STOLEN SUMMER

US, 2002, 91 minutes, Colour.
Aidan Quinn, Bonnie Hunt, Kevin Pollak, Eddie Kaye Thomas, Adiel Stein, Mike Weinberg.
Directed by Pete Jones.

Stolen Summer was the winner of the HBO competition for original screenplays, Project Greenlight, initiated by Ben Affleck and Matt Damon. The project was financed by the Weinstein Brothers and Miramax.

There was a series on HBO about the competition itself, the difficulties, the winner, the making of this film.

The film was written and directed by Pete Jones, a first-time director. It is something of a memoir as is his second film, Outing Riley, a film about a gay boy coming out.

The film is interesting with its Chicago City settings of 1976. The O’ Malley family is very Catholic, in the Irish traditional sense. Joe, the father (Aidan Quinn) is a fireman and works for the city. He considers it as a good job. This is where he sees his sons working, especially his oldest son Patrick (Eddie Kaye Thomas, the American Pie films). However, Patrick has a dream of being a doctor. Bonnie Hunt plays Margaret O’ Malley, the mother of the eight children.

The film focuses on the eight-year-old Pete O’ Malley, played by a Jewish actor, Adiel Stein. He is quite convincing in his earnestness – a bit hard to believe he is trouble at school where Sister Leonora Mary threatens him with Hell. However, he promises to get better during the summer holidays and lights on the prospect of making conversions to Catholicism. His brother tells him about Paul converting the Romans and the Jews so he goes down to the synagogue, meets the rabbi (Kevin Pollak in a very sympathetic performance) and sets up a lemonade stand.

Complications occur when the rabbi’s house burns down and Joe O’ Malley rescues his son. The two boys become friends – although the Jewish boy is suffering from leukaemia. He becomes the target of Pete’s earnest conversion quest and, since the parish priest, played by Brian Dennehy, says there are rules and tests for first communion, he decides that a decathlon is the best way and the two boys perform that.

The film is complicated, especially with the portrait of the father who is an ordinary working man but is very proud, cannot accept what he considers charity from others, has limited vision for his son. Bonnie Hunt is good as the mother (and was soon to have twelve in the two Cheaper By The Dozen films).

The film is pleasant, emotional – with a touch of sentiment. However, it is interesting in its presentation of Catholics and Jews in those days, and the possibilities for opening up for understanding each other by meeting, discussing, sharing rather than by emphasising doctrinal intolerance or racism.

1.The impact of the film? A humane story? Of the 1970s? A piece of Americana, Chicago style?

2.A film about families, family life, functional rather than dysfunctional, difficulties? The size of families? The hard life? Expectations? Suffering and illness? Relationship between parents, parents and children? Children amongst themselves? A film about friendship?

3.The Chicago summer, the Irish neighbourhood, the Jewish neighbourhood? The church and the school, the temple? The lake, the beaches? Workplaces? The musical score?

4.The film and its background, Project Greenlight, winning the competition, the television series, the making of details in the writing, the direction and production?

5.The film as a memoir, a touch of nostalgia, a clear-eyed look from a child’s point of view? The eight-year-old? His voice-over, earnest, wanting to change the world, at school, Sister’s criticisms, the mention of Hell? His questions about Hell, about Heaven? About being good? His brother, the story about Saint Paul and converting the Jews and the Romans? The Jews of Chicago? Pete establishing his quest? The initial support of his parents? His father disapproving, his mother’s helping him?

6.The Catholic background, the family going to mass, the father not going, everyone in a hurry, the priest meeting the people, the loudness of Catholics, the ritual of the mass? The nuns at school? The parish priest and his listening, advice? A bit stern? Issues of doctrine, the sacraments, the simplified and simplistic view of a child? The Irish Catholic tradition, tough? The touches of prejudice and anti-Semitism? Irish pride?

7.The Jewish background, Pete’s quest, going to the temple, the interiors of the temple, his asking about the crucifix? The rabbi, kindliness? The family, the rituals? The congregation protesting about Pete? The generosity of the Jewish community? Issues of God, prayer, suffering and death, faith?

8.The interfaith aspects, the 1970s, presumptions about Jews not going to Heaven, issues of Hell? The quest, the sacraments? The rabbi and his friendliness, the boy and his earnest Catholicism, Daniel and his learning the sign of the cross and making it before the Jewish grace? Discussions? The tests – and the decision about the decathlon? Baptising Daniel in the beach water? Pete and his taking the hosts, the priest catching him, the explanations about consecration, Catholics earning communion, the priest allowing him to take the unconsecrated host? Pete arriving too late at the hospital, Danny’s death? The final discussion with the rabbi – and a more tolerant attitude?

