MOTHER AND CHILD

US, 2009, 125 minutes, Colour.
Annette Bening, Naomi Watts, Kerry Washington, Samuel L. Jackson, Jimmy Smits, Cherry Jones, David Morse, Marc Blucas, S. Epatha Merkerson, La Tanya Richardson, Shareeka Epps, Elizabeth Pena, Lawrence Pressman, Lisa Gay Hamilton, Amy Brenneman.
Directed by Rodrigo Garcia.

A simple title for a complex, always interesting and always moving portrait, mainly of women, but also of some men and loving and family relationships, mingled with a lot of pain and sorrow.

Rodrigo Garcia previously directed two films which explore female characters and relationships: Things You Can Tell by Just Looking at Her (1999) and Nine Lives (2005). He has written and directed for television, especially several episodes of Six Feet Under and In Treatment. He has great skill in writing credible characters, telling stories with feeling and directing them for unobtrusive maximum effect.

There are at least seven mothers and children here but there are three at the centre of the film. Annette Bening gives one of her best performances as a fifty year old woman who had to give up her baby for adoption when she gave birth at age 14. A demanding perfectionist with a curt manner, she looks after her aged and infirm mother and resents her mother’s friendship with their house cleaner and her daughter. A co-worker at the hydrotherapy centre, a sympathetic Jimmy Smits, alienates her at first but a series of events leads to her softening and the possibilities of happiness in her life.

An excellent Naomi Watts plays an ambitious, steely-controlled (even in seduction) lawyer who was adopted and whose adoptive parents are dead. Independent, she goes to work in an LA firm for Samuel L. Jackson in a very humane role.

Meanwhile, Kerry Washington finds that she and her husband cannot have children and want to adopt. They meet Cherry Jones as the kind nun who supervises the adoption program. The pregnant mother who is to give the couple her child bonds with the adoptive mother but things don’t work out for either the marriage or the adoption, although there is a satisfyingly happy ending despite a great deal of grief. The mothers of the husband and wife are important in this story as offering other angles on the mother and child theme, supportive mothers and dominating mothers.

Somebody remarked that this is the material of television soap opera. Yes, this is often the contents of episodes, but Garcia’s treatment of material and characters goes well below the surface of the stories and explores the feelings for mothers for their children. The men are at the edge of the portraits of the women and several of them don’t come off very well at all.

The film runs for just over two hours which enables us to spend quite an amount of time with the three principal women, to share their lives, their emotions and their decisions, even when we don’t agree with them or find them sometimes alienating. It is a tribute to the three actresses that they are convincing and take us into the interior lives of the women they are portraying.
1. The title, audience expectations? The impact for women? For men? Older generations? Younger?

2. The Los Angeles settings, the range of neighbourhoods, wealth, the orphanage, ordinary homes, suburbia, the cross-section of Los Angeles life? The locations and the feel for the city? The musical score?

3. The introduction to Karen, aged fourteen, her relationship with the boy, the kiss, the cut to her being pregnant, the cut to her giving birth, the cut to Karen in her fifties? At home, with her mother, her care for her mother, hard in herself, her mother turning away from her?

4. Karen’s story, at fourteen, the child, giving birth, handing the child over for adoption? Her being hurt by these memories? Writing letters to her daughter, her dreams? Her own mother and non-communication, disappointment, her work, the hydrotherapy? Meeting Paco, his attention, her curt words to him about his work, her expectations and being demanding? Paco and the enquiry about her feelings, his attempts to placate her, the coffee, the cold, walking away? The attempt to apologise? Karen going home, her attitude towards the maid, towards the maid’s daughter? Another mother and child? Resentments? Her mother talking to the maid instead of to her? Calling the daughter a thief, the necklace, the mother’s gift to the little girl? Upset, attempting to talk to Paco? The tomatoes incident? Her self-explanations? Her mother, going to hospital, the sudden death, her reaction? Her going to visit David, memories of the past, the sexual encounter, the past love for him, the changes in their lives? What might have been?

5. Paco, nice, divorced, his attempts to communicate with Karen, the tomatoes and her reaction, the card, going out with her, her unwillingness, finally going? His developing the relationship with her, mellowing her? Finally mellowing her? His daughter, the religious issues? The loss of the daughter and Karen’s anxiety, going to visit the orphanage, meeting Sister Joanne? Learning about the procedures, Karen writing the letter, wanting to meet her daughter? The letter being mislaid? The year passing, the grief? Going back to see the sister? Lucy and the adoption? Visiting Lucy? Thanking Paco? The finale – and the final photos?

6. The possibility of change, Karen and her long regrets, the bitter consequences and her effect on people, her personality, Paco able to effect a change?

7. Elizabeth and her story, aged thirty-seven, self-sufficient, her knowing she was adopted, blaming her mother? Falling out with the adoptive family, leaving home at seventeen? Having her tubes tied? Her not wanting to be a mother? Her study years, her intensity, her ambitions? Preparation for the interview with Paul? Her being a loner, not wanting to be part of the sisterhood? Her hard work, the briefs, working late at night, the dinner with Paul, the appropriate behaviour or not? Noticing the neighbour and his wife, her flirting, seduction, putting the panties in the drawer? This theme not followed through? Seductive with Paul, talking with him, loving him or not? The pregnancy, her going to the specialist, the doctor trying to be friendly, her curt attitude towards the doctor, to the possibility of abortion? The pregnancy and her anger? Her leaving? Not telling Paul, Paul’s puzzle? Her interview for further work, away from Paul? Her going to the apartment, Paul’s daughter and their discussion? Violet and communication? The birth, her determination to have the child, her death? The letter and the irony of of its being mislaid? The photo?

8. Paul, the law firm, his being a widower, the interview, the dinner, Elizabeth and her being seductive, the effect on him, love, his leaving, offer to stay with her? His family?

