PARANOID PARK

US, 2007, 84 minutes, Colour.
Gabe Levins.
Directed by Gus Van Sant.

Gus Van Sant has been making smaller, more 'cinematic' films in recent years, after his Golden Palm win in Cannes with Elephant (Gerry, Last Days). Here he is back in school, this time amongst a group of skateboarders. At a railway yard near a popular park, nicknamed Paranoid Park because it had an unsavoury reputation, a security guard has been killed on the adjoining railway tracks. Has one of the skateboarders been responsible? The police come to the school to question and get background for their investigation.

Van Sant focuses on teenager, Alex (Gabe Levins), who we discover is writing a story about the park and skating. It emerges early enough in the film that Alex is responsible. What Van Sant does well is re-create the world of the adolescent, broken family and almost absent parents, friends, sexual experimentation (all with a soundtrack of relevant songs and Nino Rota/Fellini score, and with Christopher Doyle's realistic and stylised camerawork).

What we see is an ordinary young boy who is completely self-absorbed, has no sense of compassion for the victim, never thinking about him and with little conscience. This makes the film arresting to look at and listen to and very disturbing about contemporary moral sense.

1.The work of Gus Van Sant, small films, the importance of visual styles, sounds and music, the contemporary world, adults and adolescents? Characters and issues?

2.The adaptation of a novel, the Oregon setting, Portland, the city and homes, school, the malls, parks? The American story? Universal interest?

3.The blend of realism and visual styles? Stylised camerawork? The special scenes, for example the close-up of Alex’s face and long contemplation in the shower, Jennifer and Alex breaking off with her, the audience not hearing what she was saying but seeing her speak ...?

4.The structure, the title, skateboards, the scenes of skateboarding? Alex and his writing, the emergence of the truth, dealing with the truth, protecting himself?

5.Paranoid Park as a location, for skateboarders, its reputation, dangerous, the adolescents going there, the thrills and the risks? The police commenting on it? It adjoining the railway yards? Audience in the railway yards?

6.The character of Alex, his age, the audience barely seeing his mother, in long shot? His absent father, discussion with his father at the end? His father trying to do the right thing in the separation? The glimpses of his uncle? His way of life, separated family, going to school, the scenes of classes, laboratories? His range of friends, skateboarding, the meals? Jennifer and the relationship, the sexual experimentation – her advances, telling all her friends about it? His friendship with Macy, her sensing something of the truth, her urging him to write it down, to tell someone? His friendship with Jared, their sharing the experience? The group?

7.The role of the police, the officer, the interview in the headmaster’s room, Alex and his innocence? The officer explaining Paranoid Park, the situation? His coming to visit the school, the group, showing them the photos, their reactions, even laughing? The audience knowing by this time the truth? Alex’s reaction?

8.The glimpse of the mother, her trusting her son, not worrying about him? His father, the separation, going off, wanting the best possible deal, finding his wife difficult?

9.The kids themselves, their age, at school, courses, skateboarding, writing, friendships, sexual relationships and talk?

10.Alex and the reality, the visualising of the incident? The man and his attacking the boys, their daring? Pushing him back, the train, his being cut in half, pursuing Alex?

11.Alex and his reaction, throwing the board away, the clothes, having the shower, contemplation, not telling anyone, the relationship with Jennifer, then breaking it off? Self-absorbed, not trusting adults, not showing any interest in the man who had died? His lies to his parents?

12.His worry, writing, burning the manuscript, not letting Macy see it?

13.The ambiguities in the world of the teenager, the amoral world, the lack of moral compass, the inconclusive ending – open to what possibilities there were for Alex to deal with the situation and himself?

A MIGHTY HEART

US, 2007,108 minutes, Colour.
Angelina Jolie, Dan Futterman, Archie Panjabi, Irfan Khan, Will Patton.
Directed by Michael Winterbottom.

One of the highest profile foreign journalists abducted in recent years is Daniel Pearl who worked for the Wall St Journal. This tribute, memoir and picture of the investigation into his disappearance in 2002 is based on his wife's memoir and dedicated to his son, not yet born at the time of his death.

Directed by Michael Winterbottom (his In this World and Road to Guantanomo have already shown his credentials for work on films from this part of Asia) has directed the film, focusing strongly and at a rapid pace on the details of the search and tracking down of leads. This background to diplomacy as well as counterterrorism holds the interest. An extraordinary amount of effort went into the five weeks of search, utilising the resources of the US Consulate, the local Pakistani authorities and international intelligence offices. Pearl was abducted in Karachi after he and his wife had spent time reporting on Afghanistan, especially the bombing of the Taliban forces after the events of 11th September, 2001.

Dan Futterman (actor in The Birdcage and writer of the screenplay for Capote) portrays Daniel Pearl. The film has to make him a congenial character for the audience very quickly. He and his Frenchborn wife (who has Cuban background) are preparing to return to the US via Dubai. He takes up one more lead to get to speak with a Sheikh who allegedly can give information about the Afghan situation. He takes a taxi, waits outside the restaurant rendezvous and disappears. To strengthen the impact of his character and that he was a truthseeking journalist (and a mighty heart), there are flashbacks to his courtship and marriage.

There are re-enacted glimpses of the customary videos that kidnapping groups circulate showing their captives and getting them so speak propaganda.

While Daniel Pearl is central to the plot, the focus is on the mystery and the anxiety for his wife, Mariane. She is six months pregnant – and the screenplay inserts a flashback where they discuss the name for their baby, Daniel suggesting Adam, which the boy was eventually called.

Angelina Jolie plays the role of Mariane full throttle, accent and all. While Jolie is always a strong and commanding presence on screen, she is able to blend with the supporting cast and not dominate the film. When Pearl does not return from his meeting, she phones anxiously and soon the house is a nerve centre for the investigation. She appears on television and makes appeals to the abductors. She follows through for the weeks, relying also on some of her newspaper contacts.