9.The O’Malleys: Joe, as a father, the Irish background, interested in baseball, his drinking, hard work, working for the city, the fire brigade? Seeing him in action at the fire at the rabbi’s house, rescuing Danny? The inability to rescue the rabbi’s secretary? Patrick and his being a lifeguard, the girls, his dreams of being a doctor, not getting the scholarship, frustration, his father wanting him to work for the city, his attitude? The offer of the scholarship and his father’s opposition? Margaret, the eight children, managing, meals, washing, getting to mass? Reprimands of the children? Talking, listening? The intimacy between Joe and Margaret in their room? The fact of eight children? Concern about Pete and his situation, Patrick, the rabbi’s visit, the giving of the lasagne to the firemen, coming to the house, offering the scholarship, Joe’s hostility, accusing the Jews of wanting publicity?

10.The various kids, their ages, the boy older than Pete explaining about the temple and conversions? The focus on Pete, his doing good, meeting the rabbi, the lemonade stand, the price or no price, no one buying? His meeting Danny, their playing, discussions, the issue of conversion, going to the beach, the various stages of the decathlon, swimming out to the buoy in the lake, Danny not able to, Pete and his trying to help and find ways? The baptism in the water? Danny and his swimming out alone – and leaving the message that he had achieved it? Pete and his ideas, going to the priest, the discussions with him? Being grounded? Learning to be obedient? His father letting him go to the baseball? Getting the host, going to the hospital, his sadness at Danny’s death? The final talk with the rabbi?

11.The rabbi, a good man, open, his friendship with his secretary, her difficulties about Pete, dying in the fire? Love for Danny, the leukaemia? His wife? The meal and the sign of the cross? The gift of lasagne, talking with Joe, going to the house, the offer of the scholarship, his being insulted? Patrick’s visit to him – and his giving the scholarship? Going to the hospital, Danny’s death?

12.Pete and his attitude towards the crucifix, his commenting about Jesus, his look, wanting to get him down?

13.The impact of the film for a non-religious audience and interest? For a religious interest? Dialogue or strict stances? An emotional story, personal stories and sharing – via children?

ENVY

US, 2004, 99 minutes, Colour.
Ben Stiller, Jack Black, Rachel Weisz, Amy Poehler, Christopher Walken.
Directed by Barry Levinson.

Envy took a long time to be released – initial screenings were unfavourable. However, as Jack Black became more popular, especially with School of Rock, the film was released two years after its production.

Ben Stiller is an uptight executive who becomes envious of his happy-go-lucky best friend, Jack Black, when he invents a machine for vaporising dog manure. Envy takes over his life and attitude – and also means that he kills the rich family’s horse which is in agistment in his own yard. This brings him into contact with Christopher Walken as a hobo with a persuasive tongue, who helps him bury the horse in a swimming pool, then transfers it into the countryside to dispose of it.

Stiller is expert at this kind of deadpan comedy as well as the more exuberant Jack Black style. Jack Black is a genial character, generous to a fault. Rachel Weisz is uptight as Ben Stiller’s wife, Amy Poehler rather more carefree as Jack Black’s wife – enjoying the unexpected wealth and standing for state senate. However, this brings a crisis – the constituents asking where the dog manure vanishes to.

The film was directed by Barry Levinson, a writer who became a director in the 1980s with such films as The Natural, Good Morning Vietnam and his Oscar-winning Rain Man.

The film would probably be more popular if seen in the context of the other Jack Black films as well as Ben Stiller’s many comedies.

1.The reason for the lack of popularity for the film? The cast? The story? The comedy?

2.The affluent settings, suburbia, homes? Workplaces? The increased opulence of the wealthy? The countryside, the woods? The musical score – and the song about envy throughout the film?

3.Tim and Nick, their friendship, driving to work together, discussions? Tim as uptight? Nick as enthusiastic and friendly? His invention, his explanation, the title: Vapooriser? The acceptance, the sudden wealth, the experiment, the humour of the television commercial with Nick? Tim and his stolid refusal? Not explaining it to Debbie? Her wanting to invest the two thousand dollars – and the recriminations afterwards?

4.The passing of eighteen months, Nick and Natalie and their affluence, the big home, the servants, the meals, the children playing the piano? The horse in the yard, eating the apples? Nick and his generosity towards Tim, the range of gifts? Natalie and her enthusiasm? Her deciding to stand for the state senate? Giving something back to society?

5.The contrast with Tim, his not believing in the product, his jealousy, the increasing envy? His resentment towards the horse? The drinking, abusing the boss, getting the sack? The chance meeting with J- Man? The talking? J- Man understanding him? The firing the arrow, killing the horse? J- Man and his arrival at his home, the digging of the swimming pool and Nick stopping it? Putting the horse in, covering it up? The later decision to move it, on the van? Taking it into the woods? Losing the horse? Nick and his taking Debbie and the children to the house, through the woods, the smell, dinginess? Meeting J- Man’s friend?