9. Lucy and Ray, the marriage, the interviews at the orphanage, Lucy’s tendency to chatter, Ray and his love, agreeing to the adoption, Lucy’s initiatives, Ray, agreeing with her? Lucy and her controlling? Sister Joanne? The possibility of being parents, the forms, the questionnaires? Ray and his visiting his parents, the pressure on Lucy? Ray’s own tenderness, weakness – and being pressurised into leaving? Lucy as strong, her feeling abandoned, reliance on her mother, tough, advice? Continuing to want to adopt? The meetings with Sister Joanne? The final emergency, taking the baby, the black baby? Her life with the child, the image of mother and child? Karen, finding out where she lived, visiting her and the child, playing, passing the time together, bonding? Karen and her granddaughter?

10. The portrait of Sister Joanne, contemporary nun, a type, breaking through the stereotype? Pleasant, businesslike, effective? The discussions? Tolerant? Setting up Lucy with the first pregnant girl, the pregnant girl testing Ray and Lucy, not liking Ray, Lucy talking too much, their meetings, sharing things together, the girl’s family? The preparations, buying things for the baby? The birth and the mother wanting to keep her child?

11. Ray’s parents, snobbish, the pressure?

12. Lucy’s mother, tough-minded, direct speaking, Lucy’s reaction, yet depending on her mother?

13. Paul’s family, the social at his apartment, the parties, Elizabeth’s presence, Paul’s daughter coming to see Elizabeth and discussing the matters with her?

14. Elizabeth, getting the work, going to the agency, the help of the agent?

15. The doctor, Elizabeth’s visit, the issue of abortion, the doctor talking about friends, Elizabeth’s abrupt reaction?

16. The maid, working well with Karen’s mother, her daughter present, Karen tough, the accusations of her daughter being a thief, her mother’s death? The maid continuing to work, with Paco, the bonds, finally leaving, Karen giving the necklace gift to the little girl?

17. The range of mothers and daughters in the film? A male screenwriter, his insights into women, his treatment of men?

L'HERISSON (HEDGEHOG)

France, 2009, 100 minutes, Colour.
Josiane Balasko, Garance Le Guillermic, Togo Igawa, Anne Brochet, Ariane Ascaride.
Directed by Mona Achache.

Hedgehogs are prickly on the outside but more tender on the inside. This is the metaphor for understanding Renee, a 54 year old widow, overweight, sometimes curmudgeonly who thinks herself ugly, a concierge at an apartment building in Paris. This is how she describes herself to 11 year old Paloma from upstairs who is busy making her film, videoing everybody whether they consent or not. This is the setting for this quietly small but pleasing French portrait of eccentric people. This is what the French seem to do best: focus on characters, visual, emotional and psychological close-ups, moments of isolation and loneliness, moments of intimacy. There is a particular French sensibility.

Paloma is the character we are asked to identify with at first. She seems to have overdosed on some existential angst and is determined to kill herself on her next birthday as long as she is doing something she wants: to be making her film. Her parents are, as one would expect, quite odd, her mother in psychoanalysis for ten years, her father too busy at work, her sister writing a thesis. Every family unhappy in their own way, as Tolstoy noted.

Renee reads Tolstoy and is given a gift of books by a new tenant, a kindly and genial Japanese gentleman, a widower, who is attracted to Renee and she, despite her misgivings, attracted to him. The scenes between the two, watching an Ozu film on video, enjoying noodles and, later, sushi, are pleasing and emotionally satisfying.

Writer-director-actress Josiane Balasko embodies Renee. Bespectacled and introspective except with her camera, Garance Le Guillermic is Paloma. Togo Igawa is charming as Kakuro Ozu.

There is a shock towards the end, where several people, including the happily relaxed reviewer, jumped in their seat. Which means that the ending is not anticipated and there is a pervasive sadness.

However, audiences who want something lower key and humane rather than CG explosions will find that this is a satisfying look at being human.

1. A film for French sensibilities? Universal appeal?

2. The Paris locations, the street, the apartments and the interiors? The score?

3. The title, Paloma and her explanation, as applied to Renee? As applied to Paloma herself?

4. The structure, the three stories, each focus, and their interweaving?

5. Paloma’s story, her family, her mother and her addictions, pills, shopping? Her father and his job, busy? Her sister, her own life, her thesis? Family meals, the way of talking to each other, behaviour? The parcel? The goldfish and Paloma’s devotion to it? Paloma and her age, the voice-over, filming everyone? Her comments about her job, her suicide, when to die, filming? Spying on people, with each member of her family, with Renee? Embarrassing people? Their reaction? The fish, the pill, flushing it down the toilet, her sister’s being upset? Her visiting Renee, interrogating her for the film? The hiding place? Communicating and help? Renee’s death and her reaction? The gift of Tolstoy? Rediscovering the fish? Paloma’s future?

6. Renee’s story, aged fifty-four, widow, memories of her husband, crusty in manner, strict, her weight, thinking she was ugly? Giving her story to Paloma? Allowing Paloma to film? Her dealings with the family, her sister’s anger about the parcel? The mother and getting permission for Paloma to visit? Later the mother not recognising her when she had the makeover? The man in the street, Jean- Pierre? Taking out the bins, her tasks as concierge? The death of the resident, the Japanese man moving in, her amazement at his style, his books, the discussions about Tolstoy? Their discussion about Ozu and his films? His visits, her taking the cakes and cassette, their watching the film? The invitation to dinner or not, the sushi bar and enjoying the noodles? Manuela and her friendship, persuading her for the makeover, her dress, her hair, changing her mind and going out with Kakuro? The intimacy, the friendship? Finding the fish? Trying to save Jean- Pierre? Being hit by the car, the drycleaner and her past meetings with Renee, the driver being upset? Renee as the hedgehog?

7. Kakuro, his taking the apartment, his books, the layout of his apartment, the gift to Renee? His visits, his technology, the video, his courtesy, nice, the story about his wife? The cakes and watching the Ozu film? Enjoying the noodles with Renee? The invitation to dinner, her not wanting to go, the note and her changing her mind, going out, the beginning of a friendship? The bonds? His sadness at her death?

