It might be best to note this early in the review and then go on to praise what is good.

Speaking personally, the most difficulty I had was with the character of the marine who comes to help in the rescue on the afternoon of the 11th. He is played by Michael Shannon (who was even more frighteningly paranoid in William Friedkin’s Bug). His severe face and the intense glint in his eyes are truly alarming. When he hears the news, his stone-faced determination takes him to his pastor for advice as to how he should help. It is a religious mission in the crusading sense. Donning his uniform, he travels to New York and is able to enter the site and does fine work in the rescue. A post-script notes that he fought in Iraq later. One could not imagine him doing otherwise.

That is the scary part of the screenplay.

However, the re-creation of the planes hitting the towers, their collapse and the killing and trapping of police officers is also truly frightening. The collapse has been re-created in great detail. The audience is there – and probably wondering how we would have managed in such a situation, trapped, injured and in pain, dehydrated, alone, not knowing what had really happened or what was happening, striving to ward off sleep and unconsciousness. These aspects of the film are excellently done.

Many of us have our memories of September 11th, 2001, where we were when we heard and saw the news. It started as a perfectly ordinary day. And that is how the film starts, a well-paced crescendo of police and workers with their early rising, leaving families, travelling into New York City, the increasing numbers of drivers, train commuters, people chatting, reading, getting the paper, something to eat. At the Port Authority precinct, police get their roster for the day. Then come the shudders, the shock, the reports – and the police go into action.

This film focuses on a small group and then on two of the survivors who spent so many hours trapped beneath the rubble. They are played by Nicolas Cage and Michael Pena. Their scenes together, trying to support and encourage each other, are very effective.

In a popular film like this, it is necessary to fill in the characters’ backgrounds, show us some flashbacks of their lives, their families, as well as the anguish of uncertainty and waiting that they endure. While this is necessary and director and cast do their best, these sections look rather more routine, perhaps too familiar to audiences from too many disaster movies. The two wives are played well by Maria Bello and Maggie Gyllenhaal. We had to see these family reactions and, while they give some kind of audience relief for the tension, they also tend to take away from the scenes with the trapped men.

This is Oliver Stone’s most objective film. No conspiracies like JFK, no histrionics like Nixon, no sensationalism like Natural Born Killers. Rather, this is a tribute film, an acknowledgement of heroism and humanity that most audiences can appreciate.

1.The impact of the film? For Americans, New Yorkers? Non-Americans? The impact of the war on terrorism? President Bush’s policies? The war in Iraq? The war in Lebanon? The five years later – memoir, tribute? The re-creation of the scene, the testimony of witnesses, the reality of the experience of the police, a film for healing?

2.The factual aspects of the film, the modest focus? Two families? By implication for the rest of the police – especially for the many police and fire crews who died?

3.The focus, the two families, symbolic, tribute?

4.The reconstruction of the two towers, the planes crashing into them, the aftermath, the crashing of the buildings? Ground Zero? The New York locations, Port Authority, the police precincts, the streets? The homes in New York State, New Jersey? The ordinariness?

5.The opening of the film: September 11, 2001, the ordinary day, the police getting up in the morning, at home, breakfast, children? Going to work, driving, the music? The trains and the commuters? The gradual dawn? The city filling up? People going about their ordinary business? A normal day?

6.The details of the ordinary day, especially for the police, at the precinct, camaraderie, arriving and chatter, getting ready for work, job allotment? The squad itself? Their volunteering for particular duties at the World Trade Centre?

7.The work at the World Trade Centre, the need for equipment, their getting it, the men volunteering, the collapses and the effect, John and his urging them to go to the lift well, the collapse, their being buried? Chris, his volunteering, friends with the others, his death? Dom, trapped, dying and speaking? The film having built up his character? His gun, ready to die? His sitting dead – as if in vigil? John and Willi, the collapse? Deep down, the heavy concrete? The pain?

8.The hours passing, the audience getting to understand their characters better? Their talking, sharing, encouraging each other? The nature of the pain, their talking about it? Willi and his memories of GI Jane and the statement about pain? Knowing that you were alive if you were in pain? The theme from Starsky and Hutch? Urging each other not to sleep? The pipe, giving Willi some moisture, the possibility of banging it? Their dozing as the hours went by?

9.Their imaginations while they were trapped, memories of their families? Willi, Alison, the family, the extended family? Wanting the name Olivia for the next child? John, remembering Donna, the details of work at home? Their love for each other – the boys, the ordinariness of life? The background of the attack on the World Trade Centre in the 90s and his heroism?