6.Nick, going to Rome, further success? The excitement, the merry-go-round, his not being able to listen to Tim’s wanting to confess? Natalie and the questions about where the evaporated manure went?

7.Tim, his discussing things with Debbie, J- Man turning up, wanting more money? Debbie and her mercenary attitude, willing to give the blackmail money? The irony of shooting the arrow? Hitting J- Man, Tim and Debbie searching for him, his holding up the people on the road? His giving in, running away?

8.Tim eventually telling Nick the truth? Nick and his genial attitude, willing to forgive? Valuing friendship? The information about the horse, the poison from the product, the apples?

9.The plans, the visit to Rome, enjoyment, the Italian commercial? Extending the product to other animals?

10.The happy ending – the moral of the story, envy being valueless, friendship being everything? The environment – and the cultivation of products?

ARE WE DONE YET?

US, 2007, 92 minutes, Colour.
Ice Cube, Nia Long, John C. Mc Ginley, Aleisha Allen, Philip Bolden.
Directed by Steve Carr.

This film is something of a relief after the torment of Are We There Yet? That was the film where Ice Cube, a sports store owner, clashed with two of the most obnoxious children ever to invade the screen (especially the girl) and had to drive them to meet their mother, Nia Long, with whom he fell in love, thus acquiring a wife and the two children. This road trip was one of the most excruciating on film as the children tricked, abused, upset Ice Cube.

Very popular in the US for its intended audience, the sequel has not drawn good reviews elsewhere. This film is an adaptation of the 1947 comedy, Mr Blandings Builds his Dream House with Cary Grant and Myna Loy – which was, in turn, adapted in 1986 as The Money Pit with Tom Hanks and Shelley Long.

This time round Ice Cube, with Nia Long pregnant with twins, plus the two horrors (actually this time the boy is not so bad, but she…!!!). They move to the country, are persuaded to buy a good looking house which, of course, has everything wrong with it. Slapstick and pratfalls, anger and humour are the order of the day as the house first falls to pieces and then is put back together again.

Ice Cube is now a long way from the ‘hood and his rapper days, settling into comfortable middle class mayhem.

There is one thing, depending on your sense of humour, which helps this film along. It is the performance of John C. Mc Ginley as the real estate agent, all smiles and smarm. Then he turns up, with different hats, as the person responsible for everything else in the town, a different persona for each. He does it all with exuberance and versatility.

But, this is a comedy for its target audience – others probably should beware.

1.The popularity of Are We There Yet? The opening for a sequel? The target audience of African Americans? For a wider audience or not?

2.The city settings, the transfer to the countryside, the dream house, the town? The musical score? Songs? The title – and the reference to the house? The remake of Mr Blandings Builds His Dream House? Adapted and updated?

3.The focus of the family in the city? Nick and Suzanne married? Lindsey and Kevin? Still playing up? Suzanne pregnant? Expecting twins? Nick and his selling his sports firm? Starting the magazine? The contact with Michael Jordan? Discussions with the agents and editors? His trying to work at home, continually interrupted? The decision to buy a house?

4.Chuck Mitchell Jr and his role as an estate agent? The smarmy style? Everything positive? Showing Nick and Suzanne over the house? Smoothing over parts that fell off? The next couple having a look, Nick and the quick making of the decision?

5.The move, the children complaining, losing their friends? The house itself, settling in, the children having a room each? The house and its being satisfying? Things beginning to go wrong? Electricity, the parts falling off, falling through floors, cupboards …?

6.The irony that Chuck was the repair organiser? The plumber? In charge of law and order? His different hats, changing personality? The comedy of the writing so that he could move from one responsibility to the other in a detached way?

7.The rebuilding of the house? The contractors? Nick getting upset? The growing expenses? Interacting with Chuck? The other builders? The final exasperation?

8.Suzanne and the children moving away? Nick alone? The final destruction of the house?

9.His change of heart, talking with Chuck? Chuck and his going into the caravan? Nick discovering the truth about Chuck’s marriage? Their reconciliation, making friends? Chuck bringing everybody back? The community effort?

10.The glimpse of the neighbours, everybody coming with sturgeon meals to welcome the family? Their coming to the celebration? The happy ending – and a future?

11.The birth of the twins – and Chuck and his being a midwife, a long-distance walker champion – and his helping in the delivery, consolidating his presence in their lives?

ELIZABETH

UK, 1998, 124 minutes, Colour.
Cate Blanchett, Geoffrey Rush, Christopher Eccleston, Joseph Fiennes, Richard Attenborough, Fanny Ardant, Eric Cantona, Vincent Cassel, Kathy Burke, Edward Hardwicke, Emily Mortimer, John Gielgud, Terence Rigby, James Frain, Jamie Foreman, Kelly Macdonald, Angus Deayton, Kenny Doughty, Daniel Craig.
Directed by Shekhar Kapur.