8. Jean- Pierre, eccentricities, in the street, the unwitting cause of Renee’s death?

9. Manuela, her visits, friendship? The drycleaner and the stain after the dinner? The drycleaner upset at being the cause of Renee’s death?

10. A film of gentleness, sentiment and humanity?

WHAT DOESN’T KILL YOU

US, 2008, 100 minutes, Colour.
Mark Ruffalo, Ethan Hawke, Amanda Peet, Brian Goodman, Donnie Wahlberg, Angela Featherstone.
Directed by Brian Goodman.

What Doesn’t Kill You is based on the early life of actor, writer-director Brian Goodman. It is another of those South Boston crime stories, a picture of families and petty criminals.

The film has an atmospheric setting, Mark Ruffalo and Ethan Hawke portray childhood friends who used to run errands for a criminal, Pat Kelly, played by Brian Goodman. When they grow up, they want to get more money, become more ruthless and brutal in their running the behest of the crime leader. Eventually, they are caught and sentenced to prison. In the meantime, the Mark Ruffalo character has married, has two children, tends to neglect his family, becomes addicted to cocaine. In prison he has the option to reform himself, especially with the influence of an Alcoholics Anonymous leader. In the meantime, Ethan Hawke remains hardened in his attitudes towards his friends, towards women, towards making money. After their release, the Ruffalo character falls on hard times, is tempted to take part in an armoured car robbery (and imagines what it would be like as well as it going wrong). He opts out and opts for a better life with family, and AA meetings. In the meantime, Ethan Hawke’s character has done the armed robbery but has been caught.

To this extent, while the film is a portrait of young criminals, parallel to those stories of Hell’s Kitchen in New York, it finishes as a cautionary tale.

1. A South Boston story, tough, crime, family? The range of films focusing on this area of Boston?

2. The use of the city skyline and buildings? Boston, as a city, the streets, homes – and their changing over the years, the gentrification? Bars, warehouses? The drug world?

3. Prison, the atmosphere, the cells, corridors, the yards, offices?

4. The director and his own experience, the film based on a true story?

5. The opening with the armoured car robbery, Paulie and his threatening the policeman? This later being revealed as a fiction, Brian and his imagining it later, the disaster? His fears, his decision? The ending and Paulie actually in an armoured car robbery?

6. The boys, stealing goods, giving them to Pat Kelly, his getting them to collect items for him, fifty dollars payment? Their life, friendship, Brian and the girl? Their watching Kelly and his taking the money to the car, the shooting?

7. The transition to adulthood, the years passing, the odd jobs, still stealing, going into the bars, brutalising people? The standover tactics? Paulie and his attitude to money, his motivation, Brian tagging along?

8. Brian’s story, his marriage, still in crime, getting money, giving it to Stacy? Too busy to care for his children, the love for Stacy, the restaurant sequence, her jealousy of the waitress? Brian and his drinking, the two getting into drugs, the deals, double crossing, the brutal world of drugs, his buying the drugs, his addiction? His being shot? Hospital, anger, walking out? Paulie and the confrontation?

9. Paulie, his friend, influence, the different jobs, tough, friendship towards Stacy, Kath, the kids?

10. Pat Kelly in the bar, Jack and his orders? The dealers, the fake robberies, the delivery of the goods? The payments?

11. The policeman and his watching Paulie and Brian, his reappearance throughout the film, warnings, Brian and his reaction, being spooked by him?

12. The drugs, the double deals, the brutality of the dealers, the shootings and bashings? The next job, stealing televisions, the arrest, their being sentenced to jail?

13. Life in jail, five years sentence? Supporting each other? Pat Kelly in jail, his connections? The exercise, Brian getting better? The episode with the child molester, the guard giving them the keys, their bashing him? The warden and his reaction, Paulie and his accepting ninety days’ solitary while Brian was able to leave at the end of his sentence?

14. Brian and the Alcoholics Anonymous man, knowing him from the past, going to the meetings in jail, the encouragement, Brian and his wariness about prayer?

15. Stacy, before Brian went to jail, upset, the kids, her visits to the prison, his getting out, her love for him, the meals, the younger boy and his love for his father, the older boy and his reaction, mellowing, the sport?

16. Brian and his looking for jobs, small jobs, part-time, the Alcoholics Anonymous leader and his contacts? Paulie getting out, Paulie’s own life, with women, collecting money, the confrontations with Brian for the gas payment and his reaction, overbearing with the man to wave to Stacy? The nuns ringing for the school payment?

17. Brian and his being tempted, Paulie and the armoured car robbery, the difficulty of doing it in daylight, the imagined scenario, Brian imagining the disaster, his decision to say no?

18. His decision, improving as a character, the sport, with his family, his sons? The contrast with Paulie?

19. Life on the streets, the working class, crime? A cautionary tale?

THE TWO MR KISSELS

US, 2008, 90 minutes, Colour.
John Stamos, Anson Mount, Robin Tunney, Gretchen Egolf.
Directed by Ed Bianchi.

The Two Mr Kissels is based on a true story. It is one of those films, based on contemporary crimes, that American audiences would remember but which audiences around the world would acknowledge that it was based on a true story but respond to it largely as fiction.

The film focuses on two wealthy brothers, one conscientious who made a great deal of money but who is bludgeoned to death by his greedy narcissistic wife. The other, overshadowed, and despised by his father, tries to make money deals but takes risks and gambles, has a drug addiction and is a womaniser. Eventually he too dies, perhaps by suicide, perhaps arranging his own killing.

While the story has its lurid touches, it is made in such a way that it is acceptable for the wide American television audience. John Stamos is the reckless brother. Anson Mount is the serious one. Robin Tunney steals the show as the wilful, sometimes vulnerable, always predatory wife. Gretchen Egolf is the other wife. Chuck Shamata gives a good small performance as the father who favours one son and humiliates the other.

The film was directed by Ed Bianchi, a television director. His first film, however, was The Fan with Michael Biehn and Lauren Bacall in 1981.

