COEURS (PRIVATE FEARS IN PUBLIC PLACES)

France, 2006, 120 minutes, Colour.
Sabine Azema, Lambert Wilson, Andre Dussollier, Pierre Arditi, Laura Morante, Claude Rich.
Directed by Alain Resnais

This is a film written and directed Alain Resnais. It is based on a very British play by Alan Ayckbourn. Resnais had directed another of Ayckbourn’s plays, Smoking and No Smoking, in 1997.

Looking at Resnais’ career from 1955 to 2006, one sees a very interesting trajectory of a film-maker who is one of France’s national treasures. He began very seriously in the 1950s with his short film about the concentration camps, Night and Fog. Then he made Hiroshima Mon Amour, a striking film of the French New Wave, commenting on French society – as well as coming to terms with some of the issues of the war with Japan. These themes continued in the mid-60s with The War is Over and Far From Vietnam. During the 1970s his films became more national and political: Stavisky, Providence, My American Uncle. By the 1980s, he had mellowed and was telling more humane stories, a touch romantic, with music: Life is a Bed of Roses. This preoccupation with theatre and music continued in the 1990s with Smoking and No Smoking, Same Old Song and his 2003 version of a 1920s operetta, Not On The Lips.

These later films of Resnais are an acquired taste. European film buffs appreciated their lyricism and delicacy. Others, harking back to the intensity of his serious films, have found that his later films seem to be very light, even superficial. However, he won the director’s award at the Venice film festival, 2006, and elicited strong performances from his ensemble cast. It is interesting to note how Ayckbourn’s sharp dialogue does not cross the channel so well – but rather, becomes typical French relationship comedy.

1.The French style of portraits, dialogue, relationships, characters?

2.The film based on an Alan Ayckborn play (and the poster for Ayckborn’s Scarborough)? The basis of a play, the reliance on dialogue, enclosed scenes and sets? The opening out of the play? Across the English Channel? The play being made Gallic?

3.The city, the apartments, affluent suburbs, homes and apartments, bars and clubs, the offices? An authentic atmosphere?

4.The work of Alain Resnais, his groundbreaking films of the 50s and 60s? The 90s onwards and his focusing on this kind of intimate personal drama, comedy? The niche audience? Interest? Lack of interest?

5.The six characters, their interconnections? The strong cast?

6.The apartment, Nicole and her discussions with Thierry, the false brochure, the small apartment, the rooms? Her impatience? Waiting for Dan to come? Her wanting another apartment? Her demands on Thierry? The transition to Dan, in the bar, his drinking? His military career, his mistake, his being dismissed? His reliance on Lionel at the bar, having the same drink, talking? Getting more drunk? Meeting Nicole, her demands on him? His excuses? His going to see the apartment, agreeing with her, wanting a study? The tension in their relationship, her wanting to separate? Her going off, the different returns, in the bar, seeing Gaelle, the discussions with Lionel, not being able to help him, the attraction towards Gaelle, buying the flowers, the farewell with Nicole? Being reunited? A future or not?

7.Lionel, looking after his old father, the father’s tantrums, getting Charlotte to look after him? His working in the bar, his skills, listening to people? The widower? The attraction towards Charlotte? Her work with Thierry, giving him the tapes of the favourite hymns, the pornography at the end (Charlotte or not, deliberate or not?)? Thierry and his loneliness at home, his sister fussing about him, the TV meal, watching the video, being caught? Assuming that Charlotte was making advances, his kissing her, her reaction, apology? Her use of the Bible, her patience with the impossible old man and his humiliation? Her buying the sexy clothes and performing? The effect on the old man, his heart attack? Lionel and his not knowing this? The appreciation of Charlotte? An ambiguous character?

8.Gaelle, at home, fussing about her brother, her being younger, going out, looking for contacts, failing? Answering the advertisement, meeting Dan, the false name, their getting on well together? Her seeing him with Nicole, assuming the worst? Possibilities for a future?

9.A merry-go-round of characters, relationships? Disappointments in life? The strength of men, the strength of women? Weaknesses?

10.A much ado about very little kind of trifle, Gallic style?

LE PRESSENTIMENT (PREMONITION)

France, 2006, 97 minute, Colour.
Jean- Pierre Darroussin, Valerie Stroh.
Directed by Jean- Pierre Darroussin.

Le Pressentiment is a fine film. It was written and directed by Jean- Pierre Darroussin who also appears as the main character. It is based on a novel by Emmanuel Bove.

The theme is the familiar one, a man facing the realities of midlife, divorced from his wife, alienation from his family, tired of his work, wanting to opt out and live a simple life among poorer people, offering his services to them.

The film shows the reaction of the very bourgeois-like family, unable to understand what he is doing. His brother tries to persuade him to come back to work and to the family. However, the man finds that he relates well with the people in the poorer part of Paris, especially with some of the migrants from eastern Europe. He becomes entangled with one man who wants to be his client for divorce but is brutal to his wife and goes to prison. The man then looks after the young daughter of the prisoner and while the wife is in hospital recovering. The neighbours, previously friendly to the man, begin to gossip and accuse him of molestation of the little girl.

The film shows the pathos of a man trying to come to terms with his life, with the demands that people make on him. The possibilities are to end his life or not? It is then revealed that he has a serious illness. He receives affirmation from the mother and daughter – and imagines his death and the funeral and the reactions of his family.

Small-budget, small in focus – yet a very interesting and moving portrait of a human being and insight into human nature.

1.French style of film? Introspective? Dialogues? Relationships?

2.The city of Paris, affluent settings, the poorer suburbs? The detail of the streets, the apartments? The cafes? The musical score?

3.The title, the focus on Charles, his choices in life, his presentiments and premonitions about death?

4.The focus on Charles Benesteau, the writer-director acting this part, his insight into the character? The initial focus, his age, personality? His meeting his brother? The news about his leaving his wife, the bourgeois upper class suburbs, his family? Their all coming to see him, the protests? The legal documents? Their reaction to his apartment, their snobbery? His continuing his life, reading, writing? Friendliness with the neighbours? His legal profession? His work at home? The visit of the neighbour, his asking advice about the divorce? His being summoned by the police, the man brutalising his wife? His daughter? The wife in hospital, his care? His taking the daughter in hand, helping her, buying things for her, encouraging her to read? Her going out with the local boy? The women and their reaction, their gossip, suggestions of molestation? His calm, his continuing to work with the girl? Her mother out of hospital, coming to get the girl, her discovering the truth about his generosity? His giving the money to the man – and saying how easy it was to be conned? His getting the money for the woman, setting her up? People’s change of heart? His going to see his woman friend, her support, his wanting to break off? His second visit to her and her advice? His sitting in the café, imagining his death, imagining his funeral, imagining the reactions? His collapse, the diagnosis of epilepsy, the opinion of the doctor? What he would do with his life, writing, theatre, poetry? Philosophy? His insights into life, solidarity with the poor?