Elizabeth is a lavish historical production that is reminiscent of the French Queen Margot, a grimmer portrait of 16th century France than we are accustomed to with the romantic Hollywood epics of the past.

Elizabeth of England was a contemporary of Margot, although this film shows us a period of ten years, 1554-1563, with the young princess spurned by Mary, ascending the throne, advised to do ill-fated battle with Mary Queen of Scots, purging the kingdom of pro-Spanish and pro-Papal plotters and assuming the austere detachment she would show for the forty years of her reign.

Elizabeth wanted a united England and church of England. Margot wanted a united France and a Catholic church. Both saw fierce persecutions and religious intolerance as well as martyrs on both sides. Cate Blanchett gives a depth portrait of Elizabeth, from girlish princess to Virgin Queen. She is well supported by Geoffrey Rush as the quietly Macchiavellian adviser, Walsingham, and Christopher Eccleston as the ambitious papist, Norfolk. Richard Attenborough is Lord Burleigh. Elizabeth recreates its era, especially its sinister shadows, and offers a great deal to think about. Thoughtful, provocative history.

1.Audience interest in and response to Elizabeth? History, an icon, the politics of the period, Britain, religion, the Reformation?

2.The production values, re-creation of the 16th century, locations, palaces, interiors, prisons, the life of the royal family, costumes, décor? The countryside, the coast? The battles? The musical score?

3.The period covered: Queen Mary and persecution, Mary’s marriage and pregnancy, Elizabeth and prison, her freedom, proclaimed queen, her relationships, suitors, politics, Mary Queen of Scots, her life, prospects of marriage, becoming Gloriana?

4.The opening and the setting of Mary’s reign, Mary’s age, her relationship with her father, her marriage to Philip of Spain, her resentment of Elizabeth? The Catholic supremacy, her advisers, the executions, burning? Parliament, her councils, the plots? The status of Catholics? Her seeing Elizabeth, coming into her presence, her attitude towards Elizabeth, resentment, sending her to prison? Her false pregnancy, her death? The portrait of a miserable woman?

5.The introduction to Elizabeth, young, at court, her friendships, with Robert Dudley, dancing, playing? The arrest, the audience with Mary, going to prison, the kindness of some of the courtiers – and the later repercussions when they were to be executed? Her sense of fate?

6.Her becoming queen, the pomp, the protocols, proclaimed, her political meetings, the advisers? The role of the church? Norfolk and the Catholics? The return of Walsingham? Lord Burleigh? Issues of religion? Elizabeth in charge of meetings? Her criticisms of her advisers, comments about marriage? Her relationship with Robert Dudley?

7.The portrait of Elizabeth, her growth as a person, her experience, from girlish to woman, shrewd, political? Religious issues?

8.The background of Spain, Philip II, his marriage to Mary, the proposal to Elizabeth, his being in Spain and she in England? The ambassador, his being in league with the Duke of Norfolk and the other Catholics?

9.France, the possibility of marriage liaison, the French ambassador, in the court, the preparation for the Duke of Anjou, his joke in disguising himself, speaking in French, his disdain for Elizabeth? Her observing him? His relationship with Mary Queen of Scots? Her discovering him in the dress? Ousting him?

10.Walsingham, as a sinister presence, as a person, his relationship with the young men, getting information, his killing the young traitor? Betrayal and plots? His being in charge of security, always present? In the council, his advice? Spying, negotiating, unmasking the priest, arresting the Catholics? Organising the assassinations and executions? His relying on Lord Elliott – and his death?

11.Lord Burleigh, a wise presence, age and experience, his faux pas in referring to Elizabeth as a woman and questioning her ability to govern? His being made Lord Burleigh and retired?

12.The presentation of the Catholics, the Duke of Norfolk, scheming, his relationship with his wife? The other lords, their being excluded from the council and decision-making, locked in their room? The plots? The priest, the scene in Rome, the pope, the priest’s mission, assassination, his arrival on shore, the fight? The excommunication of Elizabeth? The search in the priest’s house, the children, finding him in the priest’s hole? His torture?

13.The arrests of the Catholic nobility, the Duke of Norfolk with his wife, taken away, his dignity and death? His beliefs? The other lords?

14.Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, his friendship with Elizabeth, the affair, his wife, his ambiguity in friendships and love? In the council? His finally being rejected by Elizabeth?

15.Mary Queen of Scots, her character, the battles, relationship with Anjou – and her being poisoned?

16.The ladies-in-waiting, their friendship with Elizabeth, their place, presence, liaisons?

17.Elizabeth as strong, her tough decisions, the executions, the issue of marriage, her change to maturity, the final ritual with her hair, make-up, married to England? The opening for a sequel?