10.Alison, strong woman in herself, pregnant, the family, at home, everybody gathering, her daughter Bianca, giving her to the neighbours? Her wanting to get out of the house, going to the supermarket? Realising they didn’t have a phone? Alison’s own family, support? Willi’s family, his mother? Their prayer?

11.Donna, her anxiety, John’s brother coming, the kids, J.J. and his moods, blaming his mother? The family gathering? Waiting for the phone? Memories?

12.Carson, his appearance, severe, patriotic? The marine? Discussing with his pastor? Deciding to go to New York? The marine, the gung-ho attitudes, going to the site, calling out, hearing the tapping, finding Willi? His heroism?

13.The scene in Wisconsin, the volunteers, the condemnation of the bombers?

14.Strauss, his skills, the rescue, his having to take off protection, climbing through the rubble, going down, encouraging Willi and John? The request for the medic, the medic and his alcoholism, his courage, going to help? The detail of the rescue, the engineering required, the personal approach, each being rescued? The applause?

15.The family’s going to the hospital, the wrong information? Donna and her confronting the policewoman at headquarters?

16.The police information, accurate and inaccurate?

17.The families waiting at the hospitals, the gradual good news?

18.Audiences’ overall view of the day itself, the ordinariness, the surprise, the amazement, the collapse, the destruction of the buildings – and surrounding buildings? The bewildered people at the site? The loss of so many police and firemen? The anxiety, the waiting? Ordinary people going about ordinary things outside New York City and waiting for news?

19.Two years later, the party, John and his greeting everybody, Willi, the new baby? The family reunited? A spirit of goodwill?

20.The consequences of the collapse of the World Trade Centre buildings, President Bush (glimpsed during the film) – and audience knowledge of his delay in Miami? The puzzles and the mysteries? The war against terrorism? The post-9/11 atmosphere – and this film contributing to more peace and reconciliation? Tribute?

YI NIAN ZHI CHU (DO OVER)

China, 2006, 113 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Yu- Chieh Cheng.

Do Over is an intriguing film from Taiwan. Do Over is the first feature film from the director Cheng Yu- Chieh who had made some award-winning short films.

This is a film which requires constant attention as it moves from one story to another, focusing on issues of identity, reincarnation, relationships, Chinese violence, aimlessness. The audience also has to be alert to the various time shifts. The action takes place over limited time but moves backwards and forwards in time and focuses on the developments of different characters in the way that their stories interlock.

The film opens with the focus on one of the assistants on a film set, one who feels himself lucky because he has to act as stand-in and be kissed by the leading actress, but who also feels that he will win the lottery. The film shifts then to focusing on an illegal immigrant who has been waiting for years for his citizenship and the criminal group who supply him with an identification. The film also focuses on a drug addict, Rat, who is also a crook and finds himself in a deserted hospital who has to try to work out what has happened to him, retracing his footsteps. In the meantime, the focus goes to a criminal boss who has suffered from insomnia, his becoming paranoid about people plotting against him, only to find further violence. He is connected with the director of the film with which the film opened, the young director needing money and not being able to decide how to end the film.

Once the audience has seen the film, the various characters and pieces fall into place – but the film is so well made that one wants to make the effort to understand the characters and follow the plot.

1.The impact of the film? Interest? Entertainment? Challenge?

2.The visuals of the film: Taiwan, the open roads, the city, the film set, gangsters’ meetings, ordinary situations? Hospitals? Anonymous locations? The combination of these to give a real and surreal atmosphere? The musical score?

3.The structure of the film: the five different stories, the same time span, the intercutting of the stories, the interconnection of the stories and characters? The revisiting of time? Actions and consequences?

4.Themes of identity, identity in time, the nature of the past, the uncertainty of the future? Change, reincarnation, repetition? New birth? New death? How well did the film integrate these more philosophical themes into the narrative?

5.The characters, the events – in linear form, the gangsters, the director, the assistant on the film, the young couple, the enigmatic Butterfly Woman? The symbolism of the butterfly on the woman’s back? For the final scene of the film? Trying to get the butterfly to fly?

6.Pang, the assistant, on the road, stopping the traffic? The insults? The irony of finding the illegal immigrant was one of those blowing the horn? His going to the set, his low self-esteem, his size, awkwardness? His being sent to get material from the car, his buying the lottery ticket? His standing in for the actor, lying next to the actress, his falling in love with her, her touching his hand? Listening to the results of the lottery?