5.The neighbours, the man brutalising his wife, wanting the divorce, his being lent the money, his assault on his wife, going to jail (and his reappearance at the funeral)? The wife, in hospital? The girl, her age, need for support, his looking after her, caring for her? Her going out with the boy, the mother and the criticism? The gossip of the neighbours, their malice?

6.A detailed portrait of individuals, the neighbours, the family and their snobbery? The woman friend? The effect on Charles, his interactions, changing his life?

7.The title and a premonition about life and its possibilities, a premonition about illness and death?

HOLLYWOODLAND

US, 2006, 126 minutes, Colour.
Adrien Brody, Diane Lane, Ben Affleck, Bob Hoskins, Robin Tunney, Larry Cedar, Lois Smith, Dash Mihik. Jeffrey de Munn.
Directed by Alan Coulter.

Hollywoodland used to be the full word on that famous ‘Hollywood’ sign proclaiming itself all over Los Angeles. It is now the title of a very interesting and effective Hollywood story.

It was released at the same time as Brian de Palma’s take on James Ellroy’s portrait of 1940s Los Angeles, crime and police, The Black Dahlia. This is altogether a sunnier story even though it tracks over the same kind of ground. Part of the sunniness is the change of status in the LA private eye. This is post-Chandler, post-Hammet territory. No longer is the detective the tough individualist in a seedy office who probes the dark side of the city (that is so 30s and 40s!). Here is the 1950s, the late 50s, the end of the Eisenhower administration, the nice era of ‘Back to the Future’. The private eye lives in suburbia, has an ex-wife, is devoted to his children – but still probes the seamy side.

The focus is the suicide of actor George Reeves who had appeared in Gone With the Wind and a number of 40s movies, who had fallen on hard times despite his charm and self-promotion and who had taken on the role of Superman in a series of minus-B movies and a television series and found himself the centre of adulation especially from his children fans. Everybody had to go home and watch Superman.

In the meantime, he had begun a liaison with the wife of an MGM executive which lasted several years until he took up with a model. He was depressive and shot himself. At least that is what the history says.

The interesting part of Hollywoodland, besides the career and spiral of Reeves, is the parallel story of the private eye investigation into his death. As with The Black Dahlia, we are treated to some hypotheses, plausible enough, of what might have been.

Did Reeves simply commit suicide? Could the tough executive with a Mafia background have organised his death? What about the model and her wanting his money? The screenplay shows us all these possibilities and leaves us with them.

The paralleling of the stories makes for an involving screenplay. The world of the private eye centres on Adrien Brody in an effective performance, partly an ambulance chasing detective who wants celebrity, partly a man who would like to have his family back, partly a man who is intrigued by the different dimensions of the story, the characters and stirring up trouble and revelations of a murky world (in the vein of Chinatown).

Reeves is portrayed by Ben Affleck in one of his best performances (winning the Best Actor award in Venice). And there is a topnotch performance from Diane Lane as the older woman he takes up with.
Bob Hoskins is her husband.

This is intelligent adult drama that immerses us in 1950s Hollywoodland.

1.Interesting and entertaining? Its part in the Hollywood genre? Based on facts, elaborated with speculation, what might have been? Three theories for the death of George Reeves?

2.The quality of the screenplay, verbal, structure, the two worlds, the intercutting, the momentum of each, each throwing light on the other?

3.The film working on several levels and themes: the United States in the 1950s, the American dream, the Hollywood dream, celebrities, images and fans, relationships, Hollywood corruption?

4.The private eye genre – the post-Chandler, post-Hammett private eye? The private eye of the 50s? Tough, the cases, but a different life and lifestyle, more ordinary, fallible, marriage and break-up, children, suburbia?

5.Audiences and their knowledge of George Reeves and his career? Boxer and actor, appearing in Gone With The Wind, films, television, Superman, Sir Galahad? His achievement, sense of failure? Potential for a career? His depression? Killing himself?

6.The image of Superman over the decades, the comic strips, the radio serials, the films and television series? Louis’ son Evan and his grief at Reeves’ death? The announcing of Superman’s death? The film showing the television series, families hurrying to watch it, Kellogg’s sponsoring it? George’s audition, his being accepted, the filming of the various sequences, the costume, the different colour for black and white photography, his fall and his reaction? His feeling that it was a nothing career? Two years and it not being screened, the sponsorship, the colour filming? His continued working over the years as Superman? His meetings with children, the theme park style of action, the child wanting to fire the gun at him to see if the bullets would bounce off him, his shrewdness in saying bouncing bullets could hurt others? The effect on his film career, the preview of From Here to Eternity, the catcalls and the questions about Lois Lane?

7.George Reeves in himself, his age and experience, his relationship with his mother, her lies about his conception, about his father’s suicide? His anger with her? The reality of the father not committing suicide and visiting? In Hollywood, his friends, drinks, getting his friends to pay, his self-promotion, photos in the nightclubs, in the papers? Aiding his career, meeting people who would help him? Turning his charm on Toni, going off with her, the night together, the discovery of who she was? The impact of the truth, his continuing with her, the very long affair? His love for her, her love for him? Her buying things for him, especially the house, the watch? Getting a gun for him? Always together, her going to the studios to watch the filming of Superman? Going to the meal with Eddie Mannix and his mistress, the irony of the Japanese woman not talking? The passing of the years, the differences in his career from what he expected? Eventually breaking with Toni, new hopes, going to New York, the meeting with Leonore, the parties, the disagreements with Leonore, whether he had broken the engagement or not? The parties at home, singing the Mexican songs? His singing being an entrée in the past into company and parties? His bond with his agent, a good friend and support? The audition tape for the wrestling show? The final night, despondent, singing, shooting himself

8.Toni Mannix, the background of her being a showgirl, her relationship with Mannix, mistress to marriage? Her social life, wealth? At the clubs, photo opportunities? Charmed by George, the age difference, the night with him? The truth, buying the house? Their long affair? Going out together? With her husband, his tolerance? Her tolerance of his affairs? Her life, gifts, the break and George’s going to New York, her telling him the truth about himself and his career? Her grief? The impact of his death, seclusion, the anniversary of her marriage and the pressure on her to come to the party?

9.Eddie Mannix, his New Jersey gangster background, work in the studios, solving problems? A studio boss, money, control? His files? His PR man, Howard Strickling and solving all the problems at the studio? His pressure on private detective companies and their doing work for him, for the police? At dinner and meeting George? Work at the studio, Louis Cimo confronting him, his pushing his weight around? The end, protecting Toni, wanting her to come down to the party?