FRANKIE

France, 2005, 88 minutes, Colour.
Diane Kruger, Jennick Gravelines.
Directed by Fabienne Berthaud.

A brief portrait of a young model, her work and the pressures on her for glamour and a career, especially as she grows older. Despite the presence of Diane Kruger as Frankie, the film is not particularly engaging. It is structured in a fragmentary way, moving between different times, especially with many fashion shoot flashbacks, so that it is not always easy to follow. The structure makes us appreciate the fragmentation of Frankie’s life and her attempts to come to terms with the end of her modelling by spending time in an institution.

A number of characters move in and out of the plot, models, friends, photographers, directors (all flattery to the faces of the models and critical behind their backs), psychologists.

Filmed with hand held camera and edited to intensify the fragmentary feel, this is a case study in breakdown.

1.The impact of the drama? Portrait of a model? End of her career? Breakdown?

2.The fashion style of the film? Camerawork? Poses? Set-ups? The musical score?

3.The structure of the film: Frankie, in the fields, the background of her breakdown? The flashbacks to her career, the modelling episodes, the tests? Returning to her discussions with the psychiatrist? The interlocking of these scenes to produce a fragmented portrait?

4.Diane Kruger as Frankie? Her own background as a model? Producing the film? As a successful model, performance? The demands of photographers, of directors? Her age, the interviews, fitting into the dress, the walk for the director – his sweet-talking her and then criticising her behind her back? Her mental collapse, the lack of prospects for a future? Her friendship with Tom? The discussions with the psychiatrist, her not feeling safe enough to leave, in the institution? Her interaction with the other residents? The finale in the fields, feeling safe with Tom?

5.The institution, the range of residents, the old woman and her calling out, the other people in the sessions? The nurses, the psychiatrist, his concern about Frankie, listening to her, reassuring her?

6.The world of modelling, the casting director, the jobs, the photographers?

7.The long sequence with the black director, the dress, directing her walk, affirming her? His criticisms?

8.A glimpse into the world of the fashion model – and the grim prospects for her future?

SWEET SIXTEEN

UK, 2002, 106 minutes, Colour.
Martin Compston, William Ruane, Annmarie Fulton, Michelle Coulter, Gary Mc Cormack, Martin Mc Cardie.
Directed by Ken Loach.

Ken Loach and his writer, Paul Laverty, have been in Scotland before for My Name is Joe. This time, their focus is on teenagers on the verge of sixteen. The romantic songs and the phrase 'Sweet sixteen and never been kissed' belong to another era. These youngsters are worldlywise and streetwise, especially Liam (Martin Compston). They know unemployment. And they know drugs. The demands on them in family, in crime, are more than enough for adults. Loach brings his customary seriousmindedness and emotional toughness to a story that leads to a sense of despair rather than hope as it ends on Martin's sixteenth birthday.

1.The work of Ken Loach? Human interest? Social concern? Problems? His writer Paul Laverty and his knowledge of Scotland? Their collaboration on many films? The beginning of the 21st century?

2.The Scottish settings and atmosphere, the city of Glasgow, the village, the coast, the Clyde River? The use of the locations? Homes, caravans, pubs? The importance of the range of songs, their forming part of the screenplay? The musical score?

3.The title, the focus on Liam, Liam at fifteen, the film ending on his sixteenth birthday? What had happened to him during his sixteenth year? Where was he going?

4.The prologue, gazing at the stars? The cash? The cigarettes, the crash, the helmet?

5.The character of Liam? The amateur actor, football player, convincing in this role? His situation? His being in the homes, the way that he was treated in the homes? His standing up for his rights? His love for his mother, her being in prison, her being in prison because of her boyfriend, serving time for him? The lack of home life? His going to his sister, Chantelle? His being best friends with Pinball? Their mateship? The clashes with Stan? His harsh grandfather? The car and prison? Coffee and the kiss? The refusal, the bashing?

6.His time with Pinball, with Suzanne? Hanging out? His dream about the caravan, Green Rock? His hopes, love for his mother, wanting a happy future for her, getting away from Stan? His dreams about raising the money?

7.His watching Stan, the interactions with Stan, the Scots dialogue and the forcefulness? Stealing, selling the drugs taken from Stan? His being bashed and bashing? The various dealers, the boss? The mo-peds and the pizzas? The deals, the money, the splash? Pinball and the car and the crash?

8.The test for Liam, the gangland boss, wanting Liam to kill? The offer for the deal? Wanting to get the caravan for his mother? The punishment? Pinball and his going, his face, the truth about the caravan?

9.Liam and his relationship with Chantelle? Talking with her? Chantelle wanting to have nothing to do with her mother? Her warnings to Liam, his asking her to give his mother a second chance? Her looking after him, his wounds? His relationship with his grandfather, tough, harsh? The background of the soccer, the ride, the caravan, the picnic and the burning?