When she finally (and suddenly) receives the news of Daniel’s execution, she has a scene of grief, tears and cries that is very powerful. She also appears again on television where the interviewer insensitively questions whether she has watched the execution video. The film shows media people as victims of terrorism, but also has victims of the media pack who show little sensitivity as they rush and bully towards getting their story.

When she gathers together those who had worked so had to find Daniel, she makes a speech at the end which rightly focuses on all the victims of such abductions, Pakistanis as well as foreigners, as this 21st
century phenomenon of war continues.

1.A 21st century story? Terrorism? The East? Asian uprisings and battles? The presence of America? The role of journalists? Abductions? Executions?

2.The film as a memoir by Mariane Pearl? A tribute to her husband? Her perspective on the experience? Her love for her husband, her pregnancy, the birth of the child? The film dedicated to her son?

3.The background of Middle East and Eastern uprisings and wars? Afghanistan? The American bombings? The post-9/11 experience? Pakistan, Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden hiding? Difficulties in Karachi? The streets, the popular city, the vistas of the city, the traffic, the people? Interiors, wealthy homes and centres? American headquarters? The musical score?

4.The structure of the film: the linear development of Daniel Pearl and Mariane, preparations to leave for Dubai, the arranged meeting, Daniel going to the meeting, his disappearance, Mariane’s response, the work of the United States officials, Pakistani officials, the police? The insertion of the flashbacks, especially of the wedding?

5.Daniel Pearl as an ordinary man, the Wall Street Journal, his skill in his work, his contacts, daring, the risks that he took, his telling the truth? His marrying Mariane? His Jewish background, not being religious, but not denying the background? The symbolism at the wedding, Jewish, talk of Buddhist spirituality? Daniel Pearl as a symbol of free journalists, abductions, torture, executions, videos of executions? His imprisonment, the videos, the code words, affirming his Jewish background, his attempts at escape, the interpretation that he was Mossad, CIA? The description of the final video – Mariane not wanting to watch, the audience not seeing it – only his face and words?

6.The fateful day, getting ready to leave, packed, Mariane at home, the supermarket, the phone calls, Daniel in the taxi, waiting at the restaurant, taken?

7.Angelina Jolie as Mariane, her screen presence, subdued? Pregnant, a strong woman in herself, the different racial backgrounds? Her own journalist work, her range of friends, connections? The phone call at the supermarket? The night, her anxiety, calls to the consulate? Asra and her friendship? The various links, people? Asra making a chart of all the connections? The taxi driver and the witnesses? The Islamist connections? The mystery about the middle men? The man quiet about his sources, Mariane’s anger and appeal?

8.The picture of the US personnel, from the Wall Street Journal, from the local consulate, the FBI and the woman in charge? Their personalities, work, support of Mariane?

9.The film’s detail of the processes, the editing and pace? Attention to detail, phone calls, emails, false leads? The local police? The captain, his team? Personnel?

10.The five weeks of work, the false leads, the dead body – and its not being Daniel Pearl? The glimpse of the man being tortured? Pakistani methods? Mariane and the TV interview – and the congratulations of the Americans for her skills?

11.Mariane and her coping, a strong character, continued hopes, tireless?

12.The final news, the drama of her cry and weeping, the shout? Her not wanting to watch the video ever?

13.The dinner of thanks, the people arranged there, her speech? Their contribution?

14.The media hounds, Mariane at the television, the obtuseness of the interviewer asking about the execution video? The critique of media harassment?

15.The birth of Adam, the years passing, Mariane back in France, her work? The dedication of the film?

MANG SHAN (BLIND MOUNTAIN)

China, 2007, 102 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Li Yang.

This is a fine but very grim and demanding film from China. It is the second film of the writer director. His first film in 2003 was Blind Shaft, a powerfully ugly story of miners who kill workmates, make the murder seem like an accident and take the financial compensation.

This time, the director takes us out of the city, sharing the bus ride of the young woman who believes she is going to a village to work. However, she is drugged and abducted, forced into a marriage and trapped in the village, trying to escape but failing, her letters never delivered. The film makes its audience share in the detail of the humiliation, the suffering, the degradation of the woman. It is highly emotional, a cry for human rights.

The characters, mostly sinister or obnoxious, are drawn vividly which makes the experience all the more harrowing. And the film does not let up. It is a strong cinema contribution to the theme of human slavery in the 21st century.

1.The Chinese film industry at the 21st century? Its look at recent history, critique of society, critique of law?

2.The picturing of the city, the contrast with the countryside, the village? Beauty, harshness? Remote? Authentically real? Musical score?

3.The title, Bai and her experience of the mountain, coming into the valley, trying to get out? The relentlessness of the mountain?

4.The introduction to the character of Bai, her happiness, on the bus, making friends, the prospect of the job, money for her family, hopes? The truck ride – her being drugged, stranded?

5.The village family, the issue of the money, her being kidnapped, bought? The hard family, the trap, the treatment? Her angry reaction, alone? Discovering the other women in the valley?

6.The situation and the kidnapping of women, the law, tradition, the role of men, expectations, the women as child-bearers, as slaves, hard work? The history of the women in the valley, Bai and her attempts to escape?

7.Bai, the initial horror, being tied up, allowed out, the marriage? Her not consenting? Writing the letters, the postman – and later discovering he was giving them to her husband? The kindliness of the teacher, bringing her books to read, the brutality of the sexual experience, her impassivity, the pigs coming, her feeding the pigs?

8.The teacher, the books, hope, his own story, lack of education, inviting Bai to the school, the celebration, the sexual liaison, his being expelled, her shame?

9.Her attempts to leave, running away, over the mountain, her being caught? The second escape, her skill, the lift, the money for the lift, getting the bus, her being ordered off the bus?