7.Ding Ahn, as an illegal immigrant, the eight years to get the documents, the meeting with his friend, the ID card, its being issued, kept away from him? The confrontation, the getting into the car, the drive? The risk to his life? Getting the gun, confronting his friend?

8.The crook, the drug addict, in hospital, no-one present, his loss of memory? The bloodstains, no wound? The girl, the party with her? His decision to retrace his footsteps, the ambiguous location? His not knowing where he was? The encounter with the others, with the girl? The possibility of a future? Meeting the director?

9.The gangster boss, insomnia, his becoming paranoid, going to the meetings? The gun, going to his brother, the family situation, the brother and his lack of sympathy, the confrontation?

10.The director, his first film, the actor missing, getting Pang to stand in for the actor, the difficulties about the ending, his continued changes? His past, the money for the film, the gangster background, his trying to cope? His meetings? His meeting with the addict, the girl, being taken into another world?

11.A cross-section of Taiwanese culture and people? How interesting an overall portrait through the complex pieces of a jigsaw puzzle?

ROME RATHER THAN YOU

Algeria/France, 2006, 111 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Tariq Teguia.

This is an experimental Algerian film written and directed by Tariq Teguia. It uses many long takes giving the opportunity for the audience to reflect on what they are seeing and try to assess the characters. In terms of plot, it is set on the Algerian coast, focuses on ordinary people and the details of their way of life. It also focuses on young people who are contemplating migrating and in need of passports – legally or illegally. There are also implications of violence with some of the characters with guns and becoming involved in fights. Differences between the generations in terms of interpretation of Muslim law and practice are also significant.

However, the film will not appeal to a wide audience – but requires an audience which is interested in the themes, issues, Islam and the repercussions of these themes at the end of the 20th century and moving into the 21st.

1.An experimental film? From Algeria? For Algerian audiences? European financial support? For the art film circuit and festivals?

2.The style of the film, the very long takes? Audiences having time to watch, think, contemplate – or be distracted? The cumulative effect of the long takes, the mundane detail? The film coming alive with the police came to the café? Activity, non-activity? The silences? The music?

3.The Algerian locations, the town, the suburbs, the wharves, the factories, the beach, the cafés? Authentic?

4.The purpose of the film – the 1999 setting, the slow war, curfews, martial law? The effect on young people? Their all having been to Europe, coming back or being deported? Their wanting to get to Europe again or Australia or America? The dreams? Needing the documents and the money? Possibilities and impossibilities?

5.The focus on Zina, the slow opening, her making the coffee, going to work, walking along the street with Kemal? At work, in the clinic? His inviting her out, looking for his friend, sitting in the car, coming out, walking along the beach, the discussions and silences on the beach, the kids playing soccer and their joining in, some joy and exuberance? Having the coffee in the café? The police and the brutality, their trying to shame Zina because of her wearing jeans, being out with men? The curfew and their having to spend the night with the strangers, sitting silently? Searching for their friend, finding the dead body, her covering it? Finding the passport and the Green Card, giving them to Kemal? Zina and her driving the car, Kemal being shot, her continuing to drive – and the cut ending?

6.Kemal, getting the photo for his passport, the tropical backgrounds? Meeting Zina, walking with her? His not being employed, borrowing his uncle’s car? Family relations? The gun? Seeking his friend, the possibility of going abroad? Standing with Zina looking at the ships? His taking Zina to the sea, finding his engineer friend, at the beach, the ball, the game, the café, his documents being taken, his being interrogated? Being lost, the curfew, staying the night, searching for the friend, finding the body and his being sick? The Green Card, the passport, the possibilities – and his being shot?

7.The engineer friend, his work on the building site, his going out with Zina and Kemal, joining in the activities, getting drunk with his friend the baker, their dancing to the music? Staying in the house? The baker, letting them in with the curfew, his work, drinking, the music?

8.The families, the older generation, their criticisms of the younger generation, leaving Algeria, not following strict Muslim law? The uncle and the car? Zina’s mother and father? The father not accepting her working?

9.The background of the young men, their ambitions, their dreams? The police arriving at the café, the very long take, improvised or acted, the power of the film? The police and their brutality, their words, the interrogations, the documents, the young people being helpless? Their being kept in the police station, their being let go after the curfew?

10.The insertion of texts for reflection about globalisation, about migrants, goals in life? A film about hopes at the end of the 20th century? The dashing of dreams at the beginning of the 21st century?