1. The film based on a true story? Audience knowledge of the characters and facts? Necessary or not? The wider audience looking at it as a fiction?

2. The affluent American settings? The comparisons with Hong Kong and life in Hong Kong? Authentic flavour? Musical score?

3. The testimonies throughout the film, from Robert’s wife, from the driver, from Nancy’s friends? The effect of these testimonies and their points of view and comment on the characters?

4. The death of Robert, bludgeoned to death? The death of Andrew? The initial visuals, the voice-over? The interviews with the driver – and his being accused of Andrew’s murder?

5. The story of Robert and Nancy? Nancy as a waitress, ambitious, looked down on by Robert’s parents? Their being in love? The lavish wedding? The comments of Andrew’s parents? Nancy and Robert and their life together, his conscientiousness, his skills, financial background? Nancy and her life, photographing herself, her exhibitions? Exhibitionism? Her pregnancies, the children? Robert spending so much money on her, clothes, apartments? Her wilful spending? The continued revelation of how self-centred she was? The gifts and Robert’s trying to persuade her to go to Hong Kong? Her petulance? Going to Hong Kong, her dissatisfaction, her friends, life in Hong Kong? Robert and his continuing success, promotions? Nancy and her relationship with the cable man? The fling, romance, selfishness? The phone calls, her despising Robert? Robert and his private detective, believing him or not? The build-up to the confrontation, Nancy and buying the dress, in Hong Kong? Her children? The set-up, the drug, beating Robert to death? Leaving him, the maids, the rug, carrying it out and the boy holding the door? The discovery of the body, her arrest, her silence in court, denying memories of anything? Her imprisonment, her despair? The phone calls about her children? Justice being done to her? The pathos of Robert’s life and death?

6. Andrew, in his brother’s shadow? His meeting Hayley, her money, her love for him? The wedding, children? Andrew and his work, his gambling, his neighbours and getting money from them, the testimony of the neighbour and his giving witness, yet his falling in line with Andrew, the high life in Las Vegas etc? Andrew and his making money, spending it, investments, risks? The house, reconstructions? Hayley and her own life as a financial commentator? Andrew and his double dealings, the members of the board trying to get documents, his forging them? His collapse? His father’s continuing to despise him? His failure, Hayley leaving? His reliance on his chauffeur, his death – suicide or murder?

7. The glimpse of the Kissel parents, high society? The father and his attitudes towards each of his sons? His daughter? His daughter having to take Nancy’s children after Andrew’s collapse?

8. The society people, Nancy’s friends and their gossip? Wealth, shopping, manicures and beauty treatments? Andrew’s friends and their risking their money, suing Andrew?

9. A world of society and finance – and a squalid look behind the surface glamour?

I LOVE YOU AGAIN

US, 1940, 99 minutes, Black and white.
William Powell, Myrna Loy, Frank Mc Hugh, Edmund Lowe, Donald Douglas, Carl ‘Alfalfa’ Switzer.
Directed by W. S. Van Dyke.

I Love You Again is one of the fourteen films that William Powell and Myrna Loy acted in together. They were most famous for the Thin Man series. They worked very comfortably on screen, both in serious sequences and, especially, in comic sequences. This is a variation on the themes that made them popular.

The film is a comedy about amnesia. William Powell plays a rather stuffy man on a liner who rescues a drunken man from the sea. When he is hit on the head by an oar, he regains his memory that he had lost after being hit nine years earlier. It turns out that he is a conman. The comedy is in his returning to America, to his home town, in the company of the man he rescued, another confidence man, Frank Mc Hugh. He discovers that he has a wife, that she wants to divorce him. He also find his place as a respectable citizen, especially with the boy scouts (and a comic situation where he has to lead the scouts on one of their exercises and saves face despite all the things that go wrong for him). He also decides that the parcel of land he owns can be sold if he fakes oil and the citizens think that oil can be drilled.

At the end, he has fallen in love with his wife again, and cannot go through with the deal. (One little boy in the cast is Carl ‘Alfalfa’ Switzer, very well known in the time for the Our Gang shorts.)

1. A popular American comedy of the 30s and 40s? The aftermath of the screwball comedies of the 30s? William Powell and Myrna Loy, their star power, their ease at working with each other?

2. Black and white photography, the liner, New York, Habersville, Pennsylvania, the town, the woods outside, the lake? Realistic? The jaunty musical score?

3. The credibility of the plot, amnesia, regaining memory? Holding one’s own as a conman in difficult situations?

4. Larry Wilson, a bore on the liner, not drinking, encountering Ryan, his drunkenness, walking a line, falling from the boat, Larry tossed overboard, the rescue, hit on the head, hailed as a hero?

5. Larry discovering that he is really George Carey, nine years out of his life, his memory of his friends, Duke Sheldon and the cons? His decision to have Ryan help him? To return to the US and exploit it?

6. Kay, at the wharf, charming, Larry discovering that she was his wife? His coping, the hotel? Her hostility, his attraction, exercising charm, waiting on her, the shopping with her, the nightgown? Her reaction, puzzle? Her later saying she wanted a more dashing husband, discovering the man behind Larry? The return home, her putting him at arm’s length, her mother, the people in the town, the bank manager and his praise? Discovering his responsibilities, the nature of the bank accounts, his roles in charity? The scout leader, the parade, being led through the woods, trying to find the waterhole, his having to track the bear, the footprints, his falling down the holes, being trapped – but saving the situation and being admired?

7. The oil deal, Duke Sheldon putting the oil in the water? The boy scouts and being covered in oil, telling their fathers, being discovered searching the place at night, going to see Larry, the money deals? Duke Sheldon posing as a buyer, the issue of gravel? The higher rates? Kay and her intervening? Kay and her relationship with Herbert, his attention to her, Larry warding him off? Herbert in on the money deal?