10.Her pregnancy, jumping to abort the child, finally accepting it, the birth, the boy – and the image of the people at the dam and the drowning of the baby girl?

11.The portrait of the husband, his ignorance, brutality? His father and the expectations? The mother, her going along with this? Their attitude towards Bai, looking down on her, feeding her, demanding work of her?

12.The children in the valley, some hope, helping the children, the boy posting the letter, her teaching the children, the growing class?

13.The child posting the letter, her father’s arrival, her upset that he was so late? The police accompanying him? The visit to the village chief – and his previous indifference? Saying he would handle the matter? The attempt at a deal?

14.The village people, their reaction, the husband, rough, attacking the police?

15.The final attack on the father, the brutality? The background of the hatchet present, Bai and the hatchet, her taking it, attacking her husband to save her father?

16.The sudden ending of the film, the emotional response to Bai’s situation and her desperation, the aftermath of the film with the shock ending?

MANG SHAN (BLIND MOUNTAIN)

China, 2007, 102 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Li Yang.

This is a fine but very grim and demanding film from China. It is the second film of the writer director. His first film in 2003 was Blind Shaft, a powerfully ugly story of miners who kill workmates, make the murder seem like an accident and take the financial compensation.

This time, the director takes us out of the city, sharing the bus ride of the young woman who believes she is going to a village to work. However, she is drugged and abducted, forced into a marriage and trapped in the village, trying to escape but failing, her letters never delivered. The film makes its audience share in the detail of the humiliation, the suffering, the degradation of the woman. It is highly emotional, a cry for human rights.

The characters, mostly sinister or obnoxious, are drawn vividly which makes the experience all the more harrowing. And the film does not let up. It is a strong cinema contribution to the theme of human slavery in the 21st century.

1.The Chinese film industry at the 21st century? Its look at recent history, critique of society, critique of law?

2.The picturing of the city, the contrast with the countryside, the village? Beauty, harshness? Remote? Authentically real? Musical score?

3.The title, Bai and her experience of the mountain, coming into the valley, trying to get out? The relentlessness of the mountain?

4.The introduction to the character of Bai, her happiness, on the bus, making friends, the prospect of the job, money for her family, hopes? The truck ride – her being drugged, stranded?

5.The village family, the issue of the money, her being kidnapped, bought? The hard family, the trap, the treatment? Her angry reaction, alone? Discovering the other women in the valley?

6.The situation and the kidnapping of women, the law, tradition, the role of men, expectations, the women as child-bearers, as slaves, hard work? The history of the women in the valley, Bai and her attempts to escape?

7.Bai, the initial horror, being tied up, allowed out, the marriage? Her not consenting? Writing the letters, the postman – and later discovering he was giving them to her husband? The kindliness of the teacher, bringing her books to read, the brutality of the sexual experience, her impassivity, the pigs coming, her feeding the pigs?

8.The teacher, the books, hope, his own story, lack of education, inviting Bai to the school, the celebration, the sexual liaison, his being expelled, her shame?

9.Her attempts to leave, running away, over the mountain, her being caught? The second escape, her skill, the lift, the money for the lift, getting the bus, her being ordered off the bus?

10.Her pregnancy, jumping to abort the child, finally accepting it, the birth, the boy – and the image of the people at the dam and the drowning of the baby girl?

11.The portrait of the husband, his ignorance, brutality? His father and the expectations? The mother, her going along with this? Their attitude towards Bai, looking down on her, feeding her, demanding work of her?

12.The children in the valley, some hope, helping the children, the boy posting the letter, her teaching the children, the growing class?

13.The child posting the letter, her father’s arrival, her upset that he was so late? The police accompanying him? The visit to the village chief – and his previous indifference? Saying he would handle the matter? The attempt at a deal?

14.The village people, their reaction, the husband, rough, attacking the police?

15.The final attack on the father, the brutality? The background of the hatchet present, Bai and the hatchet, her taking it, attacking her husband to save her father?

16.The sudden ending of the film, the emotional response to Bai’s situation and her desperation, the aftermath of the film with the shock ending?

CENTOCHIODI

Italy, 2007, 93 minutes, Colour.
Raz Degan.
Directed by Ermanno Olmi.

Olmi says this will be his last film. An interesting choice of themes, very Italian. A religious professor becomes disillusioned with cerebral knowledge and books and nails a hundred precious manuscripts to the library floor and then opts out to live life with the marginalised on the banks of the Po, becoming their spokesperson and saviour – and they call him, as one would, Jesus Christ.

This symbolic parable criticises the Church as well as God for all suffering and chooses the Gospel message of Jesus: living life and solidarity, being with and helping the poor. ‘Having a cup of coffee with a friend is worth more than all the books’. Idiosyncratically Italian and arresting.

1.The work of Olmi, a long career? Italian perspective? Themes? Human nature? Religion? Church?

2.The picture of central Italy, Bologna, the Po Valley, the river? The Italian countryside? Authentic atmosphere? Musical score? Religious overtones? Popular music?

3.The title, the irony of the crucifixion, the nails, nailing the books, nailing God’s Word to the floor?

4.The security guard, his work, his being upset, the sight of the books and the nails?

5.The monsignor, leaving the seminary, interacting with the guard, the president arriving on motorbike? The police, the books on the floor? The monsignor’s reaction? His love for the books?

6.The professor, his farewell to the students, leaving, driving into the countryside, becoming free, throwing his keys and other things into the river? His personality, appearance?

7.His opting out, finding the people, finding the building, going to the shop, the friendship with the girl, the young man? The work, the characters, becoming friends with them?

8.The happy life, utopia by the river, the girl and her story, being affirmed? The riverbanks, the picnic, people happy, going home on the boats?

9.The group, their dwelling on the land, their age, men and women, elderly?

10.The official and his arrival, the rules? The professor as the spokesperson?

11.The police, the arrest? The explanation about the books, the importance of one cup of coffee compared with all the books in the world?