10.MGM as a studio, Howard Strickling, his expert manner, threats, pay-offs, tough stances, confrontations with George?

11.The police, at the scene of George’s death, Patterson and his detective work? The pressures on the police, the files? Patterson finally handing them over to Louis? The Sinclair story, Sinclair murdering his wife, the police and Louis at that scene of the crime? The interconnection?

12.The glimpse of Hollywood, Hollywoodland, its glamour, tough, hard work, betrayals? An isolated world?

13.Art as an agent, a good man, decent, his friendship with George, supporting him, the funeral, his discussions with Louis?

14.The Sinclair story, showing Louis in action, his paranoia, Kit and her work with Louis? The photographing Sinclair’s wife, the wife talking to Louis and warning him off? Kit and her work, getting information for him, her other relationship and his sacking her?

15.Louis and his story, the five thousand dollars for the revelation? His estrangement from his wife, from his son? The visits, his wife and her new boyfriend, her exasperation with him? The Superman headlines, the private eye firm giving him the clues, urging him to investigate? His seeing himself as a private eye, his surly manner? His going home, his wife asking him to help with Evan, Evan and his concern about Superman’s death? His father’s gifts, his reactions? His spurning the gift? Louis turning up at school, his drinking, the end?

16.Louis’ wife, her relationship with Russ, Russ as a decent man, their discussions, Louis watching the home movies with their memories?

17.Louis in himself, integrity, ambiguous, the money, the Sinclair case, the photographs, neglecting it, confrontation by the wife, Sinclair and his growing paranoia? The death of the wife, his feeling guilty, Patterson offering to help?

18.The investigation into the death of George Reeves, the tip-off, the headlines, his work, meeting George’s mother, her retaining him, her motivations? Her not believing her son would die? His visit to Leonore, overhearing the information about the will, leaking it to the press? Leonore being vicious, later finding her in the house, her phoning him and the proposition? Her friend, her friend’s husband, working in the garden, his tip about the case? Building up the scenario that Leonore could have killed George Reeves?

19.Louis being bashed at home, the cigar, realising it was the private detective company? The pressures from MGM? Buying off George’s mother? His not having access to Toni, his meeting Mannix – and the scenario that Mannix could have ordered a hit man to kill Reeves?

20.The picture of the police, the newspapers, the stories, the will? Louis and his giving stories to the press? The story of the brakes in the car and Reeves drunk? A go-getting private eye, the bashing and its effect, his wanting to see Toni, failing, Kit and her betrayal, the going back to the cigarettes and the drinking?

21.The various pieces, going to Toni, talking with her, being kicked out?

22.The end, his focus, the panning to his standing outside the house while the film recreated the final night, George singing, going upstairs, ready for bed, depressed, shooting himself and panning back to Louis?

23.American themes, the American dream and failure, the loner detective who becomes hero, social corruption, authority figures and corruption? Speculations and possibilities about the case?

THE HOTTEST STATE

US, 2006, 117 minutes, Colour.
Mark Webber, Catalina Sandina Moreno, Laura Linney, Michelle Williams, Frank Whaley, Sonia Braga, Ethan Hawke.
Directed by Ethan Hawke.

The Hottest State is Ethan Hawke’s adaptation of his own novel for the screen. He has written the screenplay as well as directing. He also takes a cameo role as the father of the central character.

The film opens with groups of young people in Texas, nothing to do, idling the time, the girls becoming pregnant. It is the autobiography of a young man who eventually abandons his mother in Texas, goes to New York to become an actor, gets an opportunity to perform in a film, encounters a young woman and takes her to Mexico during the filming, has a lyrical relationship with her, but finds that she cannot sustain the relationship. He has to rely on friends to get him through the crisis – and to face his life again. He tries to track down his father and meets him in Texas with his new family. He also has discussions with his mother who has become embittered against her husband as she has grown older.

The film is a rather talkative narrative (akin to Hawke’s novel and his other very talkative film, Chelsea Heights).

Mark Webber (Winter Solstice) is very good as the gauche young man. Catalina Sandino Moreno (Maria Full of Grace, Fast Food Nation) is the young woman, bewildered in the relationship. There is support from Michelle Williams as a good friend, from Hawk himself and, especially, Laura Linney as his mother. Hawk’s friends, director Richard Linklater and John Patrick Shanley appear as a John Wayne enthusiast and a priest respectively.

1.The title, the reference to Texas, its meaning? The memories of childhood? Tom Robbins’ quote that it’s not too late to have a perfect childhood?

2.The work of Ethan Hawke, his novel, adaptation? Experience, sensibility, narrative drive, strength of dialogue, understanding of relationships, psychology and inner states of mind and emotions?

3.The Texas opening, the two girls, the young men, the discussions? The conception? The flashbacks to Texas? The final return to Texas?

4.The New York City locations, the streets and apartments? Authentic?

5.The Mexican locations, the atmosphere?

6.The importance of music, the songs, the lyrics, the instrumental accompaniment, setting moods?

7.William’s narrative, the boys and the girls in Texas, the attempt to tell the joke, the fascination and falling in love? Going to the city? His conception? His observations about his parents, Texas, the past? The continued manifestation of his inner life?

8.William at twenty-one, experience, separating from his mother at fifteen, memories of his father’s promises that he would live with him at thirteen, their not being fulfilled? Alone? Wanting to be an actor? His awkward manner, self-image, in New York, Samantha and his other friends, his hopes, the auditions, the party in Camino Real? The scenes from the play, the rehearsals, the monologue from the film – and the relation of the monologues to William’s life?

9.His encounter with Sarah, the audience seeing her through his eyes, attracted, infatuated, falling in love, courting her? The significance of the many long scenes of discussions, dialogue, issues, relationships? The tone of the film with such talk?

10.The bond between the two, her not being able to love him, the discussions about the sexual relationship, its not happening? The scene of the rehearsing of the clichés of breaking up (and the audience hoping that this would not happen)? Sarah’s story of her life, her love, her boyfriend’s infidelity, her forgiving him, dropping out, the anger of her mother? The visit of Sarah and William to Sarah’s mother, her attitudes? The possibilities of the relationship, sex, her decision, the concern about condoms and pregnancy, his nervousness, non-consummation?

11.Persuading her to go to Mexico, the happy and idyllic time, the fullness of the relationship? But her leaving, not thinking it was real, yet saying it was the happiest time in her life?

12.William and the film, the monologue, his returning early, the flowers and dress, her eating porridge, the awkwardness, not talking (and memories of the break-up rehearsal earlier)? William and his intensity, silence, his outbursts, Sarah and her seeming indifference, cold, her feeling pressurised?