8. The set-up, Kay and the walk with Larry, where he proposed? His being touched, deciding he can’t go through with the fraud, explaining to Ryan? Everybody assembling at the apartment? Duke Sheldon and his being upset, the fight? Larry being hit on the head? Everybody believing that he had reverted?

9. His waking up, pretending to have lost his memory, the cooing from his previous bill and coo sequence with Kay, the happy ending?

RIEN DE PERSONEL

France, 2009, 90 minutes, Colour.
Jean- Pierre Darroussin, Denis Podalydes, Melanie Doutey, Pascal Greggory.
Directed by Mathias Gokalp.

Rien de Personel is an intriguing film. It begins with a group entering a museum-like space, with strange sculptures, and the reception for what seems to be a party. As the film moves on, we realise that games are being played, commercial games where the directors of a pharmaceutical company are having tests of management with red-jacketed supervisors watching various employees and their interactions in teams.

The film focuses on Bruno, bewildered as he prepares for his encounter with the strong-minded Natacha. He becomes despairing about the future of his job. He also encounters Gilles, the union representative who commiserates with him and offers to help him so that he will not lose his job. Then the action begins again, focusing on Natacha. We then realise that the film is one of various role-plays – very difficult to tell who is acting and who are the executives and officials who are being tested. Natacha has difficulty with her husband who is also an executive whom she thinks has deceived her about the sale of the company. Pascal Greggory is the company manager, presiding over the proceedings. There are various other characters who may be actors acting as coaches or who may be real employees in danger of losing their jobs. There is also a character who is one of the doormen and is sacked, taking Bruno’s jacket and mingling with the crowd as if he were the owner of the company.

While the film is sometimes bewildering for the audience to work out who is who, it is an intriguing look at the devices management use, especially for testing their employees and possibly sacking them.

1. An intriguing French drama? Characters? The basic situation? The workplace and companies? Survival? Tests?

2. The focused setting, the museum-like building, the skeleton sculptures at the opening, the food and the distribution? The nature of the gathering? Muller emerging as the boss? Supervising, singing and everybody applauding? The different rooms? Toilets, open spaces, the steps outside? Real and surreal? The musical score?

3. The title, business practices, nothing personal?

4. The structure of the film, the chapters, the initial focus on Bruno, the married couple, the activities of the whole group? The narrative beginning again, different angles on the same characters, situations, speeches? The different perspectives and the audience learning more information about each character?

5. Bruno’s story, timid man, in the washroom, getting somebody to tie his tie, giving his coat to the attendant? His looking scruffy, Natacha and her interview with him, his family situation, supervision, on trial, the testing period coming to an end? His reaction to Natacha, leaving her, eating? Gilles and his concern, Bruno pouring out his heart, Gilles’ concern? Biting the glass? Gilles taking him outside, offering him his coat, comfort?

6. Natacha’s story, with her husband? Their place in the company? Well dressed, her style, sure in her manner? The encounter with Bruno? Her perspective as being observed, doing the test? Not realising Bruno was an actor? Hearing about the company sale, the attack on her husband, her collapse, her concern? Her husband, his role, authority, his deceiving his wife?

7. Gilles’ story, his role in the unions, earnest, encountering Muller as they arrived, Muller’s offering for him to resign from the union, giving him a supervisory position? Gilles standing on his principles? Wanting to help people? His talking with Bruno, the reality and the role-play? His realising the glass was a fake? His growing concern, discussions with Muller and the others? With Barbieri? His sitting on the steps with Bruno? His concern about the future?

8. The Barbieris, the man drinking, talking, giving away information? Christine and her being the assistant to Muller? His exposing her and his relationship with her? Her humiliation? The clash with her husband? His telling her that she gave away too much information? Her becoming depressed, the couple together? Their leaving, Barbieri sitting on the roof singing?

9. Muller, control, the possibility of the sale, the evening using tax money for training? To impress the potential buyers? His wanting the best deal? His singing? Going to the toilet, the handle falling off, Christine leaving him there? His trying to get out?

10. The attendant, taking the coat, being told he was no longer employed, putting on Bruno’s coat, circulating, being mistaken for Muller, his speech, being given the documents, going to the car? His giving the documents to Bruno, Bruno’s surprise in reading them? Bruno giving the documents to Gilles? The exposure?

11. The cumulative effect of experiencing this evening with such a variety of people, in the testing situation, and the audience reflecting on management, companies and their way of dealing with their employees?

INCEPTION

US, 2010, 148 minutes, Colour.
Leonardo Di Caprio, Joseph Gordon- Levitt, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, Ken Watanabe, Dileep Rao, Cillian Murphy, Tom Berenger, Marion Cottillard, Pete Postlethwaite, Michael Caine, Lukas Haas, Talulah Riley, Earl Cameron.
Directed by Christopher Nolan.

Conception? Deception? Exception? Perception? Reception?

All of the above, plus Inception.

With a surprisingly high initial box-office income in the US (given its demands in making its audience pay attention and think), Inception has become something of an event. Even audiences who might not like this kind of science-fiction exploration of the psyche or who don’t go for fast-paced action sequences and explosions – and Inception has a great deal of both in its two and half hours’ running time – probably need to see it for its place in movie history and development, just as we needed to see The Matrix at the end of the 1990s and even Avatar at the end of the last decade.

That would probably do for a review for anyone thinking about going to see Inception or not.

What seems more important is to have a review for reading after viewing the film and reflecting on it. Mention of The Matrix reminds us that audiences these days, older and younger, like a creative puzzle movie, especially when it tantalises the mind as well as the imagination, so The Matrix has probably facilitated the making and acceptance of Inception. It doesn’t matter if audiences can’t quite follow everything immediately or if they cannot give a clear and logical synopsis. The film keeps working on its audience long after the final credits come up.

This is a film about ‘reality’, asking the question, ‘what is reality?’ or ‘how many realities can exist at the same time?. We usually say that we can’t bilocate even though there are plenty of stories of parallel worlds, of time travel and doppelgangers. With Inception and its exploration of dreams and the variety of dream worlds, we can actually bilocate (or, as here, trilocate and, even, quatrolocate) because we can by lying asleep while active in our dreams. And, as posited here, in dreams within dreams.