12.The nails themselves, the flashback to the professor buying them? Seeing him hammer the books?

13.The talk with the monsignor, his attitude towards God, intellectual? His suffering? The professor, criticising God, criticising allowing human suffering? The monsignor’s reaction of blasphemy?

14.The professor disappearing, the people waiting, lighting the candles on the road for his return? His living on in their hearts?

15.The simplicity of the point about books and real life? The critique of the institution? The promotion of the Gospel message?

TEHILIM

Israel, 2007, 96 minutes, Colour.
Michael Moshonov, Limor Goldstein, Yonathan Alster, Shmuel Vilojni, Ilan Dar.
Directed by Raphael Nadjari.

The content of this film is more interesting than the way it is communicated. We observe rather than becoming engaged with characters and issues.

The film has a religious background, Tehilim being the name for the Psalms. We focus on a quite orthodox family (although the mother is from a secular Jewish background). The father and the older son attend classes and study the scriptures. Rituals are kept in the house. (Although the teenage boy who is at the centre of the film goes out at night removing his yamulka when at clubs with his friends.)

After a car accident with his two sons, the father simply disappears. Tehilim is about how the rest of the family deal with the disappearance. The mother is thought to be to concerned about the material consequences by the father’s brother and father who are devout, not taking her grief into account. This influences the two boys who find a way of giving out books of Psalms to the public so that they will pray for their father. This provokes a crisis with grandfather and uncle.

While the film offers an exploration of a religious family, the kind of religion they practice is very formal: lessons, rituals, prayers, discussion. There is no outflow from their beliefs and practices into the quality of their daily lives, making religion either cerebral or superficial. One would like to be more engaged and to learn more about the religious implications of this orthodox family.

1.The impact of the film for an Israeli audience? The various stances in Judaism, Reform and Orthodoxy? For non-Jewish audiences?

2.Jerusalem City, the streets, the hills, the buildings, homes, the Yeshivah? Authentic? The musical score? The chants?

3.The title of the film, the reference to the Psalms? The importance of the Psalms for every aspect of daily life, Orthodox Jews and their praying the Psalms? The giving out of the books of Psalms with the markers, the money to get people to pray for the man who disappeared?

4.The presentation of the Jews in this sector of Jerusalem? Orthodox, the men and their studying of Talmud? The nature of prayer? The issue of which direction to pray in? The lectures of the rabbi? The responses of the men? Father and son and their going? The grandfather and his continual prayer and study? The uncle? The blessings, the rituals of Shabbat? The details presentation of the rituals?

5.These Orthodox Jews and their religion: cerebral, study, prayer, the exact rituals? But the love and happiness of God not being manifested in their ordinary lives?

6.The family, the father and his work, relationship with his wife, children? Cooking? Inviting family to Shabbat? The discussions with his two sons? Driving them to school, the strangeness in the driving, passing the school, crashing? His getting Menachem to get help? His disappearance? The arrival of the police, the questions, the aftermath? The procedures, the search, his being declared a missing person?

7.His wife, a secular Jew? Under suspicion from the more religious members of the family? Love for her husband, her children? Her grief, her focus on the material aspects, the need for money, social security? The reassurances? Her having money in the tin in the kitchen? Her wanting to be alone, sending her husband’s family away, their taking it ill? Menachem trying to apologise? Her love for her sons, their going off to be with their grandfather without telling her, her being upset? The issue of taking her money? At the end, with the young boy sleeping, forgiving the older boy?

8.The boys, their age, discussions, bonding, fights? At home, asleep, the meals? Going to school, their arguing in the car? The young boy being injured and in hospital? Menachem going to seek help?

9.The film’s focus on Menachem, his age, irritating and irritable schoolboy? His relationship with Deborah, bonding with her, wanting to go into her home, her not letting him because of her father? Later not wanting to be with her, his harsh breaking of the relationship, her walking with him, after getting the friends together? His change of heart, going to see her father, her father forbidding him to come in?

10.His behaviour, not going to school, clashes with his brother? The discovery of the money? The younger brother, earnest, seeing what was wrong with his older brother? Telling him about the money? The Sabbath and their going to their uncle’s, getting the books of Psalms, taking them, giving them out in the street – and the reaction of the grandfather, that this was not sacred? Their disobedience?

11.The repercussions for them, Menachem and his failing, his apology to his mother, her forgiveness?

12.The disappearance of the father – and his not being found? The official document that he was a missing person?

13.The Israeli issues, the religious issues, the human issues? How interestingly done? For an audience which understands – for the broader audience?

MISTER LONELY

UK/France, 2007, 105 minutes, Colour.
Diego Luna, Samantha Morton, Denis Lavant, James Fox, Leos Carax.
Directed by Harmony Korine.

In the mid-1990s, Harmony Korine was something of an enfant terrible of cinema. He gained notoriety as the writer of Larry Clark’s controversial story of the sexual and drug behaviour of New York teenagers in Kids. He followed up with a strange film, Gummo, and then made julien, donkey boy, both of which were bleak in outlook. Then only a TV special and a music video for some years.

Now, moving away from the grim realism and the use of dogme techniques of film-making, he has moved into the world of whimsy and fantasy – but it is his characters who live in a whimsical world of their own making who catch our attention. In a gentle but telling spoof of how fans emulate celebrities, the characters here become their chosen show business or historical celebrity and form a commune in Scotland. This could be idyllic, but nowhere in the world can the dream idyll be lived. If not difficulties amongst themselves, there is the clash with the people who do not understand, who feel threatened and who attack.

At the centre is Diego Luna as a Michael Jackson lookalike who encounters a Marilyn Monroe (Samantha Morton). It is she who invites him to the commune where she lives with a Charlie Chaplin (Denis Lavant) and her daughter who is a Shirley Temple. Other members include James Fox as the Pope and Anita Pallenberg as the Queen of England. There are funny moments, sad moments and some moments which may strike realists as too fey.