10.The portrait of his mother, in jail, the visits, her coming out, his plan? Waiting, the flat, the party? Leaving and his anger? The pizzas? Attempting to raise money with the black market cigarettes, the pubs? His birthday, Stan and the stabbing? Finally on the beach?

11.The background of criminal activity in Glasgow, in the Scottish countryside, drugs and dealers, their brutality? The law, the prison system?

12.Liam on his birthday, his potential, the waste? His values, being a survivor? His background,

JUST CAN’T GET ENOUGH

US, 2001, 95 minutes, Colour.
Jonathan Aube, Shelley Malil, Peter Nevargic.
Directed by Dave Payne.

Just Can’t Get Enough is a film about the origins of the Chippendales, the male strippers. At the same time there was another telemovie, The Chippendale Murder, with British actor Naveen Andrews as Steve Banerjee.

This is a rather sleazy version of a sleazy story. The origins of the Chippendales came in clubs in Los Angeles, the work of an Indian entrepreneur, Steve Banerjee (Shelley Malil). As his clubs progressed with the male strippers and the women came to the clubs during the 1980s, he was involved in some criminal activities and money laundering, hiring thugs to do his dirty work.

While the film shows his story, especially his manic possessiveness and wanting to control everything, especially when choreographer Nick de Noia came in, persuaded him to give him the rights for the travelling Chippendales and made millions, he ordered his murder. When some of the dancers decided to set up by themselves, he also ordered their deaths.

The manager of this criminal activity milked Banerjee of hundreds of thousands of dollars, demanding five hundred thousand, for instance, for his mediation and then merely giving the hired Hispanic assassin a couple of thousand dollars. Eventually, the two fled to Paris where the manager was wired and the police arrested Banerjee. Having discovered that when somebody dies, United States law entitles his family to inherit everything (so that Nick de Noia’s family inherited his empire), he decides to commit suicide so that his wife will own everything.

In the meantime, the film focuses on a character, Chad Patterson who has an MBA and ambitions for management. He has a girlfriend, Heather. However, he gets a job at the Chippendales club as a manager and the two split up. The film shows his ‘progress’ in working for Banerjee with the continual promise of a managerial job. Banerjee exploits him in photography as well as on calendars. He then wants him to dance. There are a number of other men whose stories are told briefly, some with self-esteem problems, some with drug problems, some with brutality problems.

The film is peppered with many dance sequences – geared very much for an American television audience and therefore somewhat restrained. However, it shows the frantic behaviour of the average American woman when she lets herself go at these clubs. It is not always an edifying sight.

The film also shows the permissive life of the dancers – contrary to some opinion that the dancers should have no contact with the clients. In this case, they are virtual gigolos.

The film is of interest only as giving some kind of background to the Chippendales, Steve Banerjee’s career, the ethos behind such strip clubs.

VACANCY

US, 2007, 80 minutes, Colour.
Kate Beckinsale, Luke Wilson, Frank Whaley, Ethan Embry.
Directed by Nimrod Antal.

A high fright factor.

Usually, films about people stranded on American back roads in the dark focus on rather unsympathetic 20 somethings who encounter variations on the living dead and spend most of the film being chased and tortured. Vacancy is more than a bit different.

This time the central characters are a married couple (Luke Wilson and Kate Beckinsale) who are estranged because of the accidental death of their young son. Tension between them is strong. When the husband takes a side road because of a freeway pile-up and then swerves to avoid a racoon, things go to the worse and worse. They are lost. A man in a garage seems friendly but sabotages their car. They walk back to the isolated motel and are persuaded to stay the night in the best room – with special features.

The rest of this brief film has them terrorised by the mild-mannered, bespectacled manager (Frank Whaley) and his brutal friends who have a small local mini-industry of filming live-action terror.

Director Nimrod Antal (who made the Hungarian film, Control, in the Budapest rail subway) keeps the pace going and immerses the audience in the couple’s fear and their being trapped, sometimes in claustrophobic tunnels under the motel.

Antal sets out to make a scary movie for adults – and succeeds.

1.The success of this horror film? Intended audience adults rather than young adults?

2.The cast, strength of performance? Past films? Appearing in a horror film?

3.The title, motels – and audience memories of Psycho and the Bates motel? A contemporary variation?

4.The countryside, the night, the mountains, the lonely roads? The gas station? The motel? The contrast with the interiors of the motel, the room, the tunnels, the office? The surroundings of the motel? Eerie enough for this kind of horror film? The musical score?

5.David and Amy and their travelling in the car? Their impending divorce? The revelation of the death of their son? The tension between them? Visiting Amy’s family? Amy sleeping, cantankerous? Luke and his driving, taking the short cut? Their being lost?