Because we all dream and are fascinated by our dream selves and behaviours, the audience generally goes willingly into the world of Inception. When we speak about our imagination and drives in both waking and dreaming states, we start to use the language of the sub-conscious which emerges and the unconscious which is driving us unawares. Characters in dreams are facets of ourselves and projections from our sub-conscious, revealing deeper aspects of our psyches and personalities than we might be willing to share when awake. There is plenty of verbal exposition of these themes in the screenplay but, more importantly, we see these themes illustrated in complex stories, especially in dreams within dreams.

Whether all that we see is possible in reality is debatable. It seems scientifically implausible if not impossible – but who knows whether in years, decades or centuries, medical, scientific and psychological techniques will combine to make some of this actual! Then we think of the development of brainwashing techniques, truth drugs and cult leaders’ mind control of followers.

And, all the time, there is the unpredictable human factor, something which Inception explores in its dreams.

The opening is puzzling as Leonardo di Caprio’s Cobb is washed ashore and brought before an elderly Japanese businessman in his exotic house. We arrive back here at the end, discovering what state of consciousness it is, but the flashbacks begin explaining Cobb and his team and their capacity to enter the dreams of others, their being awake in the dreams, and able to extract information that can be used for good or for ill. Cobb has become an ideas thief. We see dreams within dreams at once but our puzzle is working out who is dreaming – and who is in who’s dream. Since Cobb has gone beyond ethical bounds which has cost him his wife (Marion Cotillard) and his children, he is consumed by memories of her and her unanticipated presence in his dreams. He wants to redeem himself and move from thieving extraction of information from dreams to inception, the inserting of ideas in dreams so that the dreamer might think that the incepted (the correct word?) idea (which is compared to a virus) is self-generated rather than implanted. A young businessman (Cillian Murphy) is chosen for economic and power reasons to be the subject. Cobb’s team, encouraged by his father (Michael Caine) and introducing a protégé, Ariadne (Ellen Page), study the subject and the candidate’s background, the illness and death of his tycoon father (Pete Postlethwaite) and prepare a complete architectural drama to perform the inception. Cobb’s right-hand man, Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and other contacts (Tom Hardy and Dileep Rao) and the Japanese businessman (Ken Watanabe) all enter the dreams. One of the team can also assume the appearance of someone else, in this case the businessman’s adviser (Tom Berenger)

Inside the dreams, we get plenty of action where audiences might think they are in an adaptation of a graphic novel (including a vast snow episode that outdoes James Bond and films like On Her Majesty’s Secret Service). In fact, there is a great deal of action amidst the speculations. The locations are also filmed quite spectacularly, with action set in Japan, Paris, Kenya and Los Angeles. And the effects are sometimes amazing, especially the city of Paris folding on itself and, while a van containing the sleeping team falls in slowest motion from a bridge into a river with Arthur being rocked by the fall and having to perform deadline feats of saving the team who are also asleep in a hotel in another dream by defying gravity.

Cobb has also to solve his own personal and family problems. And, of course, the final question: is how the film ends reality? After all, we are participating in a waking dream as well as we watch the reality and unreality on screen.

Christopher Nolan has shown himself no slouch in making films that demand attention: Memento a decade earlier with its action moving backwards in time, the Arctic thriller, Insomnia, his two Batman films, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, and his intriguing tale of rival magicians, The Prestige. He is obviously enjoying the opportunity to write a screenplay that is quite outside the box while directing a fine cast doing their best and playing with special effects to his heart’s – and our –content.

1. The impact of the film? Reputation? Success? A cinematic event?

2. Christopher Nolan and his skills, imagination, writing, direction, use of special effects?

3. The strong cast, effective?

4. The technical bravura, the sets, computer graphics, the folding Paris, the gravity sequences, action and car chases, explosions?

5. The score, the range, the moods?

6. The locations: Japan, Paris, Mombasa, Los Angeles?

7. The visuals of the exteriors, lavish? The interiors, the set design? The echoes of other films – The Shining, 2001, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, James Bond films…?

8. The structure: the introduction of the flashbacks, dreams, the different levels of dreams, dreams and reality, folding and unfolding, the characters entering dreams and waking, dreaming within dreams? The family flashbacks, the threats with Mal?

9. The presuppositions about inception, the nature of waking life and reality? Dreams and the imagination, the character entering into the middle of events, going into action, remembering and forgetting dreams? Films and the celluloid dreams, illusions and audiences surrendering to them? The use of Edith Piaf’s songs as the cue to end the dream – and sung over the final credits to cue the ending of this celluloid dream?

10. The presuppositions about science, technology, the use of drugs for different mental states, the outer world, the inner world? Characters being aware in their dreams, working as a team, meeting, influencing the action? The theory of extraction of ideas? Robbery? The contrast with inception, planting ideas? At different levels of the psyche and dreams? Plausible, possible?

11. The philosophical underpinning of the story, the metaphysical aspects? The visuals to dramatise this?

12. Cobb, the opening, coming ashore, taken to Saito? His gun, his symbol for the dreams and reality? Saito as old, talking, the flashback to the action of the film? The recurrence at the end, the explanation of the limbo experience? The need to get out of this experience? Possible or not? The challenge for Cobb?

13. The first dream episode, Saito and the task given to Cobb and his team, the interviews with Saito, real, yet in dreams? But whose dream? Cobb’s, Arthur’s, Nash’s, Saito’s? The various characters waking up, travelling in the train? The architecture of the dream, the locations? The thriller aspects? Waking, risks, the failure of the enterprise of extraction?