But, there is another narrative in the background concerning the nuns who looked after the hero when he was a boy. It concerns missions of charity, a dedicated priest (played by director Werner Herzog who had appeared in julien donkey boy) and miracles. This part of the film (including the Virgin Mary habits of the nuns and a final accident) is definitely not realistic.

Pleasant and accessible – despite the vagaries of fantasy and imagination.

1.Harmony Korine and his career? His pessimism in his films in his twenties? A move to hope in his thirties? From pessimistic realism to fantasy, however, passing?

2.The French settings, the city of Paris, the streets, the French countryside and mountains, the world of the commune? The contrast with the Latin American settings, the tropics, the sea, the villages?

3.The musical score, the range of songs? ‘You Have a Friend in Jesus’, ‘Dancing Cheek to Cheek’, ‘Hangman’ …?

4.The impact of the opening, the song of ‘Mister Lonely’ by Bobby Vinton? Michael on the bike, the monkey trailing, slow motion?

5.The contrast with the nuns, their habit looking like statues of the Blessed Virgin Mary? Michael’s birth, the nuns tending him, kiss, his having to fend for himself, becoming Michael Jackson, acting in the streets in Paris, all Michael Jackson’s moves, look? Busking in the streets? His discussions with Renard and advice from him? Going to the home for the elderly, his charm with the elderly people, getting them to join in the singing? Talk of hope? His meeting Marilyn Monroe, talking, in the street, her offer to him to come to the commune?

6.Marilyn Monroe and her story, American, acting, meeting Charlie Chaplin, their child, her becoming Shirley Temple? Persuading Michael to come? His packing, the personal farewell to his room? The sadness when he came back to it later? The arrival at the commune, the welcome?

7.The issue of impersonation, personal identity, identifying with celebrities, the joy of their lives, the perceptions of their lives, offering this to people?

8.The introduction to each of the characters, close-up, their comment: Charlie Chaplin, Shirley Temple, Red Riding Hood, Madonna, Abraham Lincoln, the queen, the pope, James Dean, Sammy Davis Jr, Buckwheat, the Three Stooges?

9.Their acting, their personal styles, appearance? The life together in the commune, the meals, the toast – and drinking? Tending the sheep, the many scenes of the sheep, the news that they had to be killed, Abraham Lincoln, the tractor, his getting the phone message, the Three Stooges and their having to kill the sheep? The effect on each?

10.Deciding to put on the show, the preparation, the Stooges and their building the stage, Red Riding Hood upset with the mayhem, the rehearsals, discussion in which order they should appear? The pope blessing the theatre? The queen launching it?

11.Chaplin and Marilyn Monroe, the relationship, tensions, the clash, their love, their child, the sunbaking - and Chaplin letting Marilyn Monroe burn? Her non-comprehension? Everybody looking after her? Her performance, the death, the grief?

12.The show, the small audience, the exhilaration of them all performing ‘Dancing Cheek to Cheek’, the disappointment, the impact of Marilyn’s death?

13.Michael, the impact of the death, his seeing the faces of each of the characters, the singing of the song, his talking to Marilyn, her explaining why she died, her destiny, urging him to live and follow his? His going to Renard, his changing, going to the bus, alone? But temporary? The philosophy of giving love and joy to one another?

14.The priest, supplies, the talk with Eugenio, his wife leaving him, his infidelity, urging him to confess, giving him the blessing and absolution? A genial priest? The supplies for the village? Flying?

15.The nuns, their work, joy, play, smoking? Going on the plane, the drops of the supplies? The nun falling, her prayer, faith, landing unharmed? Talking to the other nuns, getting them to free-fall, testing their faith? Their free-falling, skydiving? Seen as a miracle? The comment on miracles and people’s perception? The decision to fly to Rome, to meet the pope, the priest to have a beer with his Bavarian friend?

16.The irony of the crash, the bodies in the sea, temporary happiness?

17.The ambiguities of the film, the positive outlook on human nature, life, joy and grief?

THE MAN FROM LONDON

Hungary, 2007, 132 minutes, Black and white.
Miroslav Krobot, Tilda Swinton, Erika Bok.
Directed by Bela Tarr.

A combination of Bela Tarr and a story by Georges Simenon: Simenon in slow-motion (very slow). (Never has a steadicam been steadier in staying put on a face - or a back of a head).

In admiration: Tarr has made a film which would be at home in a gallery, each frame a stunning black and white photograph. He has captured the style of the silent German expressionist films of the 20s with something of the Warners sets of the noir 40s. The pace is relentlessly slow, giving time for contemplation and reflection on some basic drives of human nature including depression, greed, family dissent, honour.

In exasperation: while the intention is admirable, it is hard going for most, the ultra slow camera movement, the heavily slow movement and delivery of dialogue, the overall phlegmatic performance that gives very few clues as to the inner lives of the characters that Tarr wants us to resonate with (except for the heated family arguments) means that for most, this is rather a cinema of endurance. Tarr, of course, has his admirers but, as an American reviewer noted, this is a film ‘for no known audience’.

1.The importance of the style? The nature of communication? A stylistic exercise? Audience response to the style, to the content?

2.Bella Tarr, his career, his art gallery style, slow, black and white photography?

3.The black and white photography, the steadicam and its focus, steady on situations, characters? A film for contemplation, time for contemplation? The long takes, the compositions of each frame, the light and darkness, the slow movement of the camera, the slow motion of the actors’ movements, the delivery of lines? The cumulative effect? The musical score – and the repetitious theme?

4.Audiences contemplating the visuals, the sound, the silences? The characters?

5.The film based on a Georges Simenon story? The basic plot? The inner life of the different characters?