13.William meeting with his mother, the visit, the talk, his birthday, memories of the past? His mother as a character, relationships, memories of her marriage? The Christmas visit? His not listening to her about her own life? His concern about his father? His remembering his father, the present and his mother’s anger?

14.William’s father, in the memories, his leaving, the tension between husband and wife, his going to see him in Texas, the difficulties of the encounter, the father and his reticence, giving advice, William’s anger?

15.His visits to Sarah, shouting through the megaphone, declaiming Romeo and Juliet? The visits to her for his birthday, her present, the collage? His outbursts and anger?

16.His incessant phone calls, the obsessive nature of his relationship? Its consuming him interiorly?

17.The visit to Texas and his calm after the return, his visit, Sarah’s rehearsals, her life with her music, on tour? Her inviting him to listen, his leaving and her nodding?

18.The final return to Texas, his driving, his young parents in the back of the car?

19.A study of obsession and intensity? The male perspective on this kind of experience? (The character of Samantha, William talking with her, the possible sexual affair, it not happening, her resentment?)

THE QUEEN

UK, 2006, 97 minutes, Colour.
Helen Mirren, Michael Sheen, James Cromwell, Roger Allam, Alex Jennings, Sylvia Sims, Helen Mc Crory.
Directed by Stephen Frears.

While the rating for The Queen is 'excellent', it may not be everybody's cup of tea. What we like depends on where we stand.

Some strong traditional British (and other) royalists may judge that this is an intrusion into the life of the royal family (though it is much more fair-minded than many a TV documentary of recent years). For those of a more republican frame of mind, it is a critique of the culture of protocol that seems to bind the behaviour and attitudes of the royals.

For those who want to understand the royal family, it goes a long way to help us appreciate the background that has shaped their lives and the effect that it has had on them.

The film is never less than interesting. It is very well crafted and most of the performances are excellent. Helen Mirren recently won an Emmy for her performance as Elizabeth I. She won the Best Actress award in Venice, 2006. Not only does she look and sound like the queen, she creates a character that can both attract and baffle the audience. James Cromwell probably underplays the gruff reputation that the Duke of Edinburgh is famous for.

Director Stephen Frears and writer Peter Morgan made the telemovie, The Deal, some years ago, a dramatisation of the agreement of succession between Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. (This new screenplay also won at Venice.) Michael Sheen portrayed Tony Blair. Here he is again, even more persuasive in capturing the look and manner of the prime minister.

Of course, the other principal element of the film is that it is mainly set during the week of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. She appears in a great deal of television news material as well as in some of her interviews. The film is overwhelming in its reminder of the outpouring of grief at Diana's death, a powerful memory of what the British public felt and did at the time.

We are also reminded of the slow response of the queen from Balmoral and how that grew into harsh criticism, especially from media headlines. This is all dealt with here, not in a sensationalist way, but in a forthright way, a drama of the desire for privacy and the consequent decisions by the queen, the issue of the flag over Buckingham Palace and the delayed arrival of the family in London.

The Blairs (although the prime minister is shown as becoming devoted to the queen) and the Labor party members, including a strong Alistair Campbell lookalike, voice the criticism of the constricting effect of
protocol, precedents and procedures.

We also see the consequences of a sensibility that avoided any outward emotional show, even within the family. Prince Charles seems to be something of an exception, someone who has felt the need for touch and warmth and who could acknowledge that in this way Diana was an excellent mother.

In many ways, this film humanises the queen through showing us in her more ordinary life: waking up in the morning, reading the papers, watching TV, talking with her mother and, in fact, at the steering wheel of a four-wheel drive.

The film's, and the queen's, final question is whether this episode harmed the British monarchy, not just the slow response to Diana's death but perceived feeling that the queen did not care (seen especially in her tight-lipped presence at the funeral).

The Queen offers us plenty to discuss.

1.The impact of the film? For British audiences? Commonwealth audiences? Overseas? An appropriate piece of cinema? The focus on the week of Diana, Princess of Wales’ death? The context of Tony Blair’s election in 1997? A symbolic week in the life of the monarchy?

2.The strength of the cast, their resemblance to the real characters, their acting, impersonations?

3.The use of television footage, archival, texts being enacted by Helen Mirren and Michael Sheen, the air of realism? The atmosphere of a docudrama? The skill of the writing, creating characters and insights?

4.The London settings, the Blairs, parliament, their home? The contrast with the Scottish settings, the locations, the beautiful mountain countryside, Balmoral? The television footage of ordinary people in London and their grief for Diana?

5.The status of the monarchy, its popularity, the presence of the queen for so long, as a girl, during the war, abdication experience of her uncle, her father becoming king and it killing him? The Queen Mother? Stoic upbringing, patriotic? Cold in manner, the cold upbringing? The queen as a figurehead? Her experience, her wisdom? The screenplay giving her perhaps more irony than she has in real life? The attitude towards Diana, the marriage, the perspective on the divorce? Diana in the public eye, her judgments? Celebrity, friends? The fact that she was no longer a member of the royal household? The death, the news, the reaction, privacy, protecting Diana’s children, the attitude towards Charles (and the other children absent except for their mother referring to children as a blessing)?

6.Tony Blair, the 1997 election, the landslide, the queen waking up to a new era, the newspapers? Robin and his continued presence for the queen, his advice? Her attitude towards Tony Blair, mocking Cherie’s curtsey? The preparations for meeting Mr Blair, the protocol, the bowing, his asking the questions and her reversing the process? Giving them fifteen minutes? Her impatience with them? The formal nature of the meeting?

7.The presence of Diana in the UK in the 80s and 90s, the televisual collage of her behaviour, her attitudes, her charities, in the public eye? The interviews and her comments on the marriage? The queen and Prince Philip’s attitude? Charles, the relationship with Camilla? Her relationship with her children? The relationship with Dodi Fayed? Her errors of judgment? The visualising of the final night, the paparazzi hounding her in Paris, the driving, the crash? The issue of Charles hearing the news and weeping, going to Paris, his mother making difficulties, his getting the ticket, bringing the coffin back, his regret at not taking the boys to Paris, the honour when the coffin arrived back in England?

8.The people’s feeling, the people’s princess, the flowers, the cards, the crowds? For so many days? Tony Blair and his attitude, reading the people correctly, wanting to make a statement, his concern about the queen? Alistair Campbell and his quick and slick writing, the people’s princess? The misjudgment of the royal family, the Duke of Edinburgh being completely wrong? The phone calls, the headlines, the royal family’s reaction, wanting to ignore them, in denial, the polls and the anti-monarchy stances? Tony Blair ringing, giving advice – the queen pondering it, her taking it?