14. Cobb and his team, the various personalities, their success? Yet Mal and her continuing reappearances? Cobb’s experience of her, the others seeing her? Her threat to Saito and the assassination? Cobb going to meet Miles, the discussions, the revelation about Mal, Miles as the instructor? Mal, in herself? As a projection from Cobb? Her destructive elements, killing, fighting? In the elevator, in the lower level, her presence? Memories of her, of the children? The explanation of limbo? Seeing them grow old together, the passing of the decades? Her continual re-entry, the final arguments, her sitting on the window sill, falling to her death? The finale and Cobb having to let go of her? Her pleading, for the children, the children and their age, never seeing their faces, their finally turning towards Cobb? His controlling his projections?

15. Saito, his staff, his role, industrial espionage, the test, his place in the dreams, the warrior? The interactions in his own dreams? His giving the information about Fischer? His wanting to participate in the inception dreams?

16. The projections, the others as projections, interactions, who was real or who was projection? And in whose dream?

17. Arthur, his character, skills, inaction, waking? His architectural skills, support of Cobb, wary, clashing with him? His concern about Mal? Nash, his place in the dreams, his contribution to the team, the betrayal to Saito, his death?

18. The indications for waking, kicks, wounding and death, pain, the Edith Piaf songs?

19. Miles, the explanation about Mal, Miles’s advice, his helping Cobb, introducing Ariadne? Miles at the end, welcoming Cobb home?

20. Ariadne, her skills, student, her interest in the project, Cobb testing her, taking her into the dreams? The Paris sequences, walking the city, the city folding in on itself, their ninety-degree walk? Her creativity, the architecture for the locations for the dreams? Her inventiveness?

21. Cobb, his perceived need for redemption, meeting Mal with Ariadne, explaining the situation and his life to Ariadne? Ariadne seeing her? The elevator, the concern, rising to different levels?

22. The introduction of the idea of inception, seeming impossibility, Cobb being capable, his experiments with Mal, her death?

23. Choosing the target for inception, Maurice Fischer and his son? In themselves, the father and his skill as a proprietor, the son and his self-image? Visualising the father’s death? The important role of Browning as adviser? Godfather for Robert?

24. Saito’s reason for wanting the inception, to stop the monopoly, for global peace, ecology? Saito wanting to be part of the project?

25. The elaborate preparations, Cobb going to Mombasa, the African experience, meeting with Eames? His role in Africa? Drugs, his skills? His being tantalised by the project? His personality and participation?

26. The preparations in Los Angeles, the drive, meeting Yusuf, his skills?

27. The preparations, the drugs, the different levels of dream, the planning, the locations, the architecture, the risks?

28. The episode, everybody on board the plane, the encounter with Robert Fischer, the drink, his unconscious, dreaming? Each of the members of the team on the plane, entering into the dream? The time limit of fourteen hours? The different time spans within the dreams?

29. The details on the different levels, the team in the car, Yusuf driving, the pursuit, the dangers, crashing, the dreamers turning over as the bus turned over? Its falling from the bridge, the slow-motion fall? In the hotel, the behaviour of the group, the rooms? The sleepers? Fischer and his bewilderment? Arthur and his having to rescue the team, defying gravity because of the bus turning over? Fischer and his participation? The issue of Browning, Browning putting the idea into Fischer’s head? Eames and his disguising himself as Browning? The snow operation, the vast building, the military, the attack? The split-second timing for Arthur’s rescue, the explosion? Saito, his being wounded, his going into a different level?

30. The time limits in each level of the dream? The dramatic suspense?

31. Browning, Eames’ impersonation, his being tortured, Fischer’s reaction? The reality and the unreality for Fischer? The torture, the brainwashing?

32. The revisiting of Maurice Fischer’s death, the use of disappointment in his words to his son, the truth and the different interpretation? The success of the inception? Waking?

33. The team waking, Cobb and his achievement, the plane to the US, Miles meeting him, Saito and the influence, getting him through passport control, meeting his children again? Redeemed?

34. The achievement of the film, entertainment, thought and reflection, opening up possibilities?

HUMPDAY

US, 2009, 94 minutes, Colour.
Mark Duplass, Alycia Delmore, Joshua Leonard, Lynn Shelton.
Directed by Lynn Shelton.

Humpday is something of a provocative title. However, it is the theme which is provocative rather than the treatment.

The film focuses on two young friends, Ben and Andrew, who haven’t seen each other for a while. When they meet again, Ben is married and Andrew has come back from overseas. They go to a party, in a sexually open commune. There is a discussion about a pornographic festival and people in the commune wanting to make films to submit to the festival. As they drink more, Ben and Andrew become looser in their attitudes and agree to make a film of themselves having sex with each other. In the light of day, next day, there are various difficulties, especially Ben’s wife Anna who discovers what is in store and has a very strong hostile reaction. When the two men go to the hotel, the film moves more into conversation mode rather than any action, the men reflecting on the nature of male sexuality, relationships, commitment.

Mark Duplass who, with his brother Jay Duplass, have made a number of conversation films including The Puffy Chair, Bag Head, and with more well-known stars, Cyrus and Jeff Who Lives at Home, brings a certain professionalism as does Joshua Leonard.

On the whole this is a provocative film for discussion about sexuality, behaviour, moral stances – and it comes down very strongly on the men reaffirming their heterosexuality and Ben being committed to his marriage.

1. The title, the tone, provocative?

2. The small budget, the screenplay, the actors improvising, especially in the conversations?

3. The Seattle setting, homes, hotels? Realism?

4. The introduction to Ben and Anna, their marriage, the details of their life, family, hopes? Their personalities?

5. Andrew’s arrival, Andrew and his type, his past, friendship with Ben, Ben not going to the party, change of mind, free and easy? Ben walking out on Anna and her meal? The invitation to Ben and his not coming? Anna’s reaction?

6. The party, Anna and the pork shops, her anger, Ben, the women, the discussions about relationships, chatter, drink?

7. The Humpday festival, sexuality, pornography? And the excuse that these films were art rather than pornography? Andrew and Ben and their discussions, daring one another? The drink? The imagination of the film, their agreement, the plan, hotel, the friends egging them on?

8. Ben going home, the encounter with Anna? Her horror, the discussion in the morning, sexuality? Her reaction? The explanation?