6.The style for the inner thoughts and feelings of the characters? The inner life, audiences understanding this or not? What signals for communicating the meaning of this life? The phlegmatic tone of the characters, emotionless (except for the fight between husband and wife)?

7.The basic plot: the initial robbery, Mitchell and the selling of the theatre, Brown and Teddy and the robbery, the fight, Teddy’s death, drowning, the language? Maloin and his going out to find the body, finding the money, drying it on his stove? Going home, his relationship with his wife and daughter, taking this for granted, estranged? Buying the fur for his daughter and the consequences at home? The arrival of the police, interrogations? Brown’s wife? Brown, his death, no charge?

8.The signals cabin, the audience scaling the side of the ship, in the cabin, tracking from side to side of the boat, seeing the case thrown from the boat, seeing the passengers slowly disembarking (and it repeated the second night)? The train, its departure?

9.Maloin and his look, age, life experience, boredom, repetition, the café, his playing chess, laconic talk, seeing Henriette cleaning the floors, his anger, forbidding this, coming home to his wife, the meal, going to sleep and the attention to detail of his getting ready for bed? The meals, the arguments? The buying of the fur? The screaming match? The confrontation with Brown? The police, his going to the cabin, taking the food and wine, intending to kill Brown or not? The money, his giving the money to the police? The dashing of his hopes?

10.Brown, as a character, the man from London, the possibilities in his job, the robbery, the clash with Teddy, Teddy’s death? His being killed by Maloin?

11.The inspector, serious, slow delivery, the inquiry? Going to the cabin, saying there was no charge?

12.Mrs Brown, passive, listening, going to the cabin, her grief, the close-up as the finale of the film?

13.The portrait of the wife, the daughter? Their relationship to the husband?

14.Insights into human nature – or human nature being opaque?

THE MIRACLE MAKER

Russia/Wales, 1999, 94 minutes.
Voices of Ralph Fiennes, Rebecca Callard, William Hurt, Julie Christie, David Thewliss, Miranda Richardson, Ian Holm, Richard E.Grant, James Frain, Ken Stott, Alfred Molina.
Directed by Stanislav Sokolov and Derek Hayes.

The Miracle Maker is a different kind of development for the Jesus movie. After the 'realism' of the 1960s and 1970s, the 'stylisation' of the rock operas and the issues of the 80s like 'Last Temptation', comes a puppet movie with animated flashbacks, a more simple presentation of the Gospel stories but with visual art flair.

The puppet sequences, the major part of the movie, were produced in Russia. The two dimensional sequences were drawn in Wales by companies who had worked on animated short movies of Shakespearian plays. The voices, with the exception of William Hurt as Jairus, are British. The puppets combine touches of realism with a sense of performance. They look Semitic, except for Pilate and the Centurion. The settings are quite lavish and give a feel for the period and the land of Jesus.

A group of expert advisers from many churches contributed to the film, including Archbishop Rowan Williams of Canterbury who was Bishop of Monmouth at the time.

The two dimensional animation via the flashbacks (the Nativity, Finding in The Temple) as well as the use of some symbols (the temptations in the desert, the raising of Lazarus, the agony in the garden and the Emmaus journey) and stylised parables (especially the houses built on sand and rock and the Good Samaritan) make a significant contrast to the three dimensional puppetry. Jesus' words are spoken by Ralph Fiennes who presents him as a strong-minded, genial young man with more than a touch of humour. He speaks the parables and teachings beautifully and clearly and brings powerfully anguished emotion to such scenes as the Agony in the Garden.

This is a very accessible and credible Jesus. Its particular appeal is to children but most adults would appreciate and enjoy this telling of the story. Tamar, the daughter of Jairus and Rachael, is ill and cannot be cured. The decision to put Tamar and her parents to the fore as disciples and recipients of the miracle where she is raised to life means that this is a child’s view of Jesus and his message. The audience sees Jesus through Tamar's eyes throughout the whole film. This pays off dramatically.

Tamar sees a carpenter at work in the city of Sepphoris and is fascinated by him, especially in his defence of Mary Magdalene, a wild-eyed mad woman who haunts the town. When the foreman tries to lash her, Jesus intervenes. When Jesus begins his public ministry, Tamar sees him again. The doctors give her no hope but her mother trusts that Jesus will heal her. Jairus is more cautious. He and his friend Cleopas go to the banquet hosted by Simon the Pharisee and Jairus is overwhelmed by Jesus’ kindness in receiving Mary. He calls Jesus to his daughter. From then on, Tamar is always at Jesus’ side. She and the family are at the last supper (at an adjoining table). It is to Tamar that Jesus reveals that there are many mansions in his father’s house – something she confides to another little girl on the mountain just after Jesus ascends to heaven. She is shocked when Jesus is arrested. Then, she and her parents follow Jesus to Calvary, are at the foot of the cross. Tamar even helps with placing Jesus in the shroud. The two disciples on the road to Emmaus are Cleopas and Jairus (who have sent Tamar and her mother on ahead for safety), so Tamar is the first to recognise Jesus in the breaking of the bread. And, she is there at the Ascension. The Miracle Maker is her view of Jesus.

The outline of the story is the familiar one. After his work in Sepphoris, Jesus leaves his work in the carpenter's shop at Nazareth, explains to his mother (who remembers his loss in the Temple as well as his birth and the visit of the magi) that he must be about his father's work.

He is baptised by John and is tempted in the desert This is creatively shown in two dimensional animation with an ordinary looking man as the devil who reappears at the agony in the garden, taunting Jesus to escape, opening up a path through the trees for him to pass through; his voice is even heard briefly taunting Jesus on the cross. Stronger from the resistance to temptation, Jesus encounters Andrew and preaches the parable of the house built on rock from Peter's boat. There is a huge haul of fish when Peter and Andrew go out to work.