FALLING (FALLEN)

Austria, 2006, 85 minutes, Colour.
Nina Proll, Birgit Minichmayr, Gabriella Hegedus, Ursula Strauss, Kathrin Resetarits.
Directed by Barbara Albert.

Fallen is a film by Barbara Albert, an Austrian director (Northern Skirts) who is also a writer. She was co-writer of the Golden Bear award-winning Grbabica in 2006.

On paper, this film sounds very interesting, a reunion of five women at a funeral. It obviously will be an occasion for a lot of truth being told. The film is able to fill in the characters of each of the women, their backgrounds, their experiences, achievements and disappointments as well as the ambiguous relationships with the deceased. He was a teacher, married, who had relationships with some of the girls. Many are indebted to his memory for his way of teaching. However, many of them have been affected badly and emotionally.

The film has some comic moments as well as serious moments.

However, the film loses momentum as it goes along, audiences perhaps losing interest in the characters, the more eccentric they seem, as the movie goes on. The character of the woman who has been released on recognisance from prison is one of the most interesting. However, what happens to them during the twenty-four hours of the visit to the wedding is not of great interest unless one is an impassioned feminist, welcoming the opportunity for the stories of women to be presented on screen.

1.A women’s film? Female characters? Issues? The performances of the cast?

2.Interest for Austrian women? European? Non-European? Too particularly focused – or universal?

3.The town settings, for the funeral, for the wedding, in the parks, in the clubs, in the woods, in the shopping malls, on the roads? A realistic atmosphere? The musical score? The range of songs, the American songs, the hymns, the more Pentecostal types, ‘Amazing Grace’? The American songs about locations and going home? The other songs?

4.The occasion, Nina arriving, meeting Stefan, going in to the funeral? The song about Heaven and the choir clapping its hands? Her getting the giggles? Going out, Alex helping her? The aftermath, the various women saying what they remembered of Michael? At the dinner, his wife’s speech, wanting happy memories? The ironies of what was to follow?

5.The progress of the women during the day: the funeral, the speeches, the dancing, their discussions amongst themselves, going to the school, the tour of the school, going to the playground, going to the wedding, the dancing, going to the club, the night, in the woods, the dawn, finding their own camping place, going back to Brigitta’s house to rest, the supermarket?

6.The characters in themselves: Nina, pregnant, laughing and weeping, the deportation of the father of the child, her not wanting to have another abortion, her getting the giggles, cheerful, with Norbert at the wedding, his advances on her, her loving him, the clash with the bride? Her being supportive during the evening? Joining in the festivities? Her friendship with Daphne?

7.Brigitta: quiet, the revelation that she had had an affair with Michael, standing on the outer, not going for the tour of the school, her mixed behaviour at the wedding, at the club, the clashes with Alex? In the activities, afterwards?

8.Alex: dignified and well-dressed, her speech, her being rowdy, the striptease at the club? Her drinking a great deal, not being steady, being sick? Going with the group, the tension with Brigitta? Her helping Daphne?

9.Carmen, the actress, the others thinking she was above them, the revelation of her past affair with Michael? The phone, standing aloof? Yet joining in helping, her kindness to Daphne? Her open discussions with the rest of the group?

10.Nicole: awkward, laughing at the wrong times, saying the wrong thing, especially about Carmen and her career? Her bringing Daphne? Her enjoying the festivities, drinking, dancing? The tensions with her daughter, not having enough money, Carmen giving the money? Daphne being lost, the search? The revelation that she was out from prison, the brutality of the group picking her up and taking her back? Daphne, telling the truth, clash with her mother, her grandfather coming to pick her up, embracing her mother?

11.Daphne, her age, absent father, mother in prison, with her grandfather, accompanying the women, joining in, being bored, wanting the cream cake, disappearing, with the younger people?

12.The background of Michael, his wife, their memories of him teaching them, their success? Yet his being exploitive, the relationships? Carmen’s reaction against him?

13.The wedding party, the behaviour of bride and groom, the groom making advances, the bride and the striptease, being drunk, going off to the club? The future of the marriage? The wedding guests and the dancing, shouting and singing, the conga line…?

14.The aftermath, Brigitta and Alex reconciling? Brigitta and her social causes, handing out leaflets, the letters? Nina and the birth of the child? Nicole going back to prison? Alex and the break-up with her boyfriend? Carmen and her doing the voice-overs?

15.How interesting for a female audience, male audience? The presentation of men? The ultimate effect of spending the time with these five thirty-year-old women?