9.The different between the Blair world and the queen world? “Call me Tony instead of yes, Minister”? Cherie and her work, her jokes about the royal family, her socialist attitude? Her comments about Blair becoming a fan of the queen as did all Labour prime ministers? Seeing the Blairs at home, at the breakfast table, watching television, young, energetic? Tony Blair and his staff? The work with Alistair Campbell? His final outburst in defence of the queen? His speech to the public, the political angles of the queen’s attitude and Diana’s death, to the betterment of Tony Blair’s leadership? Alistair Campbell, spin and support?

10.The world of Balmoral, Charles and his phoning Tony Blair instead of talking with his mother? Robin and his listening in and his attitudes? The staff weeping? He thinking the reaction was over the top? His phoning Blair? The official in charge of the funeral, the meeting at Buckingham Palace, the arrangements, the vast changes, the public ceremony? The invitation to celebrities? (And seeing Pavarotti, Elton John, Steven Spielberg and Tom Cruise?)

11.Life at Balmoral, the holiday house, the Victorian origins and traditions, the queen relaxing, the officials present, the news, her disbelief, her not wanting to say anything? The Spencer family? Privacy? Avoiding the media? Taking away the radios and televisions, protecting William and Harry? The phone calls, the phone call in the kitchen and the staff going out? The symbolism of the queen going out in the car, her being stranded in the river, her watching and admiring the deer? Later going to see it after it was killed, her grief for the deer (rather than Diana)? Her compliments to the guest who shot the deer? Yet her grieving over its being wounded?

12.The final decision to return, the Duke of Edinburgh and his hostility, his being out in the hills always with the boys, his short, sharp comments? The family walking amongst the flowers, meeting the public? The media talking about the quarrel being resolved between the monarchy and the people? The issue of the flag flying half-mast at Buckingham Palace, the procedures and protocols?

13.The funeral, Earl Spencer’s speech and the vast applause, the queen sitting tight-lipped?

14.What did the film have to say about the British people, traditions, the monarchy, class, Diana amongst the people, their grief, the people’s extroverted outpouring of grief, the need for some kind of support from the monarchy? The support from Blair and admiration for him?

15.The two months passing, the formal meeting with the queen, asking her about the damage to the monarchy, her walking in the garden with Tony Blair? The subsequent regaining of popularity of the royal family, despite the marriage of Charles to Camilla? Tony Blair’s leadership, the Iraq war and his losing popularity? The queen and her dismay at learning that one in four voted against the monarchy, that she could be hated?

QUEI LORO INCONTRI

Italy, 2006, 68 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Jean- Marie Straub and Daniele Huillet.

Quei LorI Incontri is like many of the films made by the two directors over a number of decades. They are really theatrical pieces, pieces of drama, poetry, rhetoric declaimed by actors standing in sets.

The cinematic aspect of this film is the woodland locations were five pairs of orators speak. Most of the film is single-take fixed camera – with a few tracking shots about the beauty of the trees, the shrubs and the water. However, this makes for very static cinema. The musical accompaniment adds some enrichment to the visual impact.

However, the Straub- Huillet films are mainly verbal. Spoken in Italian, from pieces written by Cesare Pavesi, they are declaimed rather than given nuanced enunciation and modulation. The style means that the rhetorical nature of the poetry and its content is merely strengthened and made less acceptable for audiences by the declamation.

The audience would need to have great expertise about Greek mythology, about the Greek gods, about the philosophy behind creation, the gods, the role of nature, the position of human beings. There are also references to very obscure and little-known myths. The orators themselves take the voice of some of these mythical characters.

Generally the tone and content is about the human condition, about God, the transcendent, nature. It is also about the possibility of gods becoming human, or at least mixing amongst humans and sharing their experience. The emphasis is also on suffering.

This kind of rhetoric is particular to Continental Europe, a relishing of abstract and cerebral considerations rather than an imaginative, narrative, or even emotional presentation of the ideas – and eliciting this kind of response from an audience.

For most audiences, this is not a cinematic experience – and very hard going.

STILL LIFE

China, 2006, 108 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Jia Zhang- Ke.

Still Life was the winner of the Golden Lion at the 2006 Venice film festival. The surprise film of the festival, it was introduced late in the day and surprised most people in winning the main prize. The director’s previous films, Platform and The World were also screened at Venice film festivals and his Unknown Pleasures screened in Cannes. He has a high profile in the West, especially in the festival world.

This film is more accessible than his previous films. It is set in the Three Gorges area of China and was filmed on location, taking advantage of the completion of long-term plans to build an enormous dam at the convergence of rivers at the Three Gorges. Needless to say, much of the scenic aspects of the film are quite spectacular.

The film focuses on several stories of characters involved in the building of the dam – as well as the consequences of flooding various towns and the relocation of people to new homes. One of the stories involves a worker who comes from the countryside seeking the wife who left him some time earlier with their daughter. He finds that the house has been submerged. He goes to work on the dam as well as the work of demolition of buildings before the floods come. Another story involves a woman coming to see her engineer husband who works on the site whom she has not seen for some years. She wants to announce her divorce. With the various human stories interacting with the social commentary about the building of the dam and its consequences, the film offers a complex insight into contemporary Chinese life and society.

The film also has a touch of magic realism – especially in a scene where behind two of the characters speaking, one of the buildings is launched into space like a rocket. This adds a poetic and ironic comment on the realism of what has happened to the Yangtze River at the Three Gorges.

1. The reputation of the director? His portraits of China? His portraits of provincial China?

2. The location, the village, the Three Gorges, the Yangtze River, the dam and its construction? Filming in the middle of buildings under collapse, of water coming through the dam wall? Authentic?

3. The presentation of ordinary Chinese, from the villages, in the towns, those who had to move because of the submerging of the towns, officialdom, the bigger hotels, the engineers, the working class and the employer class? The change from Mao Tse- Tung’s China? The musical score, the modern songs, the dancing? Opening to the 21st century?

4. The title, the director’s comment on going into rooms and seeing dust on objects, the still life and what underlies the still life? The history?

5. The focus on San Ming, the miner, his having separated from his wife sixteen years earlier, his not having seen his daughter? His getting on the boat, travelling on the ferry, his poverty, the artists on board and the magic tricks about money, their demands on him, his not having anything? Landing, the motorcycle driver, taking him to the address, his discovery that the address was submerged? His being taken to the office, their not being able to help, the faulty perspective? The driver taking him to a friend, bargaining for the room? His being at home in the room? Going out to work, on construction and the demolition of buildings? The details of his life, the work? His meeting with the young man, his wanting to be a gangster type, looking at the television, lighting the cigarettes, going out with the group to bash others? His friendship with San Ming? San Ming, his search for his wife, gradually getting information? Her arrival, the meeting after so long, the discussion about their daughter, her saying that she was so young in the past? The possibility of a future together? San Ming as the typical worker on this kind of site? His old life gone, his old village gone, his traditions gone – having to face progress and the 21st century?