Jesus has also healed Mary of Magdala and defended her when she came to Simon the Pharisee's house. The Pharisees are hostile as is Herod whom the religious leaders consult. Pilate rules in the name of Caesar. Barabbas is a rebel but his friend, Judas, goes with great hopes to join Jesus.

Jesus has friends like Mary and Martha and enjoys visiting them (and later raises Lazarus from the dead). He heals the paralytic when people take away the roof. He comes to heal Tamar at Jairus' request (healing the woman with the haemorrhage on the way). Jesus enters Jerusalem triumphantly, clears the Temple, tells the story of the Good Samaritan and urges his disciples that to be great they have to be like children.

Disappointed that Jesus will not rise up against the Romans, Judas betrays him. After his Last Supper, Jesus agonises in the Garden. Judas betrays him with a kiss – the scene has Jesus come alone through the apostles. It is only after the kiss that the troops appear. Peter, who has protested his loyalty to Jesus, draws his sword quite violently but Jesus heals the wounded servant. Jesus is brought before the High Priest and before Herod and Pilate, who finds no cause to condemn him. However, the people plead for Barabbas' release and Jesus is crucified.

After he dies, his body is taken down and buried but Mary Magdalene, who is shown wandering the streets grieving, finds him in the garden. Though it is not in the Gospels, Peter sees Jesus as do Jairus and Cleopas on the road to Emmaus. Thomas is presented as a forthright doubter but then a devout believer. Jesus promises to be with his disciples until the end of time. He then ascends to heaven.

While the Miracle Maker shows the whole public life of Jesus, a substantial amount, up to a quarter of the movie, is given to the passion of Jesus. The response of the disciples means that the entry into Jerusalem is a culmination of Jesus' ministry. Judas interprets it wrongly, that it is the beginning of the rebellion, and so betrays Jesus in disillusionment.

The Last Supper is also portrayed well, with the apostles at a table with Jesus, a bit Da Vinci like, (where Jesus can walk to the end to talk with Judas and advise him to go to do what he must), but with other disciples at other tables. The Agony in the Garden is very effectively drawn in two dimensions with the symbol of the chalice appearing to him and the Satan taunting Jesus in his torment about God's will.

Jesus could not be apprehended in public because of the reactions of the people (this is well dramatised in the discussion about the tribute to Caesar, which also dismays Judas), so, Judas has to identify him in the dark.

Though brief, the movie shows us the response of the High Priests and their question about the Messiah, the spurning of Jesus by Herod and the previously supercilious Pilate coming round to see Jesus as no menace. But he is threatened as being disloyal to Caesar and he washes his hands of everything.

One of the distinctive features of The Miracle Maker is the inclusion at some length of the walk to Emmaus. The screenplay uses the full text which brings home to the audience the meaning of the Resurrection rather than simply presenting the fact of the Resurrection.

The Miracle Maker had more impact with its television screenings, with over 18,000,000 viewers watching it on network television in the US on Easter Sunday 2001.

1.The place of this film in the man Jesus films? The impact for adults, for children? Didactic? Entertaining? Made for the millennium?

2.The effect of having the Jesus film in animated style, the different styles, the three-dimensional puppets, the two-dimensional sketches? The interchange of each? The importance of the voice cast – and the top actors and their characterisations, dramatics?

3.The title, the initial focus on Tamar, as a child, her being present throughout the film at all the episodes in Jesus’ life, her being ill, listening to him, hope, her being raised from death, becoming a disciple, her parents following? Sharing in Jesus’ joy, sorrow? At the Last Supper, at his death, touching the shroud? At the end, resurrection? Tamar as a character? The characters of her parents, their life, worry, Jairus and his going to the banquet, being impressed break-up Jesus, requesting him to raise his daughter? His wife as a disciple? The audiences identifying with the family?

4.The use of the biblical text? Variations? The opening in Sepphora, the Roman occupation of Judea and Galilee? The busy city? Jesus working as a carpenter there? Defending the workers? The encounter with Mary Magdalene – and her madness? The Roman way of life?

5.Jesus going back to Nazareth, his bond with his mother, her memories, the two-dimensional presentation of the infancy narratives?

6.Jesus going on his mission, farewelling his mother, the encounter with John the Baptist, their memories? The baptism? The temptations in the desert? Gathering his disciples?

7.The range of teaching from the Gospels, the sayings of Jesus? People listening, the crowds? The apostles? The authorities and their disapproval?

8.The visual presentation of such parables in two-dimensional sketches as the house built on sand, the good Samaritan? The context of telling these parables? Everybody imitating the goodness and charity of the good Samaritan?

9.Jesus and his meeting people, the miracles and healing, his friends? Martha, Mary and Lazarus? The raising of Lazarus?

10.Mary Magdalene, mad, her being healed, becoming a disciple?

11.The welcome of Jesus into Jerusalem? The atmosphere of triumph? Judas and his reaction? The authorities?

12.The visualising of the Passion, the suffering of Jesus, going to Calvary, the crucifixion?

13.Jesus taken down, Tamar and her being present? The burial?

14.The joy of the resurrection, Mary, Mary Magdalene, Peter running by himself to the tomb? Thomas, the Sea of Galilee, Jesus ascending into Heaven?

15.The scope of the film, geared towards its intended audience? The value of this kind of simpler presentation of the Gospel stories for all audiences?

OKURIBITO (DEPARTURES)

Japan, 2008, 130 minutes, Colour.
Masahiro Motoki, Tsutomu Yamazaki.
Directed by Yojiro Taki.

A fine, often beautiful, film that can be recommended. It won the 2008 Best Foreign Film Oscar over Waltz with Bashir and The Class, strong competition.

However, you might be wondering during the first ten minutes. It begins slowly and solemnly with ceremonial and ritual for the dead. The, without warning, it becomes quite farcical and you wonder where you are. This is pre-credits. And immediately after the credits there is an orchestra playing Beethoven's Ode to Joy with a full choir. What is this film? What are the departures?