9. The festival, Anna taking a different stance, encouraging Ben?

10. Ben and the arrival, the talk, the revelation, the shock, Ben and his reaction?

11. Anna and her comments, the proposal of the issue of freedom, her talking about her own experiences and Ben’s reaction?

12. The hotel, action, talk, behaviour, the men changing their minds, the awareness of friendship, not being forced?

13. Ben going home, Anna and the photo?

14. The film as a scenario for exploring sexuality, the reactions of men, of women, straight, gay? The film as judgmental or not?

AFTER SEX

US, 2007, 78 minutes, Colour.
Mila Kunis, Jane Seymour, Emmanuelle Chriqui, Taryn Manning, Marc Blucas, Zoe Saldana.
Directed by Eric Amadio.

After Sex is a very brief anthology of attitudes towards sexuality, love, intimacy, vulnerability, frustration. The episodes are perhaps too short to be particularly telling. Audiences will agree with some of the situations portrayed and disagree with others, depending on attitudes, ethical stances, sexual orientations. The film tries to offer something on all these combinations.

The cast is a mixed bag, some episodes being much more persuasive than others. However, for those interested in discussions on the particular areas of sexuality and intimacy, some of the episodes could be useful.

1. The title, expectations, the credits and their tone?

2. Short stories, basic conversations? The cumulative effect?

3. The domestic stories, going beyond homes and families and relationships?

4. The episode with Christopher and Leslie: sexual encounter, sexist attitudes, issues of equality, the demands for no dependence? Christopher, language, friends who are open in their behaviour? No commitment? The conversation, demands, banter, ego? Insecurities? Love and whether it is negotiable or not? The guessing game? Deep self-giving and the partner allowing for the self-giving?

5. The story of Freddy and Jay? Gay or not, discussion of issues of orientation, the claim that the issue is ethically neutral? Talking people down from the ledge conversation? Macho attitudes, homophobia? The alienated gay, power over the others? Suicide issues? Remembering the past, the young student experimenting? Not catering to others’ opinions? The second attempt?

The story of Kristy and Sam? Bed, young, the quick encounter, the first time, the weirdness, the sexual behaviour and throwing up? The high school background? The mother, her concern, talking to her daughter, her reaction to the young man? The mother having the last word?

6. The story of Nikki and Kat? Girls, the dynamic, not falling in love, fun? The outside sequences? Discussing relationships, orientations? Crude and abrasive attitudes, speaking directly? Nikki not being nice to anyone? Kat and the admission of physical intimacy?

7. The story of Trudy and Gene? The old couple in the park, asking questions, black and white issues? The possibilities of changing the past? The mountain road, being jokey and their reminiscing, the rather permissive past where there were no rules, no jealousies? What their kids would think about their past? The kids be ashamed or not? Marriage for thirty-five years to forty?

8. The story of Neil and Bob? The room, Bob and the ball, the mirror, the car, talking in the car, bitch and butch? People’s expectations? R2D2…?

9. The story of David and Jordy? The motel, emotion unavailable? Analysis, break-up? Issues of trust? The Lothario type? The question why he and the partner were there?

10. The story of Marco and Alanna? The sexual encounter, asking names? Her story about Little Rock, Spain? The Spider Club? LA Express? The story of the hooker? The gun, locked in the bathroom? Clean or not? The questions about the past? The girl making up the story and leading the man on? The response of the Hispanic macho type?

11. Interest in the stories, their values and stances? Entertaining? Useful for reflection and discussion?

I HATE VALENTINE’S DAY

US, 2009, 98 minutes, Colour.
Nia Vardalos, John Corbett.
Directed by Nia Vardalos.

I Hate Valentine’s Day has the unfortunate title which could lead many people who did not like the film, and there were many, to say “I hate I Hate Valentine’s Day”.

Nia Vardalos had scored great success, along with John Corbett, in My Big Fat Greek Wedding. However, as writer and director this time, she provides a romantic comedy that is all grins, sweetness and light, despite some people saying they hate Valentine’s Day.

Nia Vardalos portrays Genevieve, a woman who owns a flower shop, assisted by two very prissy and camp salesmen. She encounters Greg (John Corbett) who is opening a tapas shop down the street. He is rather wooden in his personality, tries to crack jokes but they fall flat. In collaboration with him, she helps design his café. She also has a rule about relationships that they last only five days. With some miscounting, there is a difficulty at the ending of Genevieve’s and Greg’s relationships, causing concern to all her friends. Through a series of rather contrived circumstances, the two eventually become long-term partners.

The film is very much dependent on Nia Vardalos’s rather bubbly personality, but this time always perpetually smiling. John Corbett can sometimes be lively but here he is rather lifeless.

1. Romantic comedy? Capitalising on Valentine’s Day and its atmosphere? Say it with flowers?

2. The city settings, homes and apartments, the streets, the different shops, restaurants? The musical score? Authentic feel?

3. The title, the people commenting on Valentine’s Day? Genevieve and her sales? The gifts? Her own attitude?

4. Genevieve as a character, bright and breezy? Yet not wanting permanent relationships? Working with Bill and Bob? Her other friends? Discussions? Curiosity about Greg? His coming into the shop, her helping him with the restaurant? Their relationship, her setting down the terms? His finishing it, her being upset at his wrong counting? Her getting the huff with him, her treatment of him? The friends rallying round? Their coming together, the final happy ending?

5. Greg, rather stolid, his background, the restaurant and the various owners, his wanting to cook tapas? His puns? Getting help with the restaurant, Genevieve helping, his awkwardness? The relationship, its effect on him? Thinking it was over? Her shunning him? The reconciliation?

6. The range of characters in the shop, the range of friends? Bill and Bob, their characters, camp? Tammy and her friendship? The help with Tim the delivery guy, the sensible married man? John and his relationship with Genevieve’s mother? Her encounters with her parents, their separation, their characters? Her questioning them about their lives?

7. A piece of romantic froth – perhaps too cheery for many audiences?