6. The transition to the story of the nurse, Shen Hong, her coming to the town to look for her husband, his absence for two years, being busy in the construction? Her not staying long? Meeting the assistant, his trying to mollify the news? Their discussions, her going out, the dinner, watching the dancing, dancing with the friend? Her regrets about the collapse of their marriage, her finally meeting her husband? The talk, the silences, her walking away, his following in the car, the dam, the buildings surrounding them – and the surrealistic touch with the modern strange building taking off like a rocket? The discussion about the marriage, embracing, dancing – and then her telling him about falling in love with someone else, the decision about the divorce?

7. The two stories as the focus of the narrative, two different people, two different classes, being affected by the transition of the Three Gorges Dam?

8. The importance of the town, the buildings, their collapsing? The new buildings? The bridges, the engineering and architecture, the bridges being lit? The Three Gorges and the natural beauty? The ferries and the tourists on the river, going to the dam? The water rising over one hundred and fifty metres?

9. A portrait of China at the beginning of the 21st century? Immersing the audience in its way of life, the transition from the communist era, its future?

CHILDREN OF MEN

UK, 2006, 118 minutes, Colour.
Clive Owen, Claire- Hope Ashitey, Julianne Moore, Michael Caine, Pam Ferris, Danny Huston, Chiwitel Ejifor, Charlie Hunnam.
Directed by Alfonso Cuaron.

It was something of a surprise when P.D. James published Children of Men a few years ago. Her fans know her as a writer of stylish and literate crime thrillers, which are also murder mysteries and investigations but have much more depth than average. Children of Men is not a crime thriller. Rather, it is a futuristic story, more in the vein of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World or George Orwell’s 1984.

This time the year is 2027. The setting is London. However, it is a London that is recognisable but in a state of growing decay. The rest of the world has collapsed economically, militarily and even morally. Refugees, especially from Eastern Europe and Africa, are pouring into Britain only to be rounded up by hardened soldiers and police, locked in cages and transported to holding camps (with one in Bexhill). In this way the film has resonances with current British migration issues.

There is a more important factor that makes this story different. The world has become infertile. There are no more children of men and women. At the opening, there is dismay as news reaches London that the youngest person in the world, an 18 year old from Argentina, has been killed in a brawl. There is a huge outpouring of grief. This compounds the despair that when everyone dies, there will be an empty world. Everything will be still there with no one to see it.

On this level, the film works well, omitting large sections of the sub-plot concerning the hero’s political cousin, but keeping the main narrative and P. D. James’ themes. (A warning that the screenplay goes beyond Baroness James’ literate and more refined language and relies a lot on a more frank and four-lettered vocabulary.)

Clive Owen, just as unsmiling as usual but galvanised into action, is Theo, an ordinary citizen in these grim times who lives a more comfortable life because he is born English. When he is abducted by a revolutionary group, The Fish, led by Julianne Moore and Chiwitel Ejiofor, he is asked to get official permission for travel for an African young woman – who is pregnant.

The plot is complicated by the mother-to-be being an alien to be deported by the government, by the rebels wanting to keep the baby as a symbol of their fight against the authorities. It is a reminder that when all is said and done, we all respond well to a baby and can imagine our dismay if there were to be no more.

The bulk of the film consists of the dangerous journey of Theo and the girl to Bexhill to try to escape to The Human Project, an organisation that people have heard of but have never seen. It is a dangerous quest which ends up in the middle of the battles of an uprising.

Will the human race actually survive? Is the pregnancy a sign that humans will be able to reproduce? Just for a few moments, there is a ceasefire, as the young woman walks with her baby through the awestruck troops.

Michael Caine, Julianne Moore and Peter Mullan have solid cameo roles. Direction is by Mexican Alfonso Cuaron who made such a success of the third Harry Potter film. The film screened at the Venice Film Festival, 2006, where it received an award for photography and effects. It certainly does create a credibly squalid London, contrasting with the still beautiful countryside. This and the fierce battle sequences make us thankful for what we still have.

1. A vision of a possible future? Its relationship to the present? The blend of science fiction, political revolution? Message?

2. The work of P.D. James, literate, visionary, political? Insights into 21st century Britain? More universal message?

3. The setting of 2027, a recognisable London, yet squalid, collapsing? Police clashes with immigrants? The British and their attitude towards migrants, jobs, protection? The officers, the role of government? The military? The touches of 1984? The visual impact of familiar sites in the city, the interiors, the woods, the houses in the woods? Bex Hill and its being occupied, battles, camps? The overall sense of place?

4. The situation of reproduction, no children, the human race dying out, the television and the news about the youngest man in South America and his death? The squalid world and his being killed in a fight? People trying to survive? The Quietus packs for death? Government policies?

5. Britain as being the only place in any way prospering? The migrants, the rest of the world collapsing, people from Africa, East Europe, the Middle East? The contemporary allusions to migrant questions? Islam, the people coming from Eastern Europe for jobs, their icons, their thugs? People from Africa?

6. The revolutionary group, the Fish? Julian as leader, their acts of terrorism, their just cause? The talk of the futures project? Luke as lieutenant to Julian? Their military activity, abducting Theo, Julian discussing with Theo, her absence from his life? The past, their child – and Jasper’s story about the child, its growing up, its death? Julian wanting the document for Kee?

7. Theo in himself, his world, ordinary, home, the pleasure of his visits to Jasper, the conversation? Going to visit his cousin in government, to get the document? The cousin, suave personality, his disabled son and his outbursts at the table? Julian and her mission, his being abducted, the confrontation with Luke, Kee and her baby, his decision to get the document, the pursuit, going to take refuge with Jasper, watching Jasper being killed? Luke and his mission, wanting the baby? Miriam, taking her, her care for Kee?

8. The portrayal of the military, the police, ruthlessness?

9. Jasper, in himself, genial person from an old world, academic, his welcoming Theo, enjoying his company, his care for his wife, her catatonic state? Providing a refuge for Theo and Kee against Luke? The military pursuing them, the discovery of the map, Jasper being shot?

10. Kee, her background in Africa, character, not knowing the father of the child? The wonder of her actually being pregnant after all this time? The situation, Julian wanting her saved, Luke wanting her to be assembled for the cause? The mission, Luke killing Julian? Their fleeing, with Jasper, his kindness, on the road, in the car, the pursuit, the military and the police? The contact with Sid? His looking after them? Taking them to the gypsy, the gypsy and her help, Miriam and her being arrested and killed? Her going into labour, Theo and his concealing it, the experience of the birth, the difficulties, their being no models for Kee? Happy with the child? A girl? Tending the child, concealing it, the soldiers? The fighting, moving through the soldiers, their being lost in admiration for someone with a child? Going to the boat? Theo and his protection, the boat looming, Theo dead, her future? Possibilities for the human race?