Actually, the central character of the film, the young Daigo, a cello player whose orchestra is shut down, wonders about this same question when he applies for a job on returning to his home town. He thinks he will work for a travel agent or be a tour guide. The Japanese title of the film is said to mean, 'the one who sees persons off...'. But, he is to be a 'coffinator', an embalmer of the dead who performs his duties with religious atmosphere, reverent ceremonial and a decorum that enables the grieving family and mourners to pay their respects to the dead and experience the solemnity of the final rite of passage. Death is seen, in Buddhist and eastern religion terms, not as the end but as the gateway to the next stage of existence.

We are fascinated with the repetition of this ceremony, the ritual meticulously the same, but the response of the mourners so different – and we realise that the manager and Daigo are contributing to a sense of human dignity and an acknowledgement of the life of the dead person as well as the survivors.

That all sounds very, very serious, and so it is. However, the film is interspersed with a great deal of humour, especially in Daigo's personal journey from being very sick at his first case to a final ritual which brings the whole drama, the embalming, his marriage, his family and the absence of his father, to a very satisfying conclusion.

Masahiro Matoko gives a finely nuanced performance, just the right seriousness and comedy, an acute sense of timing and facial expressions indicating the depths of the character. Tustomu Yamizaki brings a blend of the offhand and the dedicated to his role as the manager.

Beautiful to look at (which is sometimes rather challenging through our tears), it is a wonderful combination of the realistically mundane, the sadness of life and its uncertainties, yet the funny side of human foibles, the emotion of music and an opportunity (without being preached at) for the audience to really respond emotionally to and intellectually think about the deeper aspects of life and death.

SIGNIS award winner, Washington DC, 2009.

1.The awards? The Oscar? Canadian and Japanese awards?

2.The title: the reference to deaths, the Buddhist theme of death as a gateway, people meeting again? The attitude of the variety of religions presented? Embalming, coffinating? The literal title: the one who sees people off…?

3.The treatment of life and death, people able to face the realities of death, the Japanese tradition? The contrast with western avoidance of death?

4.The blend of the serious and the comic, the range of moods, the flow from one mood to the other? Life as funny, life as serious? The prologue illustrating this? The travel for Daigo, his job, the mourners, the ritual and the ceremony, the serious presentation of death and decorum? The discovery that the girl was a man? The family reaction, the argument, the tone, the farcical aspects? Setting up audience expectations?

5.The structure: the present, the flashbacks, the images of Daigo as a child with his parents? These recurring flashbacks? The crisis, the climax, the resolution? The issue of Daigo’s relationship with his father and the ceremonial way of completing this?

6.Daigo, his age, experience, love of the cello, playing in the orchestra, Beethoven’s Ode to Joy, his paying for the cello, the shock of the orchestra being disbanded? Telling his wife? His love for her? Her reaction, the cooking, the octopus, throwing it into the river, its death? The later images of salmon swimming upstream to their home? His decision to return to his town, the memories, selling his cello? His father urging him to play the cello? The bond with his mother? Leaving her, missing her death and funeral? His need for a job, the advertisement, going to the firm, the secretary and the discussion, the puzzle, the brief interview with the boss? His shock at the job? The reaction? The woman dead for two weeks? His reaction, being sick? His not telling his wife?

7.Japanese treatment of the dead, the reverence for the bodies, yet the public opinion thinking that this was an unclean job? The work, the reputation? His wife’s disdain? His friend urging him not to work at his job? Yet life and death, the traditions, the purpose of the ritual, the culture, respect for the dead, the religious beliefs, the attention to detail, the washing of the body, clothing the body, the garment, the makeup, the special clothes or things associated with the deceased, the reverent placing of the hands, the interment in the coffin, burial and cremation?

8.The range of bodies and people and Daigo’s reaction? The transvestite in the prologue? The old lady long dead? The grandmother and the joy of her children, the man angry at his dead wife and their being late? The lady managing the baths? His father and the final ceremony? The final credits and the opportunity to see Daigo doing the whole process?

9.Daigo and his life, his work, his relationship with the boss, the boss’s attitudes? His sharing with the boss, learning on the job, learning respect? The decaying body and the smell, going to the baths, meeting the owner, her memories of him, her son wanting to sell the baths, his wife and child, Daigo playing with the child? The old man and his presence, playing the game with the owner? His bond with her? Daigo seeing him on the bridge, the discussion about the salmon? Taking his wife to the baths? The subplot of the son as the civil servant and wanting to sell, his mother’s refusal?

10.Daigo playing the cello, his memories, playing as a child, his rediscovering his cello, the stone hidden there and his opening it, the memories? His playing for his wife, her delight? His sitting on the side of the road, the emotion in the playing? Playing for the secretary and the boss?

11.Daigo’s wife, love, not questioning him, going to the town? In the house, cooking? Her horror at learning his job? The reaction, threatening him, leaving? Yet her love, sharing? Daigo and his need for her – especially after the first experience with the body, lovemaking? Her pregnancy? Her return, the pregnancy, her demands? Her respect for the old lady, seeing Daigo and his reverence towards the woman, changing her ideas, standing by him? The news about his father’s death, the whereabouts, her urging Daigo to go? Sharing the experience of his caring for his father?

12.The secretary and her story, Daigo’s anger in hearing it, abandoning her children? Yet her urging him to go to his father? The sadness of her story, her personality, the boss and his support of her?

13.Daigo’s father, the message, his anger, his being persuaded to go? His memories of his father, the records, his wife’s comment that his mother must have loved her husband and not thrown out his records? The town, people talking about his father? The undertakers and their lack of reverence? His performing the ritual, the closure?

14.The theme of stones, searching for the stones as a child, his father and the stone, the stone in the cello, going to the river, the stone for his wife?

15.A film of Japanese culture, yet a film of human nature, human sensitivity with a universal appeal?