6.Audiences identifying with the predicament, on the road, isolated, misreading the map? At night? Swerving to miss the racoon? David and his trying to cope with the car? With Amy and her criticism?

7.Finding the mechanic, his pleasant talk, not charging, their giving him the money? Down the road, the wrong directions, the car breaking down, their walking back?

8.The motel, Mason, his appearance? The discussions with him, the letter of the law? His arguing against their leaving, their taking the room?

9.In the room, the television, the violence? After hearing the screams in Mason’s office and his explaining about the video? The discovery that the room in the film was their room? The noise next door, David and his going to complain? The truck?

10.The beginning of the terror, the men and their invasion? David and Amy and their fight for survival? Getting out of the room, escaping back in? Hiding?

11.Discovering the tunnels, the claustrophobic feel, travelling through? In Mason’s office? The discovery of the equipment?

12.The phone call, seeing the truck driver, discovering that he was collecting the videos? Discovering that the mechanic was one of the attackers? The police coming, their signalling, his inquiries, Mason’s response? His death?

13.Getting in the car, driving into the motel room, the death of the mechanic?

14.The final defence, David and his reassurances, his being attacked, left for dead? Amy and her strength of will, getting the gun? The confrontation with Mason? Shooting?

15.Audiences expecting a happy ending – or not? David’s survival, weak, the police arriving, telling them the truth?

16.The cathartic effect of this kind of horror film – a nightmare, people being able to identify with the characters and their predicament?

WO SHI SHEI (WHO AM I)?

China, 1998, 108 minutes, Colour.
Jackie Chan, Michelle Ferre, Ron Smerczak, Ed Nelson.
Directed by Benny Chan, Jackie Chan.

Wo Shi Shei is a typical Jackie Chan action thriller. It also has many touches of comedy. It was released the same year as the original Rush Hour which was a box office success around the whole world.

The film was partly written by Jackie Chan who also co-directed and choreographed the action sequences.

The film is set in Africa and in Holland – with city scenes of Pretoria as well as of Rotterdam. The plot is slight. Jackie Chan is part of a commando group who abduct three scientists – but are betrayed and by chance, Jackie Chan survives only to lose his memory and live with Africans in their village. Eventually he emerges, is the target of the villains (led by CIA general Ed Nelson). He encounters a persistent young woman who wants to interview him – who turns out to be the real CIA.

The important thing is the action: there are some amusing car chases, some acrobatics from Chan as well as a culminating confrontation between himself and two thugs.

Nothing particularly new – but Jackie Chan is always exuberant.

1.Jackie Chan as a popular world figure? Character? Serious, comic? Action and martial arts?

2.The African settings, the desert, the village, Pretoria? The sophisticated scenes in hotels and streets? The comparisons with Rotterdam, cafés and restaurants? The tall buildings, roofs? The musical score?

3.The title, amnesia? Identity? The hero’s search for who he was?

4.The character, with the commandos, the initial raid? The taking of the scientists? The helicopter, the betrayal, the hero falling out? The others being killed? His being found by the Africans, the lack of language for communication, taken to the village? His becoming part of their life?

5.His eventually moving out, encountering the driver and his sister, going back to Pretoria? Finding himself the target of so many people? His search for his identity? The chases? The hospital, the sister and her help? Christine and her wanting an interview? Persistent? Her being handcuffed to the car? Their all being in the car – the chase, even the car on its side?

6.The transition to Rotterdam? Christine giving the information, the café, the thugs coming to find him? The chases? His thinking Christine was betraying him?

7.The villains, the retired general, the greed for the formula, the samples from the asteroid? The three scientists and their desperation? The test – and the overload, the blackouts and the explosions in Pretoria?

8.The general, his character, the go-between with the disc, the CIA man and his betrayal, the thugs? The meeting in the building? The hero and his transferring the five hundred million to save the children? The repercussions?

9.The fight on the roof, the acrobatics, going down the side of the building?

10.Meeting Christine and the happy ending – and finding out who he was?

SHREK THE THIRD

US, 2007, 93 minutes, Colour.
Voices of: Mike Myers, Cameron Diaz, Eddie Murphy, Antonio Banderas, Rupert Everett, Julie Andrews, John Cleese, Eric Idle, Justin Timberlake, Ian Mc Shane, Amy Poehler.
Directed by Charles Miller.

Shrek has become one of the best known names in cartoon and animation history. Shrek the First was such a success world wide, only to be outdone by the box-office popularity of Shrek the Second. (Both of them even being screened at the Cannes Film Festival.) While the initial surprise and magic can’t be recaptured, this is an entertaining enough sequel.

Shrek, Fiona, Donkey and that recent new comrade, Puss in Boots, are back along with a host of other fairy tale characters. And it is the demure heroines like Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella who come into their feminist own by the end of the film.