11. Theo, the effect of this experience, bringing him out of himself, his memories of the loss of his child, the relationship with Julian? With Jasper, the pain of watching him die? His protecting Kee, talking with Miriam? Watching her die, the interactions with Sid, hiding, the gypsy, the squalor, the birth? The growing dangers? The battle, his having to bring Kee through the bombardment? His rowing her out to the boat, the fight with Sid, the fact that he was wounded, his death? An achievement?

12. Miriam, her story, the midwife, her narrative about what had happened, women becoming less fertile, the stopping of the pregnancies, no births? Her wanting to help Kee, with the Fish? Her suddenly being taken, the bag over the head, her execution along with the others?

13. Sid, the genial personality, the jokes, the drug dealing with Jasper? The prison, getting people into the prison? His talking about himself in the third person? The rescue, safety with the gypsy and his reactions to her? The violence and the confrontation with Theo?

14. The gypsy, a migrant, Eastern European? The contact, her help in delivering the baby, her delight in the child?

15. The siege in Becks Hill, the numerous migrants, the camps, the bombardment of the building, the revolution coming? Luke, the Fish, Luke’s death? The people letting the baby pass – peace for a moment?

16. The range of migrants, the places they came from, the cages and camps?

17. Salvation for the human race, out of Africa? The ending, the sadness? The film as drama, conscience, challenge, insight, hope?

INLAND EMPIRE

US, 2006, 180 minutes, Colour.
Laura Dern, Jeremy Irons, Justin Theroux, Julia Ormond, Harry Dean Stanton, Diane Ladd, Grace Zabriskie.
Directed by David Lynch.

If ever there was a film where you could use the old joke, ‘What’s it about?’ ‘About three hours’, this is it. One could list some of the aspects of the plot but that would not really tell you what Inland Empire is about at all. The answer is simply, ‘this is a David Lynch film’.

For more than thirty years Lynch has tantalised and exhilarated his audiences. In the 1970s, it was the puzzle in black and white of Eraserhead (and its reverberating sound engineering). In the 1980s, it was the darkness under the suburban garden surface in Blue Velvet. In the 1990s, he took television audiences into the weird state of Twin Peaks. He also developed parallel worlds in Lost Highway and continued that into the 21st century with parallel and contrasting worlds in Mulholland Drive.

Where is the Inner Empire located? Geographically in the US and Poland, with filming done in both places. But that is only external topography. The Inland Empire, or Inner Empire, is the interior world of David Lynch as storyteller, creating an inner empire of storytelling of the mind and the emotions, showing facets of an inner empire of the central character’s psyche and evoking an inner empire response from each viewer, a world of response that will differ from person to person.

Obviously, Lynch is not interested in direct narrative. There are the elements of narrative there if we want to get some hook onto the three hours’ experience. Laura Dern is an actress. She is offered a part in a film to be directed by Jeremy Irons and is to star with Justin Theroux. She is interviewed on TV by a brassy reporter (played by her mother, Diane Ladd). The film is a remake of a film that was never finished because the leads were murdered. It is based on Polish myths. The actress has her own life, the life of the character she is playing and alter egos which emerge at different times. Julia Ormond also appears as, perhaps, another alter ego but in a weirder and more violent world. These are the major suggestions, but there is a great deal more detail.

Lynch is not concerned with narrative logic. Time fluctuates because it is multi-dimensional (after all, we imagine, we remember the past, we fantasise about the future, we dream – the narrative of our inner empires moment by moment has little narrative logic). And what is space? Is it a continuum (after all, we are present in one place and our memories and imaginations have us in other space dimensions). Our day-by-day imaginative lives are quite surreal if we examine them, so why not use this experience for a film? It engages our mind in a pursuit of reason, logic and truth but it works on the level of consciousness and feelings.

What Lynch is interested in is the experience of possibilities, alternate states, parallel worlds. With his use of digital cameras, he is freer to move the point of view around much more fluidly, capturing more effectively emotional and imaginative events.

The experience of watching Inland Empire is more than a touch mesmeric. It does run for almost three hours and, unless the experience is so confusing or disturbing that one cannot surrender to it, it draws us in and gives us, in images, movement, sound, speech and music, a truly cinematic experience.

Laura Dern appears in almost every sequence and gives a wonderful performance with quite a range of emotions. She remarked before the screening at the 2006 Venice Film Festival that she was looking forward to seeing the film to find out what it was and what it was about. Her version of the answer would probably be quite different from yours and yours and hers from mine. But that’s all right. We all have our own Inland Empires.

1. The expectations of a David Lynch film? His themes, visual style, music, sound engineering? Dreams, reality? A puzzle?

2. The use of digital camerawork, its flexibility, grainy stock, the demanding nature of the stock, the close-ups? The presentation of real worlds, unreal? The filming in Poland?

3. The musical score, the vibrations and reverberations? The range of songs? Popular? European? American? The performances throughout the film, songs and dances interspersed? The exuberance of the final credits?

4. The real world, parallel worlds, alternate worlds? The United States and Europe? The real world, the world of imagination, dreams? The world of film and the film story, compared with reality? Theatre and reality – and the participation by applause and laughter of the audience? One world flowing into the other? Offering the audience plenty of scope for imagination, reflection? The challenge not to try to work out logical connections but to go with the flow of the film?

5. The prologue, the record, the serial, popular in the Baltic area? The Polish locations, Poland itself, the people? The legends? Stories from Poland, the Polish characters, language, the members of the circus? Families, women? The violence? The scene in the hotel, sexuality, the blurred faces? The woman, her weeping, watching television – and this recurring at the end of the film, her watching Nicky’s world as well as the film?

6. The Alice in Wonderland overtones of the rabbits, performing on a stage, audience and applause and laughter, Pinteresque dialogue? The situation in the room, sitting on the lounge, the ironing? People trying to enter? Nicky coming to the door at the end?

7. The neighbour, her appearance, visually truncated, coiffeured, coming into the house, praising its beauty, wanting to be neighbourly, having the cup of coffee? Talking with Nicky? Her story of the boy reflecting evil, of the girl doing the same? Her telling Nicky she would get the part, asking whether there was a murder in it? Their discussion, her rough language, Nicky objecting? Her reappearing at the end – younger?

8. The introduction to Nicky, very proper, welcoming to the neighbour, the servants and the coffee, her husband lurking, his general absence? Welcoming but uncomfortable? Laura Dern’s presence, her part in the film as a dramatic tour-de-force, the film depending on her?

9. The woman getting her to imagine what was going to happen tomorrow, on the couch with her girlfriends, the phone call, getting the role, the jumping and excitement, the husband watching? This being a real in an unreal world? The world of tomorrow and what if?

10. The making of the film, the introduction to the director, Jeremy Irons’ style? Harry Dean Stanton as his assistant, his manner? The enthusiastic speeches, the welcome to the stars, the reading session and performance, the story about the film being a remake, the story behind the story with the deaths of the stars? The mystery and nobody knowing what exactly happened? The director, the filming, the techniques, the praise, his reappearing at the end, the dramatic death scene and the appearance of the camera? Praise, printing? His final concern about Nicky? The enigma of the assistant and his borrowing money from Nicky and Devon?

11. Nicky and Devon meeting, their reputations, manager, discussion about deals? Nicky being very proper? The reading at the table, developing their characters, the issue of the remake? Their going to the television session, the obnoxious questions asked by the host (and her being Diane Ladd, Laura Dern’s mother)? The scenes of the story of the film, Devon and Nicky – falling in love in reality, their scenes, or dreams? Nicky appearing later and declaring, as Susan, her love for Billy, Billy’s wife and her anger and reaction?

12. The significance of Nicky and her dreams, her being trapped in the dreams, going from one story to another, rushing, trying to get back but unable? The inevitability of dreams? The desire to escape? The range of dream worlds, the different identities for Nicky, her being bashed, inviting in the man with glasses, her crass language? Issues of relationships? Her appearing as the naïve suburban wife, the barbeque and her bewilderment? With the circus people? Herself, mirroring herself? Sue as a mirror or not of Nicky? With the women, in the room, their songs, dances? Their appearing and disappearing? As the prostitute in the street, with the other prostitutes, meeting the men in the street, recognising them, the discussions? The ultimate fight, the stabbing? The pathos of the death scene – the black woman lying in the street, the Asian woman, their long discussion about how to get a bus, the issue of the bus? The black woman telling her that she was dying? Her blood, vomiting the blood, her death – and the audience then seeing the camera and the director calling “Cut”? Nicky and her inability to get up for some minutes?

13. The effect on Nicky, her finally getting up, wandering, into the cinema, the screen, the man she confided in passing by? Going to the different rooms, the women in the rooms, the Polish woman watching her on the television screen? Her entering the room with this woman, the kiss, her disappearing? Two halves of the one identity? Her wanting to visit the rabbits?

14. The woman in the room, watching the screen, the kiss, her being happy?

15. The husband, Billy, the Pole, the merging of different husbands? The suburban husband and the barbeque? The husband and the son, finding Nicky/Sue? Seeing and not seeing?

16. The range of men, a certain anonymity, the Polish strangers, the circus personnel?

17. The exuberance of the final song, celebratory mode? Laura Dern present in the middle of all this?

18. Where was the inner empire, as a location, an inner world location, different worlds – and the quest for identity and meaning within this empire?

THE MISSING STAR

Italy, 2006, 103 minutes, Colour.
Sergio Castellitto, Ling Tai.
Directed by Gianni Amelio.

La Stella Che Non C’e is yet another fine film from Italian director Gianni Amelio. He made a big impact in the 1990s with Open Doors, Il Ladro di Bambini and L'America. His previous film was The Keys of the House, a film about fathers and sons with Kim Rossi Stuart and Charlotte Rampling.

Sergio Castellitto is a fine Italian actor as well as director. He portrays the Italian everyman going to the east, leaving his native Italy (as Marco Polo did in the past) and venturing to China. He has information which will help industry – but the Chinese are not interested in hearing his advice. He encounters a young woman, helps her on the road, discovers a great deal about the land of China, its present and future, its people.

The film is an interesting example of a European breaking out of the narrow confines of that continent and trying to understand something of Asia.

1. The work of Gianni Amelio? Italian perspective? Values? His sense of humanity? The international perspective of this film?

2. An Italian story, yet the world of globalisation, the interconnection between Asia and Europe? Differences in culture, language? Colonial history, the dominance of Europe, the tendency of Europe and Europeans to patronise the Asians, underestimating the history of their culture? Some unable to adapt, others learning? The challenge to Italy and Italians, especially concerning migrants, the growth of population, the future?

3. The factory, the extended tour of the factory, the explanation of its history and building? Its closing, selling the equipment to China? The Chinese and their response, the group photo, the translator? The promises by the Italians? The celebratory dinner?

4. Vincenzo, his name, goodwill? The focus of the film, the symbolic Italian? His realistic story, alone, loving his work as an engineer, his brooding, the warning about the dangers, his working on the solution? His going to the banquet, interrupting? The warning, his using the dictionary, his shaming the translator and not realising it?

5. His decision to go to China, his not being understood by the group, passing the girl in the street – and her shame?

6. The flight to China, arrival, the airport, language difficulties, the crowds and the population of China?

7. Getting the taxi, going to the factory, going to the office, the group actually being brokers rather than factory owners, the dismissal of the agent? Their being no help?

8. His meeting the translator, the library, giving her back the dictionary? Her being hurt, ignoring him? The breakfast, his insulting the food? Her decision to help, the discussions about money, the bonding between the two?

9. The different ways of travel around China? The train, the buses, trucks, cars? His going to the factory, her going to the office, his wandering, the officials presuming he was a terrorist, his arrest, the interrogation? His desperation? Her being interrogated, their meeting?

10. Her finding him a place to stay, the stairs, the many floors, his seeing the crowds, the families, the workplaces, the women sewing? The children playing, the television? The reality of China and his journey of learning?

11. His travelling on the roads, on the trucks, the hardships, rough, and his lack of language?

12. Going to the translator’s village, the discovery of her child, her explanation of her story, her shame with the child, not having seen her family or the child for a year, her pregnancy, not married, dropping out of her studies, learning Italian? Vincenzo’s response?

13. His continually wanting to do the mission alone, his sense of urgency, their ride on the truck, it becoming a dead end, their staying, going further on a truck, the roadblock, the translator asleep, his sending the truck back? His eating in the roadside café? Communicating and finding ways to communicate?

14. His finally getting to the factory, offering the equipment, his happiness, the man who understood how the mechanism worked, the puzzle of the other officials – and their throwing it away?

15. His continuing his journey, walking, arriving at the station, meeting the translator?

16. Themes of culture and honour, shame and face? European presumptions and arrogance? The Chinese and their traditions? Attitudes to strangers? Merging into the globalised world?

17. Chinese customs, visualised, Europeans learning? Food, money?

18. The visuals of 21st century China, affluent cities, the big cities, contemporary styles, growth of industry, progress (and builders working through the night)? The countryside, lush, barren? The rivers and the dams?

19. The future, Vincenzo and his talk about children, population, foundlings in China?

20. The title of the film, the stars in the flags, symbols of justice – what was the missing star?