Shrek is ruling the kingdom of Far Far Away until the Frog King gets better. He doesn’t (which gives John Cleese a chance to do three quick death scenes). But Shrek wants to go home to the swamp and live happily and grubbily ever after with Fiona, the way ogres should. He finds a way out when a distant relative could be the next king, Arthur. Off the expedition goes to find him and bring him back (just after Fiona tells Shrek she is pregnant which gives him some frightening nightmares of broods of little ogres during the voyage).

Arthur is not Round Table calibre – call me ‘Artie’! But off they go for home, aided by a spell from a befuddled Merlin which switches Donkey’s and Puss’s personalities - so some comedy routines of mixed identity.

This is complicated by the sinister planning of the thwarted Prince Charming, now a has-been actor for down-and-out villains (Captain Hook, the Evil Queen from Snow White…) who spend their time at a bar at the Unhappy Hour.

There is never a doubt that there will be a happy every after for everyone except Prince Charming (even Captain Hook will give up his hook and go and grow daffodils) when the reborn Arthur gives a stirring speech about the only obstacle to being who you want to be is yourself! It is the adventure and comedy along the way that is the important thing. For the youngies there is a lot of slapstick and schtick from Eddie Murphy’s Donkey and Antonia Banderas’ Puss as well as all the mishaps for Charming (Rupert Everett obviously relishing his villain status).

Shrek is, of course, his old self, becoming more benign as the series goes on. Fiona has long given up her beautiful appearance and is also her ogre self. Julie Andrews is the Queen who is not keen on being called an old lady and who can thump through walls with the best of them. The mock scene of Snow White’s sweet song with all the animals joining her suddenly turning into a mini Valkyries’ attack is enjoyable. Eric Idle is Merlin and Ian McShane? is Captain Hook. A good surprise is that Artie is voiced very well by Justin Timberlake.

Plenty of sight gags, with Far Far Away looking a lot like Hollywood with such shops as Versarchery. Quite a number of musical gags (like the theme from Live and Let Die for the funeral of the King or the bewitched trees rehearsal, tapping to music from A Chorus Line). Plenty of plot – perhaps laughs for the kids and smiles for the parents.

1.The popularity of Shrek? In world consciousness? Expectations of the third film? Fulfilled?

2.The quality of the animation, layouts and sets (and the Los Angeles jokes about Far Far Away)? The swamp, the countryside, the city? The play and performances? The characters, situations? Delight and humour?

3.The cast, the quality of the voices and performance? The musical score, songs – and in-jokes?

4.The presuppositions about Shrek and Fiona, about Donkey and Puss in Boots, about the king and queen, about Prince Charming? The fairytale characters like Pinocchio, the Gingerbread Man, the Three Little Pigs? Puss in Boots and Donkey swapping personality?

5.The new characters, the women, Snow White, Cinderella, Rapunzel? The martial arts? Artie and his becoming heroic? Lancelot?

6.The situation, Shrek and his having to rule the kingdom, his character, love for Fiona, Fiona in her ogre appearance? Getting ready for state events and the confinement of the clothes, the formality, the royal duties and the mayhem? Yearning for the swamp? Donkey and Puss in Boots at court and helping?

7.The king, as a frog, croaking – and his three deaths? The queen? The news about Artie? The funeral – and singing ‘Live and Let Die’?

8.Shrek going on the voyage, the farewell, Fiona shouting about her pregnancy? Shrek and his nightmares about the many children?

9.Landing in the kingdom, going to the tournament, the people, Lancelot and his skills, Artie as a failure? Lancelot and his scorn? Artie’s self-esteem, some self-assertion, the offer to be king?

10.The journey of the return, the discussions between Shrek and Artie, Puss in Boots and Donkey and the humour? Visiting Merlin, the old man in a dither, his appearance, the spells, reversing Puss in Boots and Donkey, the quick arrival at Far Far Away?

11.Prince Charming, the opening and his performance, riding and derring-do? At the inn for all the villains, Unhappy Hour? His plot, his speech urging them to help him, their conversion, Captain Hook and company? The attack, the women confronting them? Rapunzel being the traitor? Their talking Fiona and the queen and imprisoning them? The women in prison, the cell, their decisions, the queen and her strength, breaking through the walls? Snow White and her martial arts?

12.Prince Charming, the play, the performance and his wanting to destroy Shrek? Captain Hook conducting? The rehearsals for destroying Shrek?

13.Shrek, arrival, the imprisonment and his speech about Artie, Artie going? The play, the stage, Shrek and the send-up of Prince Charming, the audience laughing, Charming’s frustration?

14.Artie, leaving, learning the truth, his return? Fighting, the confrontation with Charming? His final speech about self-assertion? Everybody taking heart – and Captain Hook going to tend daffodils?

15.The return to the swamp, Merlin reversing the spells? The happy families?